, Volume 90, Issue 3, pp 1001–1013 | Cite as

Unseen science? Representation of BRICs in global science

  • Caroline S. WagnerEmail author
  • Shing Kit Wong


A survey of scientific periodical publications (or venues-as distinct from articles) from BRIC country practitioners counted more than 15,000 national publications. Data collected from and about Brazil, Russia, India, and China (BRIC countries) show that 495 venues, or about 3%, are listed in the Science Citation Index Expanded© (SCIE©) in 2010. Contrary to our expectation of under-representation overall and coverage limitation of SCIE, the average percentage of SCIE-listed venues for the BRICs is about the same as that for advanced countries. China has the lowest representation of national venues in SCIE at 2% of all publications; Russia has the highest at about 8%. India has about 6% of venues in SCIE; Brazil has about 4%. In other words, SCIE includes about the same percentage of high quality science from these four countries as for North America and Europe, meaning that these countries are not under-represented in SCIE. Moreover, the number of national venues available as outlets suggests that national scientists in these countries have good access to publications and venues. Some of the BRIC national publications are difficult to “see” at the global level because of language barriers, diverse publication formats, and lack of digitization. Other national differences represent historical traditions surrounding publication.


Global science BRICs Open access Developing countries National comparisons 



Thanks go to Jonathan Adams; Jose Octavio Alonso-Gamboa; Ana Maria Cetto; Ernesto Fernandez-Polcuch; K.C. Garg; Lee Giles; Diana Hicks; Michael Kahn; Melissa Leach; Jacqueline Leta; Loet Leydesdorff; Valentina Markusova; John Mugabe; Anthony Nasir; Ronald Rousseau; Wesley Shrum; Divya Srivastava; Yuan Sun; Pamela C. Sieving; James Testa; Wu Yishan; and Ping Zhou. We are grateful to Lee Giles for suggesting that ‘venues’ is emerging as the term of art in place of ‘journals’ because of the rise of open access and web-based publishing.


  1. Arzberger, P., Schroeder, P., Beaulieu, A., Bowker, G., Casey, K., Laaksonen, L., et al. (2004). An international framework to promote access to data. Science, 303(5665), 1777–1778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Björk, B., Roos, A., & Lauri, M. (2008). Global annual volume of peer reviewed scholarly articles and the share available via different open access options. In Proceedings of the ELPUB2008 Conference on Electronic Publishing, Toronto, Canada, June 2008.Google Scholar
  3. Cetto, A. M., Alonso-Gamboa, J. O., & Gonzalez, S. C. (2010). Ibero-American Systems for the Dissemination of Scholarly Journals: A contribution to public knowledge worldwide. Scholarly and Research Communication, 1(1), 1–16.Google Scholar
  4. Garg, K. C., Kumar, S., & Dutt, B. (2008). Profile of Indian Science Journals, India: Science and Technology. Accessed May 2011.
  5. Georghiou, L. (1998). Global cooperation in research. Research Policy, 27(6), 611–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gibbs, W. W. (1995). Lost science in the Third World. Scientific American, 273(2), 76–83.Google Scholar
  7. Goodman, D., & Deis, L. (2005). Web of Science (2004 version) and Scopus. The Charleston Advisor, 6(3).Google Scholar
  8. Jacsó, P. (2005). As we may search—comparison of major features of the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar citation-based and citation-enhanced databases. Current Science, 89(9), 1537–1547.Google Scholar
  9. Jin, B., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005), 中国科技期刊引文网络:国际影响和国内影响分析 (Citation networks of Chinese S&T journals: analysis on international and domestic influence), 中国科技期刊研究 (Chinese Journal of Scientific and Technical Periodicals, 16(2) 141–146.Google Scholar
  10. Jin, B., & Rousseau, R. (2005). Evaluation of research performance and scientometric indicators in China. In: The Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research.Google Scholar
  11. Jinha, A. (2010). Article 50 million: An estimate of the number of scholarly articles in existence. Learned Publishing, 32(3), 258–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Leydesdorff, L., & Wagner, C. S. (2009). Is the U.S. losing ground in science? A global perspective on the world science system. Scientometrics, 78(1), 23–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Luukonen, T. (1990). Invited review article: Bibliometrics and evaluation of research performance. Annals of medicine, 22(3), 145–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mabe, M. (2003). The growth and number of journals. Serials, 16(2), 191–197.Google Scholar
  15. Meho, L., & Yang, K. (2007). Impact of Data Sources on Citation Counts and Rankings of LIS Faculty: Web of Science vs. Scopus and Google Scholar. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58, 2105–2125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Moller, A. P. (1990). National citations. Nature, 348(6301), 348–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. National Science Foundation. (2007). Brazil, China, India, Russia, and Taiwan Lead S&E Article Output of the Non-OECD Countries, NSF 07-328, September.Google Scholar
  18. Price, D. De Solla (1963). Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Shrum, W. (1997). View from Afar: ‘Visible’ productivity of scientists in the developing world. Scientometrics, 40(2), 215–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Snow, C. P. (1959). The two cultures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. UNESCO. (2010). Science Report. Geneva: United Nations.Google Scholar
  22. Van Leeuwen, T. N., Moed, H., Tijssen, T. J. W., Visser, M. S., & Van Raan, A. F. J. (2001). Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequences for international comparisons of national research performance. Scientometrics, 51(1), 335–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wagner, C. S. (2008). The new invisible college: Science for development. Washington: Brookings Press.Google Scholar
  24. Wagner, C. S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organisation, and international cooperation in science. Research Policy, 34(10), 1608–1618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Zhou, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (2006). The emergence of China as a leading nation in science. Research Policy, 35(1), 83–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.John Glenn School for Public AffairsOhio State UniversityColumbusUSA
  2. 2.School of International AffairsPennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations