YACHAYTECH UNIVERSITY

BIOSECURITY AND QUALITY MANAGEMENT

Midterm Essay: Is research integrity advancing at the same pace as science

and technology in China?

Eduardo Josué Minchala Carangui

08 May 2020
IS RESEARCH INTEGRITY ADVANCING AT THE SAME PACE AS SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY IN CHINA?

Introduction

China held the world fastest supercomputer title recently from 2016 to 2018 and has 229 on
the list of the TOP500, more than any other country including US (TOP500, 2019). In 2016,
the number of Chinese publications surpassed the US ones for the first time (Ball, 2018).
There is no doubt that China has gained a notorious position in the creation and advancement
of new technologies and now has become a front-runner in the creation of scientific
knowledge.

Great effort and resources have been placed on R&D and the creation of new technologies.
In 20 years the budget for R&D in China experienced a 30-fold increase. And the ‘brain
drain’ that back in time was the norm is changing now. Talented scientist used to look for an
opportunity to place themselves in a western lab or university. If we add the creation of
infrastructure that is similar or better than American one. Now the benefits and rewards found
inside China are getting scientist back home (Ball, 2018). All this effort has one goal:
scientific dominance around the world.

Along with the growth of scientific knowledge, the apparition of research misconduct such
as plagiarism, fraudulent efforts to publish a paper have also raised some questions regarding
how China controls the quality of the research created or what disciplinary actions are
applied. A debate has been held on research integrity and the role of regulations specially in
the field of biotechnology. Creation of genetic edited human babies, human-monkey hybrids,
hermetic reaction to the apparition of new and deadly viruses. It evident that there are some
countries with strict regulation that do not make room for even early stages of experiments
(Lawrence, 2019).

For example, UK concede licenses to experiments that do not aim to bring into existence an
embryo. There are other more ‘flexible’ regulated countries like China or Russia have
allowed to run controversial experiments. In the case of the China, the use of CRISP gene
editing technology to create humans. Russia is expecting to carry out the first human head
transplant. Japan also now allows creation of hybrids involving humans. So how to develop
a responsible conduct for researches in China? Should we devote more time to research
integrity training?

Training Research Integrity

The issue of controlling research misconduct that include controversial investigations that
rise ethical issues was addressed previously by US in the 80’s. Strong measures were taken
to control this issue. Rules were passed and organizations formed to supervise and stimulate
research integrity. Once the subject was addressed inside the US, how other countries manage
research integrity was on the spot. In 1996 a polemic case of several cases of plagiarism in
China raised several critics (Resnik & Zeng, 2011).

Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) can contribute to control how institutions carry out
investigations. Although it has been questioned the effectiveness on how to teach RCR or
how to introduce in the topic in the curriculum and what to include. This topic has been tried
in university and schools but a survey in Hong Kong revealed that 30 percent of a faculty
never have received training in RCR (Jordan & Gray, 2013).

This information is taken from universities and post doc students. Where China should focus,
as some researches have suggested, is in primary school and later to reinforce the subject in
undergraduate students (Conroy, 2020). The earlier the better. Is true that this kind of values
come from home. But organizations should put efforts to strengthen this kind of education.
One way of doing this could be through incentives. Researches that are a model of integrity
when conducting their work or actively promote ethical standards, should be rewarded. In
PubMed website, the number of publications under the name of ‘research ethics in china’
increased from 127 in 2015 to 434 in 2019. This could be a good indicator of a process of
addressing the issue and bring the topic to discussion and eventually make changes.

China has put a lot of attention in rewarding those who make great impact papers and get to
publish in prestigious journals. But incentives on research integrity is not very popular not
only in China. Additionally, instead of rewarding individuals, team affords should also be
compensated if one is looking to prevent unethical behavior. The aim of training in research
integrity should be change the culture for researches. Not only to fill a syllabus.
COVID-19 Context

One way to have an idea if research integrity training is having an effect in the research
integrity culture is to analyze how the body of scientific knowledge produced during the
pandemic is being managed. Two of the principles of GRP that can be mentioned and should
be followed are: Sharing research outputs and maximizing the impact of the research.

Regardless of the impact of the findings, either positive or negative, it is expected that they
are openly shared. Is understandable that in certain cases confidentiality is needed, and
investigators should take appropriate steps to protect information. Specific actions should be
taken to make sure the research impact outside the limits of the organization. For example,
the organization should reward those who make echoes of their research beyond the
organization and catch the interest of the industrial sector or maybe a research finds
application in the clinic (Wellcome, April 2018).

China is controlling the research outputs in the context of COVID-19. Some investigators
find this acceptable because it helps prevent the dispersion of sensationalist reports or
misleading information. This is true as long as the regulations imposed are only scientific in
nature and have the aim to ensure quality. But there is a current of opinion that suggest that
the regulations that are being imposed in China try to control the information. This concerns
are based on the requirements that some Chinese universities have received recently. It states
that they have to get permission to publish from the Ministry of Science and Technology
(MOST) or Ministry of Education (MOE) (Silver & Cyranoski, 2020).

The announcement made by a high rank politician that the virus could have come to China
from Unites States (Westcott & Jiang, 2020) raises even more concerns that regulation
imposed are not only motivated by science and quality assurance. Particularly, the
requirements focus on the virus origin. But every contribution done to clarify the origin of
the virus could translate into the advancement in the development of a vaccine. It could also
give more understanding in how to prevent future eruptions or what actions should be taken
promptly enough to avoid a situation like the one we are currently living. The impositions of
the Chinese government could delay the release of key pieces of information.
Conclusion

In summary, China has proven to be a front runner in the production of science and
technology. And also have put the efforts and resources to maintain this position. But how
research integrity, especially in the field of biotechnology, is managed and taught in China
shows a gap that should not be overlooked. Other countries have already learned from the
consequences of not applying regulations and the impact it has on the output of research.
Here we analyzed how the approach to manage information in the context of COVID-19 has
opened and raised suspicions that principles like sharing the research outputs and maximizing
the impact of the investigation are being threatened. The costs of this path of actions impacts
the expedience to understand the current pandemic and could delay or hinder the
advancement to find a vaccine. No country practices an ideal research culture and although
China has made some progress to implement research integrity, there are still some problems
to be addressed. China have mimic the infrastructure of the west for the labs built and it could
be a good idea to implement some useful ideas also developed and tested in the west to
manage research integrity and benefit from their experiences.
Bibliography

Ball, P. (2018). China’s great leap forward in science | Science | The Guardian. The
Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/18/china-great-leap-
forward-science-research-innovation-investment-5g-genetics-quantum-internet

Conroy, G. (2020). Is research integrity training a waste of time? | Nature Index.

https://www.natureindex.com/news-blog/is-research-integrity-training-a-waste-of-time

Jordan, S. R., & Gray, P. W. (2013). Research integrity in greater China: Surveying
regulations, perceptions and knowledge of research integrity from a hong kong
perspective. Developing World Bioethics, 13(3), 125–137.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8847.2012.00337.x

Lawrence, D. (2019). Genetic engineering and human-animal hybrids: how China is

leading a global split in controversial research. The Convesartion.
https://theconversation.com/genetic-engineering-and-human-animal-hybrids-how-
china-is-leading-a-global-split-in-controversial-research-121473

Resnik, D., & Zeng, W. (2011). PROSPECTS. 10(3), 164–171.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8847.2009.00263.x.RESEARCH

Silver, A., & Cyranoski, D. (2020). China is tightening its grip on coronavirus research.
Nature, 580(7804), 439–440. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01108-y

TOP500 The list. (2019). Retrieved from:

https://www.top500.org/lists/2019/11/

Wellcome (2018, april). Good research practice guidelines. Retrieved from:

https://wellcome.ac.uk/grant-funding/guidance/good-research-practice-guidelines

Westcott, B., & Jiang, S. (2020). Chinese diplomat promotes conspiracy theory that US
military brought virus to Wuhan - CNN. CNN.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/13/asia/china-coronavirus-us-lijian-zhao-intl-
hnk/index.html