Nanotechnology publications and patents: a review of social science studies and search strategies

This paper provides a comprehensive review of more than 120 social science studies in nanoscience and technology, all of which analyze publication and patent data. We conduct a comparative analysis of bibliometric search strategies that these studies use to harvest publication and patent data related to nanoscience and technology. We implement these strategies on 2006 publication data and find that Mogoutov and Kahane (2007), with their evolutionary lexical query search strategy, extract the highest number of records from the Web of Science. The strategies of Glanzel et al. (2003), Noyons et al. (2003), Porter et al. (2008) and Mogoutov and Kahane (2007) produce very similar ranking tables of the top ten nanotechnology subject areas and the top ten most prolific countries and institutions.

[1]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Connecting NSF funding to patent innovation in nanotechnology (2001–2004) , 2006 .

[2]  W. D. de Heer,et al.  Carbon Nanotubes--the Route Toward Applications , 2002, Science.

[3]  Raj Bawa,et al.  The carbon nanotube patent landscape in nanomedicine: an Expert opinion , 2007 .

[4]  Ick Chan Kwon,et al.  Nanomedicine: An Emerging Modality Based on Nanotechnology for Therapy and Diagnosis , 2007 .

[5]  Zan Huang,et al.  International nanotechnology development in 2003: Country, institution, and technology field analysis based on USPTO patent database , 2004 .

[6]  Teruo Okazaki,et al.  Capturing Nanotechnology's Current State of Development via Analysis of Patents. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, 2007/4. , 2007 .

[7]  A. Hullmann.  Who is winning the global nanorace? , 2006, Nature nanotechnology.

[8]  Anastassios Pouris.  Nanoscale research in South Africa: A mapping exercise based on scientometrics , 2007, Scientometrics.

[9]  Hsinchun Chen,et al.  Building a scientific knowledge web portal: The NanoPort experience , 2006, Decis. Support Syst..

[10]  J. Youtie,et al.  Nanotechnology publications and citations by leading countries and blocs , 2008 .

[11]  Zan Huang,et al.  Longitudinal Patent Analysis for Nanoscale Science and Engineering: Country, Institution and Technology Field , 2003 .

[12]  Katarina Larsen,et al.  Knowledge network hubs and measures of research impact, science structure, and publication output in nanostructured solar cell research , 2008, Scientometrics.

[13]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Patent citation network in nanotechnology (1976–2004) , 2007 .

[14]  Martin S. Meyer,et al.  Patent citation analysis in a novel field of technology:An exploration of nano-science and nano-technology , 2001, Scientometrics.

[15]  L. Zucker,et al.  Minerva Unbound: Knowledge Stocks, Knowledge Flows and New Knowledge Production , 2006 .

[16]  Chiara Franzoni,et al.  Is academic patenting detrimental to high quality research? An empirical analysis of the relationship between scientific careers and patent applications , 2004 .

[17]  Poh Kam Wong,et al.  Internationalization and evolution of application areas of an emerging technology: The case of nanotechnology , 2007, Scientometrics.

[18]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Anticipating technological breakthroughs: Using bibliographic coupling to explore the nanotubes paradigm , 2007, Scientometrics.

[19]  David H. Guston,et al.  Real-time technology assessment , 2020, Emerging Technologies: Ethics, Law and Governance.

[20]  Robin Cowan,et al.  If the alliance fits , 2008 .

[21]  W. Bainbridge,et al.  Societal implications of nanoscience and nanotechnology , 2001 .

[22]  Ronald N. Kostoff,et al.  Global nanotechnology research metrics , 2007, Scientometrics.

[23]  Angela Hullmann,et al.  Measuring and assessing the development of nanotechnology , 2007, Scientometrics.

[24]  Gavin Clarkson,et al.  The Problem of Patent Thickets in Convergent Technologies , 2006, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[25]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  How cross-disciplinary is bionanotechnology? Explorations in the specialty of molecular motors , 2007, Scientometrics.

[26]  Thomas Heinze,et al.  Nanoscience and Nanotechnology in Europe : Analysis of Publications and Patent Applications including Comparisons with the United States , 2004 .

[27]  M. Scheu,et al.  Mapping nanotechnology patents: The EPO approach , 2006 .

[28]  P. Zhou,et al.  The Emergence of China as a Leading Nation in Science. Research Policy, 35(1), 2006, 83-104. , 2006, 0911.3421.

[29]  Thomas Heinze,et al.  Characterizing creative scientists in nano-S&T: Productivity, multidisciplinarity, and network brokerage in a longitudinal perspective , 2007, Scientometrics.

[30]  J. Youtie,et al.  Refining search terms for nanotechnology , 2008 .

[31]  Tibor Braun,et al.  Gatekeeper index versus impact factor of science journals , 2007, Scientometrics.

[32]  D. Bowman,et al.  Patently Obvious: Intellectual Property Rights and Nanotechnology , 2009 .

[33]  Martin Meyer.  Are Co-Active Researchers on Top of their Class? An Exploratory Comparison of Inventor-Authors with their Non-Inventing Peers in Nano-Science and Technology , 2006 .

[34]  Ulrich Schmoch,et al.  Are international co-publications an indicator for quality of scientific research? , 2008, Scientometrics.

[35]  Volker Wagner,et al.  The emerging nanomedicine landscape , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[36]  Michael R. Darby,et al.  Grilichesian Breakthroughs: Inventions of Methods of Inventing and Firm Entry in Nanotechnology , 2005 .

[37]  Franz C. Palm,et al.  Financial Constraints and Other Obstacles: are they a Threat to Innovation Activity? , 2008 .

[38]  Martin Meyer,et al.  What do we know about innovation in nanotechnology? Some propositions about an emerging field between hype and path-dependency , 2007, Scientometrics.

[39]  A. Porter,et al.  Nanopatenting patterns in relation to product life cycle , 2007 .

[40]  Angela Hullmann,et al.  Forecasting the development of nanotechnology with the help of science and technology indicators , 2002 .

[41]  Andrei Mogoutov,et al.  Data search strategy for science and technology emergence: A scalable and evolutionary query for nanotechnology tracking , 2007 .

[42]  Michel Zitt,et al.  Mapping nanosciences by citation flows: A preliminary analysis , 2007, Scientometrics.

[43]  N. Islam,et al.  Nanotechnology systems of innovation - An analysis of industry and academia research activities , 2007 .

[44]  Charles Oppenheim,et al.  Comparing alternatives to the Web of Science for coverage of the social sciences' literature , 2007, J. Informetrics.

[45]  Yong-Gil Lee,et al.  Selecting the key research areas in nano-technology field using technology cluster analysis: A case study based on National R&D Programs in South Korea , 2007 .

[46]  Hsinchun Chen,et al.  Worldwide nanotechnology development: a comparative study of USPTO, EPO, and JPO patents (1976–2004) , 2007 .

[47]  Hajime Eto.  Interdisciplinary information input and output of a nano-technology project , 2004, Scientometrics.

[48]  Marie C. Thursby,et al.  The nanotech vs . the biotech revolution : sources of productivity in incumbent firm research , 2007 .

[49]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequencesfor international comparisons of national research performance , 2001, Scientometrics.

[50]  Jesse A. Stump,et al.  The structure and infrastructure of the global nanotechnology literature , 2006 .

[51]  M. Meyer,et al.  Nanotechnology-interdisciplinarity, patterns of collaboration and differences in application , 1998, Scientometrics.

[52]  Murat Bengisu,et al.  Critical and emerging technologies in Materials, Manufacturing, and Industrial Engineering: A study for priority setting , 2003, Scientometrics.

[53]  Zan Huang,et al.  Longitudinal Nanotechnology Development (1991--2002): National Science Foundation Funding and its Impact on Patents , 2005 .

[54]  Tibor Braun,et al.  Gatekeeping patterns in nano-titled journals , 2007, Scientometrics.

[55]  Joachim Schummer,et al.  Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology , 2004, Scientometrics.

[56]  Grid Thoma,et al.  Scientific and technological regimes in nanotechnology. Combinatorial inventors and performance , 2005 .

[57]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Longitudinal study on patent citations to academic research articles in nanotechnology (1976–2004) , 2007 .

[58]  Ronald N. Kostoff,et al.  Structure of the nanoscience and nanotechnology applications literature , 2008 .

[59]  Michael R. Darby,et al.  Socio-Economic Impact of Nanoscale Science: Initial Results and Nanobank , 2005 .

[60]  Gilda Massari Coelho,et al.  Text mining as a valuable tool in foresight exercises: A study on nanotechnology , 2006 .

[61]  Michel Zitt,et al.  Erratum to "Delineating complex scientific fields by an hybrid lexical-citation method: An application to nanosciences" [Information Processing and Management 42 (2006) 1513-1531] , 2007, Inf. Process. Manag..

[62]  Michael Chau,et al.  Searching and mining the web for personalized and specialized information , 2005, SIGF.

[63]  Masatsura Igami,et al.  Capturing the Evolving Nature of Science, the Development of New Scientific Indicators and the Mapping of Science , 2007 .

[64]  Philip Shapira,et al.  Identifying creative research accomplishments: Methodology and results for nanotechnology and human genetics , 2007, Scientometrics.

[65]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Nanotechnology as a field of science: Its delineation in terms of journals and patents , 2007, Scientometrics.

[66]  M. McAleer,et al.  Nanotechnology strength indicators: international rankings based on US patents , 2003 .

[67]  R. Kostoff,et al.  The seminal literature of nanotechnology research , 2006 .

[68]  Jan Youtie,et al.  Measures for knowledge-based economic development: Introducing data mining techniques to economic developers in the state of Georgia and the US South , 2006 .

[69]  Arie Rip,et al.  Tracking the evolution of new and emerging S&T via statement-linkages: Vision assessment in molecular machines , 2007, Scientometrics.

[70]  Stuart J. H. Graham,et al.  Assessing the nature of nanotechnology: can we uncover an emerging general purpose technology? , 2008 .

[71]  Raymond G. Koytcheff,et al.  Technical structure of the global nanoscience and nanotechnology literature , 2007 .

[72]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Publications and patents in nanotechnology , 2003, Scientometrics.

[73]  A. Stankiewicz,et al.  DIVERSIFICATION AND HYBRIDIZATION IN FIRM KNOWLEDGE BASES IN NANOTECHNOLOGIES , 2010 .

[74]  Ken Colwell.  The Structure of Alliance Networks in Nascent Organizational Fields: The Case of Nanotechnology - Executive Summary , 2003 .

[75]  Jingjing Zhang,et al.  Language trends in nanoscience and technology: The case of Chinese-language publications , 2007, Scientometrics.

[76]  Jan Youtie,et al.  Emergence of Nanodistricts in the United States , 2008 .

[77]  Tralvex Yeap,et al.  Computational patent mapping: Intelligent agents for nanotechnology , 2003, Proceedings International Conference on MEMS, NANO and Smart Systems.

[78]  Aldo Geuna,et al.  The Role of University Spinout Companies in an Emerging Technology: The Case of Nanotechnology , 2006 .

[79]  Tibor Braun,et al.  Nanoscience and nanotecnology on the balance , 1997, Scientometrics.

[80]  Ed C. M. Noyons,et al.  How to identify research groups using publication analysis: an example in the field of nanotechnology , 2006, Scientometrics.

[81]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  How balanced is the Science Citation Index's journal coverage? A preliminary overview of macrolevel statistical data , 2000 .

[82]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Are patenting scientists the better scholars?: An exploratory comparison of inventor-authors with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology , 2006 .

[83]  Khurshid Ahmad,et al.  Can Text Analysis Tell us Something about Technology Progress? , 2003, ACL 2003.

[84]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  Scientific capabilities and technological performance of national innovation systems: An exploration of emerging industrial relevant research domains , 2006, Scientometrics.

[85]  Jiancheng Guan,et al.  China's emerging presence in nanoscience and nanotechnology: A comparative bibliometric study of several nanoscience ‘giants’ , 2007 .

[86]  V K Gupta,et al.  Carbon nanotubes: bibliometric analysis of patents , 2000 .

[87]  M. Brewer,et al.  Intellectual Capital and the Birth of U.S. Biotechnology Enterprises , 1994 .

[88]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  Knowledge-sourcing strategies for cross-disciplinarity in bionanotechnology , 2006 .

[89]  R. Bawa.  Patents and nanomedicine. , 2007, Nanomedicine.

[90]  Ronald N. Kostoff,et al.  Global nanotechnology research literature overview , 2007 .

[91]  Andrea Bonaccorsi,et al.  Institutional complementarity and inventive performance in nano science and technology , 2007 .

[92]  M. Meyer.  Does science push technology? Patents citing scientific literature , 2000 .

[93]  Ronald N. Kostoff,et al.  Structure of the Global Nanoscience and Nanotechnology Research Literature , 2006 .

[94]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Knowledge integrators or weak links? An exploratory comparison of patenting researchers with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology , 2006, Scientometrics.

[95]  Michel Zitt,et al.  Delineating complex scientific fields by an hybrid lexical-citation method: An application to nanosciences , 2006, Inf. Process. Manag..

[96]  Norbert Malanowski,et al.  Bridging the gap between foresight and market research: Integrating methods to assess the economic potential of nanotechnology☆ , 2007 .

[97]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Is the United States losing ground in science? A global perspective on the world science system , 2009, Scientometrics.

[98]  Susan E. Reid,et al.  Biotechnology and Nanotechnology: Science-based Enabling Technologies as Windows of Opportunity for LDCs? , 2007 .

[99]  Joachim Schummer.  The global institutionalization of nanotechnology research: A bibliometric approach to the assessment of science policy , 2007, Scientometrics.

[100]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Patent Citations in a Novel Field of Technology — What Can They Tell about Interactions between Emerging Communities of Science and Technology? , 2000, Scientometrics.

[101]  V. K. Gupta.  Technological trends in the area of fullerenes using bibliometric analysis of patents , 2006, Scientometrics.

[102]  C. Warris,et al.  Nanotechnology Benchmarking Project , 2004 .