Rao Yi is a leading reformer of science and education in China. Rao began his career in the United States in the 1980s. After he returned to China in 2007, he introduced practices that have revitalized life-sciences research in the country, including the use of tenure and of peer review to evaluate academics’ merits. Now based at Peking University in Beijing, he runs a leading brain-research laboratory, and holds other leadership positions.
He’s also famously outspoken. In 2008, Rao renounced his US passport to protest against policies brought in by former president George W. Bush after the terror attacks of 11 September 2001. Rao criticized US policies during the COVID-19 pandemic after his uncle died in New York, and vehemently rejected the lab-leak theory. And he is an energetic advocate for China’s talent-recruitment schemes.
Nature asked Rao how he sees China’s role in the life sciences — and what could make China into a biotechnology superpower.
According to the Nature Index, China is less strong in life sciences than in physical sciences. Why is that?
In mathematics, physics and chemistry, Chinese funding has caught up with that of the United States, or almost. But the number of biomedical scientists supported by research funding in China is lower than in the United States, because the latter has the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the largest source of medical-research funding in the world. The lag in papers is almost proportional to the funding difference.
China will remain behind the United States as long as it does not have an NIH equivalent. If the administration of US President Donald Trump keeps cutting funds for the NIH and NIH-supported institutions, including Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Columbia University in New York City, then China will catch up or surpass the United States soon.
In plant biology, China is now ahead of the United States, according to the Nature Index, again because of funding levels — in this case, much larger in China. The nation has long been worried about food security and has invested more in plant-related research than any other country has.
How can China become a leader in biotechnology innovation?
It will take both funding and real reform for China to surpass the United States in biomedical sciences. The main problem hindering Chinese science is that competing influences such as personal relationships go against merit, rigour and excellence. A system selecting and supporting the best scientists who are willing to work for Chinese development is key. If China allows mediocrity to prevail, then it might overtake the United States in quantity of papers, but not in quality.
A researcher in Rao Yi’s brain lab at Peking University in Beijing.Credit: Andrea Verdelli
For example, in 1950, when the People’s Republic of China was new and internationally trained Chinese doctoral scholars were few, many of those in scientific and educational leadership positions — from the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) to Peking and Tsinghua Universities in Beijing — had doctorates from other countries. After the Cultural Revolution in 1976, this remained the case.
If you look at the same leadership layer now, the number who obtained their PhDs abroad is low. At the CAS, the president and vice-presidents all have PhDs from Chinese institutes. Yet China is trying hard to get the best scientists, especially those with doctorates from top international universities.
Which biotech fields might China excel in by 2050?
If allowed to speculate, I would predict that Chinese biotech will take off in agriculture, with new kinds of seed. As for the biomedical sphere, my predictions would be gene therapy, neurodegenerative diseases, metabolic diseases and cancer, helped by artificial intelligence (AI) and Chinese omics databanks.
China is lagging behind the United States in precision medicine because China is weak in human-genetics research, although overly abundant in less-meaningful DNA sequencing. Gene therapy is different: the United States is hesitating, which provides China with an opportunity.
So far, universities and research institutions are the key players. The new research and development institutions, such as the National Institute of Biological Sciences, the Chinese Institute for Brain Research and the Chinese Institute for Medical Research, all in Beijing, are playing or will play increasingly important parts. One or two companies might surprise everyone, but it might take another 10 to 20 years for the entire ecosystem to change.
.png)
Students celebrate after graduating from Peking University in Beijing.Credit: Andrea Verdelli
China has massive amounts of health data from its large population — can it harness this advantage?
I am optimistic that the combined forces of AI and the pressure that will come from Trump’s policies will drive China to use its data more productively. So far, China has not been able to get health data sets organized, mainly because each hospital, and doctors in the same hospital, are fighting for self-interests. But the Trump administration has helped: it bans Chinese access to key NIH databases. This has made Chinese hospitals and doctors realize that we all have to be united in sharing.
Will China expand research partnerships around the world?
There is a Chinese proverb: when you treat those close well, those from afar will join you. China is working on improving conditions for our own researchers and entrepreneurs and will have some of the best biobanks. I am advocating for China to share data with all countries: China has traditionally had a big heart, but the country’s relative poverty over the past two centuries has not enabled other countries to realize this. Once the world has seen who we really are — peaceful and generous — partnership and friendship will blossom.
China is now even more interested in supporting scientists. The conditions for recruitment are much better than 20 years ago. I am glad that I can welcome researchers from all over the world to China. We really are in a position to promote ‘science of the people, by the people, for the people’.
Nature 642, 570-571 (2025). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-025-01888-1
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Oringinal link: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-01888-1
中文
010-86738999
cimr@cimrbj.ac.cn
