[My View] President Emeritus Peter Gruss of OIST — No need to imitate other countries: Japan needs a science system that learns

Confronting a quieter challenge

As one of the world's leading technological superpowers, Japan boasts world-class corporations, talented engineers, and top-tier research institutions, backed by a long track record of transforming ideas into products. Today, however, Japan is confronting a quieter challenge. The nation's public research system is failing to generate a sufficient volume of the frontier science that triggers the next wave of innovation.

This is not an issue that can be resolved simply by increasing funding. Japan already injects vast amounts of capital into research and development (R&D). The bottleneck lies in the fact that the majority of Japan's R&D is conducted by private enterprises. This is highly effective for refining products, manufacturing, and industrial processes. However, corporations typically concentrate on research that can contribute to their own business lines within a certain timeframe.

Public research serves a different purpose. It supports early-stage discoveries that might not bear fruit for many years, nurtures young scientists, establishes shared infrastructural tools and datasets, and generates knowledge that a broad spectrum of industries can leverage. In fields such as AI, medicine, materials, robots, and clean energy, the industries of tomorrow often trace their roots back to the publicly funded science of today.

Japan continues to produce a high volume of papers and patents. Yet, volume alone is insufficient. In terms of highly cited scientific papers, Japan's standing is weak, and the proportion of Japanese patents directly linked to scientific research appears lower than that of the United States or Germany. This underscores the core challenge facing Japan. Its public research is not being sufficiently translated into leading-edge science or science-based innovation.

What Japan needs now is a novel approach called "metascience." Metascience is studying how science itself works. Which funding models yield the most brilliant ideas? Does peer review favor safe research over bold, high-risk endeavors? Are young researchers granted sufficient autonomy? Are scientists spending far too much time on paperwork? Which specific programs translate into better research, patents, startups, and societal benefits? Metascience poses these highly practical questions.

Starting with Grants-in-Aid (KAKENHI) Reforms

The logical point start line for these reforms would be the Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research (KAKENHI) administered by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS). Japan should establish a "KAKENHI Metascience Lab" dedicated to studying the grant review process and post-award outcomes. This lab should pilot initiatives such as shortening application forms, extending grant durations, boosting support for ambitious research with uncertain outcomes, and providing substantial funding tailored to early-career researchers.

Young researchers deserve special consideration. Under many existing structures, early-career researchers remain heavily dependent on senior professors. Japan needs to make a definitive cultural and institutional shift. Assistant professors must no longer function as "professorial assistants." Promising young researchers must be granted their own independent budgets, laboratory space, staff, and research agendas.

The Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST) should become a testing ground for alternative funding models. For certain projects, particularly in engineering, AI, robots, batteries, and quantum technology, active management and clear milestones are vital. Program managers should be vested with flexible authority to scale up, pivot, or terminate projects based on real-time results. Basic research must not be shackled to short-term targets.

The Institute of Physical and Chemical Research (RIKEN) should serve as a hub for long-term frontier science. It should provide selected researchers with 8 to 10 years of flexible funding, expand the number of independent research groups for young scientists, and actively invite international teams into its centers. Japan must establish mechanisms that make it seamless for top-tier global talent to participate in the domestic research environment.

University reform will also be necessary. National universities need a stronger governance structure that includes external committee members and members from overseas. In science and engineering graduate education, institutions should expand courses that can be taken in English immediately after completing an undergraduate degree, thereby attracting a larger influx of international students, postdocs, and faculty members from abroad. This does not mean weakening Japanese culture or language. It means opening Japan's research system to the world.

Reducing paperwork is necessary

Reducing paperwork is also necessary. Researchers lose a great deal of time preparing lengthy applications, submitting reports, and complying with complex rules. The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology could establish a national target to reduce unnecessary research-related administration by 20% within five years. Providing professional research managers paired with streamlined, low-hurdle grant systems would finally allow scientists to dedicate themselves entirely to their research.

Finally, Japan needs to improve and expand its data on its own research environment. Information concerning grants, evaluations, publications, patents, startups, clinical trials, and career paths should be securely integrated. Without such integrated data, policymakers remain blind to which reforms are effective. By effectively harnessing this data, Japan can operate its scientific policy as a continuous learning system.

Japan does not need to imitate the United States or Germany. It should build a model suited to Japan. However, it must transform into a more proactive system by becoming more open, more global, providing greater support to young talent, and testing new ideas. The goal is simple. It is to transform public research into better science, and better science into stronger innovation.