Visualizing nanotechnology research in Canada: evidence from publication activities, 1990–2009
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
Over the last two decades the scientific community has witnessed unprecedented growth of nanotechnology research in Canada. Although recent studies have shown that Canada consistently maintains a position in the first tier of productive countries in terms of its share of the world’s nano-publications, a number of key questions remain unanswered. Using a unique nano-related publication dataset, this paper combines bibliometric analysis and science overlay mapping to visualize the ‘invisible college’ of Canadian nano research. The present analysis finds that the rapid growth of nanotechnology research in Canada is, for the most part, externally driven. In recent years, research content has shifted toward nanobiotechnology fields. The geographical distribution of Canadian domestic nanotechnology research is characterized by regional imbalance: most research hubs are located near US–Canadian borders. Canadian nanotechnology scientists have collaborated with a variety of countries, but Chinese scholars in particular play a leading role in Canada’s research exchange across national borders.
- Beaudry, C., & Schiffauerova, A. (2011). Is Canadian intellectual property leaving Canada? A study of nanotechnology patenting. Journal of Technology Transfer. doi:10.1007/s10961-011-9211-1.
- Duque, R. B., Ynalvez, M., Sooryamoorthy, R., Mbatia, P., Dzorgbo, D. B. S., & Shrum, W. (2005). Collaboration paradox: Scientific productivity, the Internet, and problems of research in developing areas. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 755–785. CrossRef
- European Commission Report. (2005). Nanosciences and nanotechnologies: An action plan for Europe 2005–2009. Brussels: European Commission.
- George, R. P. (2006). Scaling the technology opportunity analysis text data mining methodology: Data extraction, cleaning, online analytical processing analysis, and reporting of large multi-source datasets. Minneapolis: Capella University.
- Heinze, T., Shapira, P., Senker, J., & Kuhlmann, S. (2007). Identifying creative research accomplishments: Methodology and results for nanotechnology and human genetics. Scientometrics, 70(1), 125–152. CrossRef
- Hood, W. W., & Wilson, C. S. (2003). Informetric studies using databases: Opportunities and challenges. Scientometrics, 58, 587–608. CrossRef
- Kostoff, R. N., Stump, J. A., Johnson, D., Murday, J. S., Lau, C. G. Y., & Tolles, W. M. (2006). The structure and infrastructure of the global nanotechnology literature. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 8(3–4), 301–321. CrossRef
- Lee, L. L., Chan, C. K., Ngiam, M., & Ramakrishna, S. (2006). Nanotechnology patent landscape 2006. NANO, 1(2), 101–113. CrossRef
- Levin, S. G., & Stephan, P. E. (1991). Research productivity over the life cycle: Evidence for academic scientists. American Economic Review, 81(1), 114–132.
- Nanotechnology: where does the U.S. stand? (2005). Hearing before the Subcommittee on research committee on science house of representatives. Serial no. 109–21.
- Nordan, M., Sullivan, T., Holman, M., Choi, C., Mueller, M., Rand-Nash, T., et al. (2005). Ranking the nations: Nanotech’s shifting global leaders. New York, USA: Lux Research, Inc.
- Porter, A. L., & Youtie, J. (2009). Where does nanotechnology belong in the map of science? Nature Nanotechnology, 4, 534–536. CrossRef
- Porter, A., Youtie, J., Shapira, P., & Schoeneck, D. (2008). Refining search terms for nanotechnology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 10(5), 715–728. CrossRef
- Raffo, J., & Lhuillery, S. (2009). How to play the ‘names game’: Patent retrieval comparing different heuristics. Research Policy, 38(10), 1617–1627. CrossRef
- Rafols, I., Porter, A. L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2010). Science overlay maps: A new tool for research policy and library management. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(9), 1871–1887. CrossRef
- Roco, M. C., & Bainbridge, W. S. (2005). Societal implications of nanoscience and nanotechnology: Maximizing human benefit. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 7(1), 1–13. CrossRef
- Rosei, F. (2008). Special issue: On nanotechnology in Canada. International Journal of Nanotechnology, 5(9–12), 897–899.
- Shapira, P., & Youtie, J. (2011). Introduction to the symposium issue: nanotechnology innovation and policy-current strategies and future trajectories. Journal of Technology Transfer. doi:10.1007/s10961-011-9224-9.
- Tang, L., & Shapira, P. (2011). China-US scientific collaboration in nanotechnology: Patterns and dynamics. Scientometrics, 88(1), 1–16. CrossRef
- Yegul, M. F., Yavuz, M., & Guild, P. (2008). Nanotechnology: Canada’s position in scientific publications and patents. PICMET 2008 Proceedings, 27–31 July. Cape Town, South Africa.
- Youtie, J., Shapira, P., & Porter, A. L. (2008). Nanotechnology publications and citations by leading countries and blocs. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 10(6), 981–986. CrossRef
- Zhou, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (2006). The emergence of China as a leading nation in science. Research Policy, 35(1), 83–104. CrossRef
- Zucker, L. G., & Darby, M. R. (2007). Star scientists, innovation and regional and national immigration, SSRN. Working paper.
- Visualizing nanotechnology research in Canada: evidence from publication activities, 1990–2009
The Journal of Technology Transfer
Volume 37, Issue 4 , pp 550-562
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- Canadian research
- International collaboration
- Data visualization
- Industry Sectors