Message to Japan from the Two Japanese Nobel Prize Winners

Osaka – Monday, October 11, 2010




Many Japanese media have been reporting the great news that two Japanese scientists, Dr Eiichi Negishi, a professor with authority of Purdue University in the U.S. and Dr Akira Suzuki, professor emeritus of Hokkaido University in Japan, were awarded Nobel Prize in Chemistry for their development of cross-coupling reaction technology since the announcement of the winners by the committee on September 6. Their research led to Japanese companies such as Chisso Corporation and Tosoh Corporation immediately putting the technology into practical use. The technology is now applied in wide a range of fields such as pharmaceuticals, electronics materials, reagents, agricultural chemicals and solar batteries.



The news is an extremely welcome incident; however, some comments by the two winners imply that Japan cannot simply be happy about it. There are warning signs that cannot be missed if Japan is to continue being leader in science, technology and economy.



1. What are warning that Japan cannot miss?






1) Japan may not be a leader in science in the near future.



This has been pointed out by experts from while ago because less and less students study sciences in university, described as “rika-banare” in Japanese. This is critical because it is scientists/engineers that perform research and development and create technologies for innovation that often determines global competitiveness. Possible factors leading to this include the following:-



(1) Education without cramming degraded quantity and quality of education especially in sciences and mathematics



With fewer hours for education especially mathematics and sciences in elementary schools and junior high schools with implementation of education without cramming, many items including basics were excluded in the new curriculum. As a result, knowledge in mathematics and sciences acquired by Japanese students degraded overall, as pointed out with warning by professors at universities and people in companies.



(2) Systems and environment in Japan do not let scientists devote themselves in research



As Dr Suzuki mentioned, universities in Japan are short of capital for sound management and research, especially after national universities were privatized a few year ago.



In such a situation, employment and making a living is a critical issue for scientists at universities thus they cannot devote themselves in their research. Moreover, as pointed out in a TV programme that featured the two Nobel Prize winners, under the current systems, scientists in Japanese universities will not sufficiently be able to drive academic results and be promoted to create a successful career. This is a big negative factor in attracting talents majoring sciences for universities in Japan.



(3) Fewer Japanese students studying sciences in world top class universities



Fewer Japanese students study in world top class universities and students from other countries such as China, India and other Asian countries have been replacing Japanese students. Dr Negishi, who been teaching in Purdue University in the U.S. for many years, insists that he used to teach many Japanese students but not lately. He says that he teaches 6 students and there are no Japanese, and 3 or more are from other Asian countries. This indicates the shift of world class brain in sciences.



2) Japan’s weak growth in economy drives weakening position as leader in sciences and technologies



There are correlation between “impetus of a country” and number of Nobel Prize winners in sciences of that particular country, which can be paraphrased as technological innovations. This implies that Japan’s weak economic growth and stagnation may well drive its weakening position as a leader in sciences and technologies.



This was explained in a recent TV programme with a chart that showed that Japan created many technological innovations and breakthroughs that led to winning Nobel Prizes when it was enjoying economic growth until 1990 when the bubble economy collapsed. It is difficult to say which come first, economic growth or technological innovations, but it cannot be denied that Japan’s weak economy (impetus of a country) since 1990 would be a negative factor for technological innovations and breakthroughs including financial support to R&D.



2. What are possible challenges for Japan?






1) Review educational systems to develop and attract talent



This includes reviewing education without cramming to upgrade quantity and quality of the curriculum of elementary and high schools. This would up-level knowledge of majority of Japanese students and make more students interested in sciences to decide to study in university.



Another issue is to review systems in universities so that scientists who have studied abroad are warmly welcomed and accepted, and can continue their research to drive results and create successful career in Japan. In fact, media have reported Dr Negishi’s message encouraging Japanese young people to study/work abroad. This is all about globalization and D&I (Diversity & Inclusion) of Japan.



2) Give necessary and sufficient support from the government to academia



This includes financial and other support, both long-term and short-term. ROI (return on investment) is critical but scientific research requires time; both winners mentioned above say that the award they won is of culmination of their 50 year study.



Also, possibilities of “seeds” in scientific research that bears fruit so that the technology will be developed to commercialized are extremely low (e.g. only 1 in 10000 organic compound developed in the initial stage of R&D is said to be commercialized into innovative pharmaceuticals) and slashing the investment would reduce the number of researches at an early stage which may well mean slashing possibilities of innovation. The author strongly feels that this is the essence of Dr Suzuki’s comment that was reported widely by media: “question of ‘Does it really must be first? Is second no good at all?’ in last year’s screening process to reduce the national budget is of someone ignorant of science”.