Research diversification and impact: the case of national nanoscience development
Newcomer nations, promoted by developmental states, have poured resources into nanotechnology development, and have dramatically increased their nanoscience research influence, as measured by research citation. Some achieved these gains by producing significantly higher impact papers rather than by simply producing more papers. Those nations gaining the most in relative strength did not build specializations in particular subfields, but instead diversified their nanotechnology research portfolios and emulated the global research mix. We show this using a panel dataset covering the nanotechnology research output of 63 countries over 12 years. The inverse relationship between research specialization and impact is robust to several ways of measuring both variables, the introduction of controls for country identity, the volume of nanoscience research output (a proxy for a country’s scientific capability) and home-country bias in citation, and various attempts to reweight and split the samples of countries and journals involved. The results are consistent with scientific advancement by newcomer nations being better accomplished through diversification than specialization.
KeywordsDiversification Specialization Impact Nanotechnology Nanoscience Developmental state
JEL ClassificationO10 O25 O30
- Avila-Robinson, A., & Miyazaki, K. (2012). Emerging micro/nanofabrication technologies as drivers of nanotechnological change: Paths of knowledge evolution and international patterns of specialization. Technology Management for Emerging Technologies (PICMET), 2012 Proceedings of PICMET’12: (pp. 2652–2662): IEEE.Google Scholar
- Chang, J., Gerrish, S., Wang, C., Boyd-graber, J. L., & Blei, D. M. (2009). Reading tea leaves: How humans interpret topic models. In Advances in neural information processing systems (Vol. 22, pp. 288–296). https://papers.nips.cc/paper/3700-reading-tea-leaves-how-humans-interpret-topic-models.
- Chen, H., & Roco, M. C. (2008). Mapping nanotechnology innovations and knowledge: global and longitudinal patent and literature analysis (Vol. 20): Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
- Commission of the European Communities. (2007). Nanosciences and Nanotechnologies: An action plan for Europe 2005-2009. First Implementation Report 2005–2007 Brussels.Google Scholar
- European Commission. (2006). FP7—Tomorrow’s answers start today. In Community Research and Development Information Service (CORDIS) (Ed.): European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/research/fp7/pdf/fp7-factsheets_en.pdf.
- Fink, D., Kwon, Y., Rho, J. J., & So, M. (2012). S&T knowledge production from 2000 to 2009 in two periphery countries: Brazil and South Korea. Scientometrics, 99, 1–18.Google Scholar
- Garfield, E. (1979). Citation indexing: Its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Glanzel, W., Meyer, M., du Plessis, B., Magerman, T., Schlemmer, B., Debackere, K., et al. (2003). Nanotechnology: Analysis of an emerging domain of scientific and technological endeavour. Leuven, Belgium: Steunpunt O&O Statistieken.Google Scholar
- Hall, D., Jurafsky, D., & Manning, C. D. Studying the history of ideas using topic models. In Proceedings of the conference on empirical methods in natural language processing, 2008 (pp. 363-371): Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
- Harper, T. (2011). Global Funding of Nanotechnologies and Its Impact, Cientifica. Available at http://cientifica.com/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2011/07/Global-Nanotechnology-Funding-Report-2011.pdf.
- Hausmann, R., Hidalgo, C., Bustos, S., Coscia, M., Chung, S., Jimenez, J., et al. (2011). The atlas of economic complexity: mapping paths to prosperity. Cambridge, MA: Center for International Development, Harvard University.Google Scholar
- Horlings, E., & Van den Besselaar, P. Convergence in science: Growth and structure of worldwide scientific output, 1993–2008. In Science and Innovation Policy, 2011 Atlanta Conference on, 2011 (pp. 1–19): IEEE.Google Scholar
- Jin, B., & Rousseau, R. (2005). Evaluation of research performance and scientometric indicators in China. In H. F. Moed, W. Glanzel & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 497–514): Springer.Google Scholar
- Khramova, E., Meissner, D., & Sagieva, G. (2013). Statistical patent analysis indicators as a means of determining country technological specialisation. WP BRP: Higher School of Economics Research Paper No. 9.Google Scholar
- Lenoir, T., & Herron, P. (2009). Tracking the current rise of chinese pharmaceutical bionanotechnology. Journal of Biomedical Discovery and Collaboration, 4, 8.Google Scholar
- Mimno, D., & McCallum, A. (2007). Organizing the OCA: Learning faceted subjects from a library of digital books. Proceedings of the 7th Acm/Iee Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, (pp. 376–385). doi:10.1145/1255175.1255249.
- Noyons, E., Buter, R., van Raan, A., Schmoch, U., Heinze, T., Hinze, S., et al. (2003). Mapping excellence in science and technology across Europe (Part 2: Nanoscience and nanotechnology) (Draft report of project EC-PPN CT-2002-0001 to the European Commission).Google Scholar
- OECD. (2013). Research and development statistics: Gross domestic expenditure on R-D by sector of performance and source of funds. OECD science, technology and R&D statistics (database). doi:10.1787/data-00189-en. Accessed 26 Oct 2013.
- OECD. (2014). Main science and technology indicators, Issue 1. Paris: OECD Press.Google Scholar
- OECD Working Party on Nanotechnology. (2012). Finance and Investor Models in Nanotechnology. (Background Paper 2: OECD /NNI International Symposium on Assessing the Economic Impact of Nanotechnology. Paris, France).Google Scholar
- Palmberg, C., Dernis, H., & Miguet, C. (2009). Nanotechnology: An overview based on indicators and statistics. STI Working Paper Series. 2 rue André-Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16, France: OECD, Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry.Google Scholar
- PCAST. (2012). Report to the President and Congress on the fourth assessment of the National Nanotechnology Initiative. President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. http://whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/PCAST_2012_Nanotechnology_FINAL.pdf.
- Porter, A. L., & Zhang, Y. (2012). Text Clumping for Technical Intelligence.Google Scholar
- Raje, J. (2011). Commercialization of nanotechnology: Global overview and European position. Budapest: Lux Research.Google Scholar
- Řehůřek, R., & Sojka, P. Software framework for topic modelling with large corpora. In Proceedings of LREC 2010 workshop New Challenges for NLP Frameworks, 2010 (pp. 46–50).Google Scholar
- Roco, M. C. (2007). National nanotechnology initiative: past, present, future. In W. A. Goddard, D. Brenner, S. E. Lyshevski & G. J. Iafrate (Eds.), Handbook on nanoscience, engineering and technology (2nd ed., pp. 3.1–3.26). Boca Raton: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
- Roco, M. C., Mirken, C. A., & Hersam, M. C. (Eds.). (2010). Nanotechnology research directions for societal needs in 2020: Retrospective and outlook. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- Shaikh, A. (2007). Globalization and the Myths of Free Trade: History, Theory and Empirical Evidence: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
- UNCTAD (2006). UNCTAD Handbook of Statistics. In U.N.C.O.T.A. Development (Ed.). Geneva: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.Google Scholar
- Wagner, C. S. (2008). The new invisible college: Science for development. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
- Woo-Cumings, M. (1999). The developmental state: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
- Zakaria, F. (2008). The post-american world. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.Google Scholar
- Zhang, H., Giles, C. L., Foley, H. C., & Yen, J. (2007). Probabilistic community discovery using hierarchical latent gaussian mixture model. AAAI, 7, 663–668.Google Scholar