This year, 11 out of 13 Nobel Prize winners were American nationals or those of American citizenship. In fact, we have won 89 Nobel awards for medicine, 74 for physics, 58 for chemistry and more since the end of WWII. Although some people trivialize these awards as an approval of some vast left-wing agenda just because liberals win more often, these prizes actually commemorate the talents and merits of those who have made breakthroughs in their field through their original work. In other words, the Nobel Prize is a big deal. So, the fact that Americans dominated this year and in previous years is not trivial. It suggests that we are still the leading global force in research and innovation. It argues for American exceptionalism in the area of science and technology, at least for now.

So why are we so over-represented in the community of Nobel prize winners, especially those in the natural sciences? Some claim that the number of American Nobel winners is simply the result of our gross domestic production level or the massive size of our economy. However, if this were true, countries like China and India should have won a sizeable number of Nobel awards this year. Rather, a simple analysis indicates that it might be the gross share of national GDP devoted to research and development that determines the number of awards. This includes private and public funds used for biomedical investigations, product development and other fields of scientific research. Secondly, the number of top, global universities can potentially explain our standing in the scientific arena. There is no question that we have the highest number of top universities in the world. These institutions are the physical spaces where scientists conduct cutting-edge research, discover key findings, and share the results with scholars and students. Without these universities, all we would have is good ideas and no resources to test them out. Thus, it is highly likely that through funding and infrastructure, we have become the most scientifically innovative country.

However, there is increasing talk about the demise of American scientific competitiveness. It is true that other developing countries are catching up by increasing their funding in science and building more research institutions. Consequently, more countries are producing highly skilled scientists and engineers that are equally smart and talented as their American counterparts. However, we can take advantage of this situation by attracting these skilled foreign workers to do research in America. These foreign scientists know that we have best facilities and resources, and many dream of working in this country. All we need to do is to simplify the immigration process for these skilled workers and attach a green card to their working visas. This would encourage more scientists to immigrate and prevent brain drain in the long run. In addition, we must invest in native talent by drastically improving science and math education at the elementary and high school level. Oliva Judson, a science columnist for NYT suggested of creating “Research of America,” a research-intensive employment program modeled after Teach for America. This internship experience seems particularly effective in increasing scientific literacy and interest in research-based careers.

Clearly, our country is a global leader in technology and innovation thanks to our investment in science and research infrastructure. However, to maintain our current status and perhaps to become even more globally competitive, we must focus on attracting skilled workers from abroad and prepare our young scientists with skills they need to succeed and win a Nobel Prize. No pressure, guys.

—Soo Yang is a senior in the College of Arts and Science. He can be reached at soo.r.yang@vanderbilt.edu.