18 impact index and the Germany ratio of 1

A single figure summarizes the balance sheet of the world science in 2006: the United States have produced to them only as much knowledge as their four together following: England, Germany, Japan and France. Measured in number of articles published in selected journals, this gross production is confirmed by a qualitative indicator: the number of citations associated with a publication. This "Citation Index" or impact index reflects the originality and relevance of the work of the scientists. It's sort of the equivalent of the oscars or the Caesars applied academic research. The image of these distinctions awarded each year by professionals in the cinema, they are researchers themselves lip the first class.

In the ranking at the end of 2006, the United States largely dominate the situation, both in qualitative quantitative terms. The American public research is funded in large part incentives. Federal agencies such as Nasa or the public institutions such as the NIH (National Institutes of Health) distribute significant amounts to universities calls for annual projects. The result of this very selective system is undeniable. The United States hold one of the best indices of quality of the scientific world (with Switzerland). In other words, they produce a lot of very high-level scientific knowledge.

View under the microscope, the France displays poor performance. While England has a 1.18 impact index and the Germany ratio of 1.10, the France simply a lean 0.94, well below the world average (set by definition 1). In his last report, the Observatory of science and technology (OST) notes without explaining this decrease in plan (). "After a phase of growth between 1993 and 1999, quotes from the France global shares declined in all disciplines." "Between 1999 and 2004, this decline is greater than 10, except in engineering sciences and Mathematics".

This loss of influence of the science "Made in France" is not a simple consequence of a lack of human or budgetary means. Many countries known to be smaller and less wealthy than the hexagon produce better quality work (see table). For many experts, the French system based on endogamic evaluation of the work and the recurrent distribution of non-incentive public credits is responsible for this drowsiness. In fact, in all countries of the world, Governments are concerned about the proper use of public money in the pockets of taxpayers and attempt to measure the return on investment for these expenses, in principle, "preparing the future". A very difficult exercise which requires a subtle balance between incentives for excellence, stability of teams and project sustainability.

There are three major families of scientific publications. First, the major conceptual advances which open an entirely new field on the front of the knowledge. The authors of these discoveries are rare birds, both geniuses and workaholics. Only major magazines such as "Science" or "Nature" are worthy of their signature. They are treated as stars in the great world congresses. Very courted by research institutions, these locomotives attract the best students in their laboratories. These Nobel Prize potential, the future is no clouds and tap credits remains large open. Behind these pioneers of New Territories come seconds knives. This time, it is more major first world but confirmations or probes of existing hypotheses.

A great cauldron

These "seconds roles" dream course of debunking the first even demolish their ideas at the earliest opportunity. Finally comes the ungraded, produced by the battalions of honest artisans of the profession who form the majority of the scientific community. To affirm its existence and justify his salary, this third division often simply rework known results by adding a personal ingredient. The advent of the computer greatly facilitated the task. The computer allows good balance of primarily existing data or to reinterpret results by introducing correlations more often without interest.

This production is monitored almost in real time by the Accountants of the scientific bibliography. The best known of these experts is the Thomson Scientific data bank with the "Essential Science Indicators" Justice of the peace of the profession. Global balance presented at the end of 2006 takes into account the work of the public or private researchers stationed in 145 countries and working in 21 disciplines. The reporting period, from January 1996 to November 2006, is long enough to smooth out "route accidents."

A conclusion on the face of the balance sheet: the scientific production is a great cauldron permanently powered 5 millions of researchers in position in the world. Every day, thousands of more or less original articles thus enter the heritage of human knowledge. Image summarizes the strength of this maelstrom: a human life is no longer enough to absorb the knowledge generated in a single day by the scientific community.