Korean Scientist Laments "Our Country Can't Win a Nobel Prize" - Here's Why [Reading Science]

International Journal Nature Publishes Column by KAIST Professor So-Young Kim

Advanced equipment ultra-high resolution mass spectrometer (UHR FT-ICR) owned by the Basic Science Support Research Institute in use. Not related to the article. Stock photo.

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Bong-su] Although South Korea's investment in basic science has surged, it has not been productive, and there are calls to reform the evaluation system to provide steady support rather than pressuring scientists for short-term results.

The international academic journal Nature published a signed column by Professor Kim So-young of KAIST on the 2nd (local time), reporting this. According to the column, South Korea has been implementing continuous promotion policies since the late 1980s by enacting the Basic Science Promotion Act. As a result, the number of related research institutions increased nearly tenfold from 13 in 1990 to 122 in 2020. The budget for basic science support also surged. In particular, during the Moon Jae-in administration from 2017 to 2022, the annual budget for basic science support more than doubled from $1.07 billion to $2.1 billion. However, South Korea has yet to win a Nobel Prize in science. Professor Kim pointed out, "South Korea is home to many innovations and possesses numerous world-class scientists, especially excelling in chemistry and materials engineering," but "it is not as productive in basic science."

Professor Kim identified South Korea's research evaluation and reward system, as well as cultural customs, as causes. First, there is an obsession with easy applications or short-term results rather than long-term inquiry and bold discoveries. He said, "South Korea's (basic science-related) support evaluation system prioritizes regular outputs over unpredictable inquiry," adding, "At almost all universities in South Korea, professors' performance is evaluated by the number of papers, publication records are tallied and scored, and strict conditions require achieving a certain score for promotion." Although this is for fair evaluation and personnel decisions, the result is a structure where professors have no choice but to cling to low-risk, short-term projects to produce enough papers in a short period.

Professor Kim further emphasized that while the size of the support budget is important, it is necessary to provide sufficient time to focus steadily on research. Most Korean researchers are forced to produce results within 1 to 3 years, making innovative research impossible. Regarding the K-DARPA plan, which the Ministry of Science and ICT plans to implement from next year by imitating the US Department of Defense's Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), known for challenging research and outcomes, he criticized, "In my view, it actually does not take much risk."

Accordingly, Professor Kim pointed out that in addition to sufficient budgets, the government's basic science support needs to establish an evaluation system that allows scientists to conduct free, creative, and original research in a long-term and stable manner.

He stated, "Since the basic science support budget is also taxpayer money, scientists must be accountable for how the money is spent, and (research results) should contribute culturally or financially in the long term, but they should not be required to produce clear, continuous, and predictable results," adding, "Doubling or tripling the support budget will not enable South Korea to win a Nobel Prize in science. Policies that consider the intrinsic value of basic science and the intrinsic motivation of researchers are necessary."