Scientists and Politicians: the Impact of Institutional Reforms on the Development of Science in China and the Russian Federation (from 1980s to the Present)

Comparative analysis of scientific reforms in Russia and China is highly relevant now, when China is ranked first in global research rankings, while the Russian science is in stagnation. It was assumed that institutional organization of Chinese and Russian Academies of Sciences contributes to the future development of the national scientific potential. However, judging by the results, it is more influenced by other factors. So the main difference between China and Russia is in the amount of funding for science. China put a lot of money from the state budget there, but the main source is industry, resulting in the higher salaries of the scientists. Russia provides science with little money and low salaries and few cooperatives with the scientific sector enterprises. Moreover, China has a developed system of grants, so while the researchers experiencing tough competition, they have sources of funding. In Russia, a small amount of funds can not satisfy the needs of many researchers. In addition, there is a high risk of unfair distribution of such resources. In addition, most of scientists in Russian Academy of Sciences are elders. Also, the number of graduate students is gradually reducing. At the same time, China has increased the number of scientists and graduate students. Also, as in China retirement is mandatory for all researchers of specific age, the staff of CAS is mostly young. In fact, both countries still have unresolved problems in the sphere of science, but it is important to note that during the period of China's reform China managed to maintain and gradually create the conditions for further progress of science. A Russian control system crisis of the late 90's led to a decrease in funding, which led to a "brain drain". Russian science was able to survive, but its conditions for development were less favorable than in China.