Are there global shifts in the world science base? Analysing the catching up and falling behind of world regions

This paper explores the changing role of world regions (North America, EU15, South EU, Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), Former-USSR, Latin America, Asia Pacific and the Middle East) in science from 1981 to 2011. We use bibliometric data extracted from Thomson Reuter’s National Science Indicators (2011) for 21 broad disciplines, and aggregated the data into the four major science areas: life, fundamental, applied and social sciences. Comparing three sub-periods (1981–1989, 1990–2000 and 2001–2011), we investigate (i) over time changes in descriptive indicators such as publications, citations, and relative impact; (ii) static specialization measured by revealed comparative advantage (RCA) in citations and papers; and (iii) dynamic specialization measured by absolute growth in papers. Descriptive results show a global shift in science largely in quantity (papers) and much less in impact (citations). We argue this should be interpreted as a shift in science’s absorptive capacity but not necessarily a shift of knowledge generation at the world science frontier, which reflects the nature of science systems operating with high inertia and path dependency in areas of their historically inherited advantages and disadvantages. In view of their common historical legacy in science we are particularly interested in the process of convergence/divergence of the catching-up/transition regions with the world frontier regions. We implement an interpretative framework to compare regions in terms of their static and dynamic specialization from 1981–1989 to 2001–2011. Again, our analysis shows that while science systems are mostly characterised by strong inertia and historically inherited (dis)advantages, Asia Pacific, Latin America and CEE show strong catching-up characteristics but largely in the absorptive capacity of science.

[1]  Rainer Frietsch,et al.  Transnational patents and international markets , 2009, Scientometrics.

[2]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  In-depth analysis on China’s international cooperation in science , 2010, Scientometrics.

[3]  Electronic Working Paper Series : Available at : Title : Russian technological specialization in terms of world ’ s innovation changes during 1994-2008 . Comparison with countries of BRIC and European Innovation-driven economies , 2013 .

[4]  Ling-Chu Lee,et al.  Research output and economic productivity: a Granger causality test , 2011, Scientometrics.

[5]  Leonardo Costa Ribeiro,et al.  Matrices of science and technology interactions and patterns of structured growth: implications for development , 2010, Scientometrics.

[6]  Eugene Garfield,et al.  Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool? , 2005, Scientometrics.

[7]  J. Sylvan Katz,et al.  Bibliometric indicators and the social sciences , 1999 .

[8]  M. Abramovitz Catching Up, Forging Ahead, and Falling Behind , 1986, The Journal of Economic History.

[9]  Manuel Krauskopf,et al.  Science in Latin America how much and along what lines? , 2005, Scientometrics.

[10]  Slavo Radosevic,et al.  History matters: The inherited disciplinary structure of the post-communist science in countries of central and eastern Europe and its restructuring , 1999, Scientometrics.

[11]  Rémi Barré,et al.  Clustering research fields for macro-strategic analysis: A comparitive specialization approach , 1992, Scientometrics.

[12]  Daniel Teodorescu,et al.  The growth of international collaboration in East European scholarly communities: a bibliometric analysis of journal articles published between 1989 and 2009 , 2011, Scientometrics.

[13]  Concepción S. Wilson,et al.  Changes in the scientific output of Russia from 1980 to 2000, as reflected in the Science Citation Index, in relation to national politico-economic changes , 2004, Scientometrics.

[14]  J. Camacho,et al.  Relative absorptive capacity: a research profiling , 2012, Scientometrics.

[15]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  Using a bibliometric approach to support research policy making: The case of the Flemish BOF-key , 2004, Scientometrics.

[16]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION , 1990 .

[17]  韩涛,et al.  A comparison of disciplinary structure in science between the G7 and the BRIC countries by bibliometric methods , 2012 .

[18]  C. Pérez Technological Revolutions and Techno-Economic Paradigms , 2010 .

[19]  Yoshiko Okubo,et al.  Bibliometric indicators and analysis of research systems , 1997 .

[20]  Richard R. Nelson,et al.  Social Absorption Capability, National Innovation Systems and Economic Development , 1995 .

[21]  Yu-Shan Chen,et al.  Using patent analysis to explore corporate growth , 2011, Scientometrics.

[22]  J. Zayas,et al.  Factors affecting innovation revisited. , 2008 .

[23]  Yoshiko Okubo,et al.  Bibliometric indicators and analysis of research systems : methods and examples , 1997 .

[24]  Keith Pavitt,et al.  The International Distribution and Determinants of Technological Activities , 1988 .

[25]  L. G. Soete,et al.  The use of foreign patenting as an internationally comparable science and technology output indicator , 2005, Scientometrics.

[26]  Wen-Chi Hung,et al.  Forging into the Innovation Lead — A Comparative Analysis of Scientific Capacity , 2010 .

[27]  Rémi Barré Clustering research fields for macro-strategic analysis: A comparative specialization approach , 2005, Scientometrics.

[28]  Tao Han,et al.  A comparison of disciplinary structure in science between the G7 and the BRIC countries by bibliometric methods , 2012, Scientometrics.

[29]  Li Tang,et al.  Regional development and interregional collaboration in the growth of nanotechnology research in China , 2011, Scientometrics.

[30]  Simon Sommer,et al.  Bibliometric analysis and private research funding , 2005, Scientometrics.

[31]  魏屹东,et al.  Scientometrics , 2018, Encyclopedia of Big Data.

[32]  K. C. Garg An overview of cross-national, national, and institutional assessment as reflected in the international journal Scientometrics , 2004, Scientometrics.

[33]  Luc Soete,et al.  Catching up in technology: entry barriers and windows of opportunity , 1988 .

[34]  Yi-Ching Liaw,et al.  Bibliometric analysis for development of research strategies in agricultural technology: the case of Taiwan , 2012, Scientometrics.

[35]  Gert Villumsen,et al.  The Long Term Development of OECD Export Specialisation Patterns De-Specialisation and Stickiness , 1996 .

[36]  B. Lepori,et al.  Public research funding systems in central and eastern europe: Between excellence and relevance: Introduction to special section , 2009 .

[37]  Jorge Morales Meoqui On the complementary nature of Ricardo's comparative advantage and Smith's productivity theory of trade , 2010 .

[38]  Chan-Yuan Wong,et al.  The pathway of development: science and technology of NIEs and selected Asian emerging economies , 2012, Scientometrics.

[39]  Xu Zhang,et al.  Industry evolution and key technologies in China based on patent analysis , 2011, Scientometrics.

[40]  G. Dosi,et al.  Technical Change and Economic Theory , 1989 .

[41]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Measuring science-technology interaction in the knowledge-driven economy: The case of a small economy , 2003, Scientometrics.

[42]  Chan-Yuan Wong On a path to creative destruction: science, technology and science-based technological trajectories of Japan and South Korea , 2012, Scientometrics.

[43]  Slavo Radosevic,et al.  Patterns of restructuring in research, development and innovation activities in central and eastern European countries: an analysis based on S&T indicators , 1999 .

[44]  S. Radosevic,et al.  SSEES Centre for Comparative Economics ARE SYSTEMS OF INNOVATION IN EASTERN EUROPE EFFICIENT ? , 2009 .

[45]  Axèle Giroud,et al.  The competitive advantage of nations: An application to academia , 2014, J. Informetrics.

[46]  S. Breiner,et al.  Foresight in Science and Technology , 1996 .

[47]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  Is Italian science declining , 2011 .

[48]  B. Balassa Trade Liberalisation and “Revealed” Comparative Advantage , 1965 .

[49]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations , 2004, Scientometrics.