State Key Laboratory
list of research institution laboratories in China
State Key Laboratory (SKL; 国家重点实验室) is a national designation awarded to university- and enterprise-owned research institutions and laboratories that receive special funding from the Ministry of Science and Technology of China.
These labs often specialize in areas such as: Chemistry, Mathematics and Physics, Geology, Biotechnology, Information technology, Materials science, Engineering, and Medicine.
List of designated laboratories
According to the Ministry of Science and Technology of China, as of 2023, there were 533 State Key Laboratories approved in China.
The following lists the 73 universities in mainland China, Hong Kong and Macau with at least one state key laboratory:
Most of the universities with SKL in mainland China are Double First Class Universities, approved by the central government of the People's Republic of China.
See also
List of universities in China
Double First Class University Plan
National Key Universities (China)
OpenCourseWare in China
China Open Resources for Education
References
External links
State Key Laboratories website archived from the original on 21 February 2009.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “State Key Laboratory” is list of research institution laboratories in China. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through State, Laboratory and list, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “list of research institution laboratories in China” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The record creator and administrative purpose are central evidence, because official documentation reflects both action and institutional priorities. The source revision retrieved here is dated May 14, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q120400981. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2023 and 2009.
Institutional narratives can privilege the records that survived while minimizing voices that were never formally collected. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.
- Event chronology
- Institutional context
- Locating named record creators
Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “State Key Laboratory”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow State Key Laboratory primary sources, State Key Laboratory archive and State research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “State Key Laboratory”?
- Who created the surviving record, and for what administrative purpose?
- Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “State Key Laboratory” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.