IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v16y1982i12p1217-1221.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Rockefeller foundation, the China foundation, and the development of modern science in China

Author

Listed:
  • Schneider, Laurence A.

Abstract

Two powerful foundations, with interlocking directorates, were the most important media for transmitting American science to China and for making its development possible: In the 1920s and 1930s, the Rockefeller Foundation's China Medical Board and the China Foundation for the Promotion of Education and Culture recognized that transmission and development required much more than the transplantation of whole scientific institutions. This essay shows that, in their most mature form, the foundations' strategies were informed by a rational and coherent set of policies. Their premise was that the practice and development of advanced scientific medicine and bio-medical or natural scientific research all require an infrastructure of education, communication, physical plant, and equipment. This infrastructure did not exist before the foundations began to foster it in China. In this essay the foundations' China policies are outlined and detailed examples are given to show how they built the science infrastructure amidst debate over the appropriateness of the dominant 'Johns Hopkins' institutional model and the norm of 'pure science'. In China, the 'Hopkins' model for medical training and practice featured a combination of clinical practice with sophisticated scientific laboratory research. This model and the 'pure science' norm were seriously challenged by the political and economic exigencies of the 1930s.

Suggested Citation

  • Schneider, Laurence A., 1982. "The Rockefeller foundation, the China foundation, and the development of modern science in China," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 16(12), pages 1217-1221, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:16:y:1982:i:12:p:1217-1221
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(82)90146-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:16:y:1982:i:12:p:1217-1221. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.