GoKawiilIn early 2025, the Chinese artificial-intelligence company DeepSeek, based in Hangzhou, unveiled DeepSeek-R1, a high-performance large language model developed at a fraction of the cost of its Western counterparts. Silicon Valley investor Marc Andreessen called it “AI’s Sputnik moment”. Later that year, Chinese robotics firm Unitree, also based in Hangzhou, released its R1 humanoid robot, which has capabilities approaching those of much more expensive Western systems. Together, these advances have revived a global debate about how nations cultivate and secure technological leadership.
The number of China’s elite scientists who have been trained abroad is falling
The composition of teams at these firms is revealing. DeepSeek’s research cohort is mostly domestically trained, with many members under 30. Unitree’s engineers are similarly young and trained mainly in China.
Together, these cases suggest that cutting-edge innovation need not depend on researchers learning skills overseas and returning to their home country. A homegrown pipeline for talent is possible — but the model must be sustainable. How can countries build one strong enough to support innovation over time? The answer is to start at the earliest stages of education.
Competition for talent is growing
For decades, China, like many other countries, built its scientific capacity through a narrow pathway: high-stakes exams selected top students, elite universities concentrated resources to train them, overseas positions supplied them with advanced expertise and their return replenished domestic research leadership. That model was effective for catching up with technological developments being pioneered elsewhere. But it rested on global conditions that are becoming less reliable.
As geopolitical tensions disrupt cross-border study, research collaborations and talent flows — and as many countries, including China, continue to face limitations in attracting foreign talent1 innovation systems can no longer rely on a global pool of mobile elite talent alone. But to sustain a domestic model of innovation, the key question is where that domestic talent base comes from — and how it can be built up from scratch.
Innovation policy must move upstream
The answer lies in how scientific talent develops. It does not begin with specialization at university, but evolves in stages: preschool and the early primary or elementary years shape curiosity and hands-on skills; upper elementary and secondary-school education foster critical thinking and conceptual understanding; and higher education refines specialization and career trajectories2. Systems that invest mainly at the final stage are therefore trying to reap innovation from inadequate foundations.
This helps to explain why education reforms announced in China in 2025 are directing more attention upstream. The aim is no longer simply to expand science teaching in the classroom, but to build a broader science-learning ecosystem across all educational levels. Initiatives such as the Fertile Soil Plan (see go.nature.com/4rt8ip; in Chinese) aim to cultivate scientific literacy and strengthen the innovation capabilities of primary- and secondary-school students by replacing rote coverage with interdisciplinary, hands-on, project-based learning tied to real-world problem solving. The wider ambition is to engage students at earlier educational stages in how science is actually done: posing questions, conducting experiments, testing ideas and working across disciplinary boundaries.
... continue reading