Visualizing nanotechnology research in Canada: evidence from publication activities, 1990–2009
- 367 Downloads
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.
KeywordsNanotechnology Canadian research International collaboration Data visualization
JEL ClassificationO32 O38
The authors would like to thank two anonymous referees and Al Link for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper. We also wish to acknowledge the feedback from Christopher Kirkey and 2011 CONNECT seminar. Special thanks go to Philip Shapira, Jan Youtie, and Alan Porter for developing large-scale global nanotechnology publication dataset. This research is partially sponsored by the National Science Foundation (Award No. 0531194). The findings and observations contained in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
- 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.
- European Commission Report. (2005). Nanosciences and nanotechnologies: An action plan for Europe 2005–2009. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
- 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.Google Scholar
- Levin, S. G., & Stephan, P. E. (1991). Research productivity over the life cycle: Evidence for academic scientists. American Economic Review, 81(1), 114–132.Google Scholar
- Nanotechnology: where does the U.S. stand? (2005). Hearing before the Subcommittee on research committee on science house of representatives. Serial no. 109–21.Google Scholar
- 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.Google Scholar
- Rosei, F. (2008). Special issue: On nanotechnology in Canada. International Journal of Nanotechnology, 5(9–12), 897–899.Google Scholar
- 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.
- 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.Google Scholar
- Zucker, L. G., & Darby, M. R. (2007). Star scientists, innovation and regional and national immigration, SSRN. Working paper.Google Scholar