Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 121, Issue 3, pp 1447–1480 | Cite as

Stocktaking scientific publication on bi-regional collaboration between Europe 28 and Latin America and the Caribbean

  • Simone BelliEmail author
  • Joan Baltà
Article

Abstract

Mapping bi-regional scientific collaboration demands multiple approaches to obtain a picture as complete as possible. Usually, the first approach is the measuring of the number and typology of scientific co-publications in the most visible indexes of journals and publications covered by databases like Web of Science or Scopus, among others. This paper analyzes scientific publications listed by Web of Science (WoS), which comprises authors from the 28 EU countries and Latin American and Caribbean countries (EULAC) between 2005 and 2016. The following questions have been addressed: How are bi-regional scientific relations between EULAC countries reflected by international collaboration? What effects does this scientific collaboration have in smaller or emerging countries? Which area of knowledge has more international collaborations? The study highlights the existence of a growing global network of researchers from several countries that collaborate on their research. EULAC scientific collaboration cannot be understood in isolation from this global network.

Keywords

Co-publications Bi-regional scientific collaboration Bibliometric analysis EULAC 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This paper has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 693781 – “Giving focus to the Cultural, Scientific and Social Dimension of EU – CELAC Relations”. We appreciate the careful reading and insightful observations from the two Scientometrics reviewers.

References

  1. Adams, J., Gurney, K., Hook, D., & Leydesdorff, L. (2014). International collaboration clusters in Africa. Scientometrics,98, 547–556.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1060-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alcaide, G. G., & Ferri, J. G. (2014). La colaboración científica: principales líneas de investigación y retos de futuro. Revista Española de Documentación Científica,37(4), 1–15.  https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2014.4.1186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Álvarez-Bornstein, B., Morillo, F., & Bordons, M. (2017). Funding acknowledgments in the Web of Science: Completeness and accuracy of collected data. Scientometrics,112(3), 1793–1812.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2453-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bridgstock, M. (1991). The quality of single and multiple authored papers. An unresolved problem. Scientometrics,21(1), 37–48.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02019181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Busel, K., Degelsegger, A., Lampert, D., Lindorfer, M., Simon, J., & Wagner, I. (2014). D.1.4Report on impact dimensions of the bi-regional cooperation with outlook on impact and outreach of ALCUE NET. Latin America, Caribbean and European Union. Network on Research and Innovation. https://www.zsi.at/object/publication/3761/attach/ALCUE_NET_D1_4.pdf. Accessed 9 April 2018.
  6. Cardoza, G., & Fornés, G. (2011). International co-operation of Ibero-American countries in business administration and economics research: Presence in high-impact journals. European Business Review,23(1), 7–22.  https://doi.org/10.1108/09555341111097964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cetto, A. M., & Vessuri, H. (2005). Latin America and the Spanish-speaking Caribbean. Unesco Science Report 2005, pp. 45–76.Google Scholar
  8. Chinchilla, Z., Miguel, S., Perianes-Rodríguez, A., & Sugimoto, C. (2018). Dependencies and autonomy in research performance: Examining nanoscience and nanotechnology in emerging countries. Scientometrics.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2652-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Benavent-Pérez, M., Moya-Anegón, F., & Miguel, S. (2012). International Collaboration in Medical Research in Latin America and the Caribbean (2003–2007). Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,63(11), 2223–2238.  https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Miao, L., Murray, D., Robinson-Garcia, N., Costas, R., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2018). A global comparison of scientific mobility and collaboration according to national scientific capacities. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics,3, 17.  https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2018.00017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Zacca-González, G., Vargas-Quesada, B., & Moya-Anegón, F. (2016). Benchmarking scientific performance by decomposing leadership of Cuban and Latin American Institutions in Public Health. Scientometrics,106, 1239–1264.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1831-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. CODEV. (2015). Report on the results of the mapping study of the scientific and academic links between Switzerland and Latin America. Exploration of bilateral cooperation: Landscape of Swiss scientific collaboration with Latin America. UNESCO Chair in Technologies for Development. https://cooperation.epfl.ch/files/content/sites/cooperation/files/Report%20mapping%20study.pdf. Accessed 9 April 2018.
  13. Costas, R., & Yegros-Yegros, A. (2013). Possibilities of funding acknowledgement analysis for the bibliometric study of research funding organizations: Case study of the Austrian Science Fund (FWF). In J. Gorraiz, E. Schiebel, C. Gumpenberger, M. Hörlesberger, & H. Moed (Eds.), Proceedings of the 14th international society of scientometrics and informetrics conference (pp. 1401–1408). Vienna: Austrian Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  14. Dangles, O., Loirat, J., & Le Roux, X. (2016). Mapping the collaboration between Europe and Latin America/Caribbean for research on biodiversity. ALCUE NET- BiodivERsA report.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0157441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fernández, M., Gomez, I., & Sebastian, J. (1998). La cooperación científica de los países de América Latina a través de indicadores bibliométricos. Interciencia,23(6), 328–337.Google Scholar
  16. Finardi, U., & Buratti, A. (2016). Scientific collaboration framework of BRICS countries: An analysis of international co-authorship. Scientometrics,109, 433–446.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1927-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Frame, J. D., & Carpenter, M. P. (1979). International Research collaboration. Social Studies of Science,9, 481–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Glänzel, W. (2001). National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations. Scientometrics,51(1), 69–115.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2001). Double effort = double impact? A critical view at international co-authorship in chemistry. Scientometrics,50, 199–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2004). Analyzing Scientific Networks Through Co-authorship. In H. F. Moed, et al. (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 257–276). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.  https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2755-9_12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gómez, I., & Méndez, A. (1992). Are peripheral countries profiting from scientific cooperation networks?. In Representations of science and technology. Proceedings of the international conference on science and technology indicators (pp. 112–123). Leiden: DSWO Press.Google Scholar
  22. Grassano, N., Rotolo, D., Hutton, J., Lang, F., & Hopkins, M. (2017). Funding data from publication acknowledgements: Coverage, uses and limitations. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,68(4), 999–1017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Katz, J. S. (1994). Geographical proximity and scientific collaboration. Scientometrics,31(1), 31–43.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02018100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy,26(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Koier, E., & Horlings, E. (2015). How accurately does output reflect the nature and design of transdisciplinary research programmes? Research Evaluation,24, 37–50.  https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvu027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kreimer, P. (2000). Cultura y periferia. La ciencia en la Argentina entre siglos. En Montserrat, Marcelo, Textos, contextos e instituciones. Buenos Aires: Manantial (pp. 187–202).Google Scholar
  27. Kreimer, P. (2006). ¿Dependientes o integrados? La ciencia latinoamericana y la nueva division internacional del trabajo. Nómadas,24, 190–212.Google Scholar
  28. Laudel, G. (2002). What do we measure by co-authorships? Research Evaluation,11(1), 3–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lemarchand, G. (2008). The long-term dynamics of co-authorship scientific networks: Iberoamerican Countries (1973–2006). Research Policy,41(2), 291–305.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.10.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lewison, G., Fawcett-Jones, A., & Kessler, C. (1993). Latin American scientific output 1986–91 and international co-authorship patterns. Scientometrics,27(3), 317–336.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02016945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Leydesdorff, L., Moya-Anegón, F., & Guerrero-Bote, V. P. (2015). Journal maps, interactive overlays, and the measurement of interdisciplinarity on the basis of Scopus data (1996–2012). Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,66(5), 1001–1016.  https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Leydesdorff, L., Wagner, C., Woo Park, H., & Adams, J. (2013). International collaboration in science: The global map and the network. El Profesional de la Informacion,22(1), 87–95.  https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2013.ene.12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lucio-Arias, D., Velez-Cuartas, G., & Leydesdorff, L. (2015). SciELO citation index and web of science: Distinctions in the visibility of regional science. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Gabriel_Velez_Cuartas/publication/281177604_SciELO_Citation_Index_and_Web_of_Science_Distinctions_in_the_Visibility_of_Regional/links/55da060708ae9d659491ea28.pdf.
  34. Melin, G., & Persson, O. (1998). Hotel Cosmopolitan—A bibliometric study of collaboration at European universities. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,49(1), 43–48.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-4571(1998)49:1%3c43:aid-asi6%3e3.3.co;2-i.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics,106(1), 213–228.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Narin, F., Stevens, K., & Whitlow, E. (1991). Scientific co-operation in Europe and the citation of multinationally authored papers. Scientometrics,21(3), 313–323.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02093973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. OECD (2015), Frascati Manual 2015: Guidelines for Collecting and Reporting Data on Research and Experimental Development, The Measurement of Scientific, Technological and Innovation Activities, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264239012-en. Accessed 9 April 2018.
  38. Ordóñez-Matamoros, G., Cozzens, S. E., & Garcia, M. (2010). International co-authorship and research team performance in Colombia. Review of Policy Research,27(4), 415–431.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.2010.00449.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Russell, J. M., Ainsworth, S., Del Río, J. A., Narváez-Berthelemot, N., & Cortés, H. D. (2007). Colaboración científica entre países de la región latinoamericana. Revista Española de Documentación Científica,30(2), 180–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sancho, R., Morillo, F., De Filippo, D., Gómez, I., & Fernández, M. (2006). Indicadores de colaboración científica inter-centros en los países de América Latina. Interciencia,31(4), 284–292.Google Scholar
  41. Sapir, A. (2003). An Agenda for a Growing Europe: Making the EU Economic System Deliver: Report of an Independent High-level Study Group Established on the Initiative of the President of the European Communities. European Commission. http://edz.bib.uni-mannheim.de/daten/edz-mr/pbs/agenda_en.pdf. Accessed 9 April 2018.
  42. Smith, M., Weinberger, C., Bruna, E., & Allesina, S. (2014). The scientific impact of nations: Journal placement and citation performance. PLoS ONE,9(10), 1–6.Google Scholar
  43. Ubfal, D., & Maffioli, A. (2010). The impact of funding on research collaboration: Evidence from a developing country. Research Policy,40(9), 1269–1279.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.05.023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2016). VOSviewer Manual: Version 1.6.5. http://www.vosviewer.com/download/f-y2s2. Accessed 9 April 2018.
  45. Vargas-Quesada, B., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., & Rodríguez, N. (2017). Identification and visualization of the intellectual structure in graphene research. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics,2, 7.  https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2017.00007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Vessuri, H. M. C. (Ed.). (1984). Ciencia académica en la Venezuela moderna. Caracas: Fondo Editorial Acta Cientifica Venezolana.  https://doi.org/10.1086/446602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wagner, C. S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Mapping the network of global science: Comparing international co-authorships from 1990 to 2000. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation,1(2), 185–208.  https://doi.org/10.1504/ijtg.2005.007050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Social Anthropology and Social Psychology, Faculty of Political Science and SociologyComplutense University of MadridMadridSpain
  2. 2.ESIC Business & Marketing SchoolBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations