Interdisciplinarity in Biotechnology, Genomics and Nanotechnology

In this paper we study developments in biotechnology, genomics and nanotechnology in the period 1998--2008. The fields show changing interdisciplinary characteristics in relation to distinct co-evolutionary dynamics in research, science and society. Biotechnology emerged as a discipline in publication patterns at the same time as the number of biotechnology departments increased, whereas genomics emerged as a stable discipline, while the number of genomics departments declined. Nanotechnology maintains an interdisciplinary journal citation pattern while the number of nanotechnology departments increased. In all three fields the importance of industry--university collaborations increased, albeit to different degrees. Patterns of interdisciplinarity can thus be distinguished, as different ways in which the three dynamics co-evolve. From a governance perspective, this conceptualization provides distinct rationales for policy interventions in relation to interdisciplinarity in research, science and society. Copyright The Author 2012. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com, Oxford University Press.

[1]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science , 2003 .

[2]  Gaston Heimeriks,et al.  Digital disciplinary differences: An analysis of computer-mediated science and ‘Mode 2’ knowledge production , 2008 .

[3]  Kevin W. Boyack,et al.  Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): A review of the literature , 2011, J. Informetrics.

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

[5]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  An item-by-item subject classification of papers published in multidisciplinary and general journals using reference analysis , 2006, Scientometrics.

[6]  L. Vaccarezza.  The new production of knowledge. The dinamics of science and research in contemporary societies, Michael Gibbons, Camille Limoges, Hega Nowotny, Simon Schwartzman, Peter Scott y Martin Trow, Londres, SAGE Publications, 1994, 179 páginas. , 1995 .

[7]  Terry Shinn,et al.  New sources of radical innovation: research-technologies, transversality and distributed learning in a post-industrial order , 2005 .

[8]  Blaise Cronin,et al.  Invoked on the Web , 1998, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[9]  Diana Lucio-Arias,et al.  An indicator of research front activity: Measuring intellectual organization as uncertainty reduction in document sets , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[10]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The delineation of specialties in terms of journals using the dynamic journal set of the SCI , 2005, Scientometrics.

[11]  Ron Boschma,et al.  Scientific Knowledge Dynamics and Relatedness in Bio-Tech Cities , 2014 .

[12]  M. Roco.  The Emergence and Policy Implications of Converging New Technologies , 2006 .

[13]  Science for the 21st Century , 2002 .

[14]  Can Huang,et al.  Nanoscience and technology publications and patents: a review of social science studies and search strategies , 2011 .

[15]  P. David.  Why are institutions the ‘carriers of history’?: Path dependence and the evolution of conventions, organizations and institutions , 1994 .

[16]  Andrew Abbott,et al.  Time Matters: On Theory and Method , 2001 .

[17]  H. Simon,et al.  The Organization of Complex Systems , 1977 .

[18]  J. Klein,et al.  Analyzing interdisciplinarity: Typology and indicators , 2010 .

[19]  Inyong Shin,et al.  General Purpose Technologies and Economic Growth , 2014 .

[20]  F. J. Rijnsoever,et al.  Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration , 2011 .

[21]  D. T. Tomov,et al.  Comparative indicators of interdisciplinarity in modern science , 1996, Scientometrics.

[22]  J. Youtie,et al.  How interdisciplinary is nanotechnology? , 2009, Journal of nanoparticle research : an interdisciplinary forum for nanoscale science and technology.

[23]  G. Heimeriks,et al.  Disciplinary, Multidisciplinary, Interdisciplinary: Concepts and Indicators. , 2001 .

[24]  Gaston Heimeriks,et al.  Do more distant collaborations have more citation impact? , 2013, J. Informetrics.

[25]  Julie Thompson Klein,et al.  Afterword: the emergent literature on interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research evaluation , 2006 .

[26]  Gaston Heimeriks,et al.  Changes or transition? Analysing the use of ICTs in the sciences , 2008 .

[27]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Dynamic animations of journal maps: Indicators of structural changes and interdisciplinary developments , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[28]  J. McAllister,et al.  The Future of the sciences and humanities : four analytical essays and a critical debate on the future of scholastic endeavour , 2002 .

[29]  M. Albornoz.  Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty , 2003 .

[30]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The Knowledge-Based Economy , 2006 .

[31]  B. Latour.  Science in Action , 1987 .

[32]  B. Latour.  From the World of Science to the World of Research? , 1998, Science.

[33]  R. Corey,et al.  Shaping Biomedicine as an Information Science Timothy 1 enoir , 2022 .

[34]  Yuko Fujigaki,et al.  Filling the gap between discussions on science and scientists' everyday activities: applying the autopoiesis system theory to scientific knowledge , 1998 .

[35]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .

[36]  Diana Lucio-Arias,et al.  Knowledge emergence in scientific communication: from “fullerenes” to “nanotubes” , 2007, Scientometrics.

[37]  Gaston Heimeriks,et al.  Mapping research topics using word-reference co-occurrences: A method and an exploratory case study , 2006, Scientometrics.

[38]  Julie Thompson Klein,et al.  Crossing Boundaries: Knowledge, Disciplinarities, and Interdisciplinarities , 1996 .

[39]  F. Malerba,et al.  Technological Regimes and Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation , 2000 .

[40]  A. Bonaccorsi.  Search Regimes and the Industrial Dynamics of Science , 2008 .

[41]  Suzanne Bakken,et al.  Defining interdisciplinary research: conclusions from a critical review of the literature. , 2007, Health services research.

[42]  Eberhard R. Hilf,et al.  Scientific Publishing: From vanity to strategy , 2010 .

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

[44]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Dynamic animations of journal maps: Indicators of structural changes and interdisciplinary developments , 2008 .

[45]  Apresentação Paulo Bastos Tigre.  Bengt-Åke Lundvall - Innovation as an interactive process: from user-producer interaction to the national system of innovation , 2009 .

[46]  L. Leydesdorff,et al.  The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and , 2000 .

[47]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Possibilities for global governance of converging technologies , 2020, Emerging Technologies: Ethics, Law and Governance.

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

[49]  F. Webster.  The Information Society Revisited , 2002 .

[50]  L. Leišytė,et al.  Introduction to a special issue: Academic knowledge production, diffusion and commercialization: policies, practices and perspectives , 2011 .

[51]  R. Whitley.  The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences (Second Edition: with new introductory chapter entitled 'Science Transformed? The Changing Nature of Knowledge Production at the End of the Twentieth Century') , 1984 .

[52]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Emerging search regimes: measuring co-evolutions among research, science, and society , 2011, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[53]  R. C. Miller,et al.  Varieties of Interdisciplinary Approaches in the Social Sciences: A 1981 Overview , 1982 .

[54]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  Indicators of the interdisciplinarity of journals: Diversity, centrality, and citations , 2010, J. Informetrics.

[55]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time , 2009, Scientometrics.

[56]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance , 2003 .

[57]  Arie Rip,et al.  An Exercise in Foresight: The Research System in Transition--To What? , 1990 .

[58]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The knowledge-based economy and the triple helix model , 2012, Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol..