Abstract
It has been about 30 years since China adopted an open-up and reform policy for global competition and collaboration. This opening-up policy is accompanied by a spectacular growth of the country’s economy as well as visibility in the world’s scientific literature. Also China’ competitiveness in scientific research has grown, and is mirroring the development of the country’s economy. On the other hand, international collaboration of most countries dramatically increased during the last two decades and accompanied the growth of science in emerging economies. Thus the question arises of whether growth of competitiveness in research is accompanied by an intensification of collaboration in China as well. In the present study we analyse the dynamics and the national characteristics of China’s co-operation in a global context. We also study research profile and citation impact of international collaboration with respect to the corresponding domestic ‘standards’.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Braun, T., & Glänzel, W. (1990). United Germany: The new scientific superpower? Scientometrics, 19(5–6), 513–521.
Braun, T., Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (1985). Scientometric indicators. A 32-country comparison of publication productivity and citation impact. World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., Singapore, Philadelphia, 424 pp.
Frame, J. D. (1977). Mainstream research in Latin America and the Caribbean. Interciencia, 2, 143–148.
Glänzel, W. (2000). Science in Scandinavia: A bibliometric approach. Scientometrics, 48(2), 121–150.
Glänzel, W. (2001). National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship. Scientometrics, 51(1), 69–115.
Glänzel, W. (2008). Turkey on the way to the European Union? On a scientific power rising next door. ISSI Newsletter, 4(1), 10–17.
Glänzel, W., Danell, R., & Persson, O. (2003). The decline of Swedish neuroscience—Decomposing a bibliometric national science indicator. Scientometrics, 57(2), 197–213.
Glänzel, W., Debackere, K., & Meyer, M. (2008). ‘Triad’ or ‘Tetrad’? On global changes in a dynamic world. Scientometrics, 74(1), 71–88.
Glänzel, W., Leta, J., & Thijs, B. (2006). Science in Brazil. Part 1: A macro-level comparative study. Scientometrics, 67(1), 67–85.
Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2001). Double effort = double impact? A critical view at international co-authorship in chemistry. Scientometrics, 50(2), 199–214.
Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2003). A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes. Scientometrics, 56(3), 357–367.
Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2004). Analyzing scientific networks through co-authorship. In H. F. M. Moed, W. Glänzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research. The use of publication and patent statistics in studies on S&T systems (pp. 257–276). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Kostoff, R. N., Briggs, M. B., Rushenberg, R. L., Christine, A., Bowles, C. A., Alan, S., et al. (2007). Chinese science and technology—Structure and infrastructure. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 74, 1539–1573.
Leta, J., Glänzel, W., & Thijs, B. (2006). Science in Brazil. Part 2: Sectoral and institutional research profiles. Scientometrics, 67(1), 87–105.
Leydesdorff, L., & Zhou, P. (2005). Are the contributions of China and Korea upsetting the world system of science? Scientometrics, 63(3), 617–630.
Moed, H. F., De Bruin, R. E., & Van Leeuwen, T. H. N. (1995). New bibliometric tools for the assessment of national research performance: Database description, overview of indicatiors and first applications. Scientometrics, 33, 381–442.
O’Neill, J. (2005). Attention Europe: The BRICs are coming!. Internationale Politik, 60(5), 78–79.
REIST-2. (1997). The European Report on Science and Technology Indicators 1997. EUR 17639. European Commission, Brussels.
Rousseau, R. (2008). Triad or Tetrad: Another representation. ISSI Newsletter, 4(1), 5–7.
Schubert, A., & Braun, T. (1990). World flash on basic research: International collaboration in the sciences, 1981–1985. Scientometrics, 19, 3–10.
Zanotto, E. D. (2002). Scientific and technological development in Brazil. The widening gap. Scientometrics, 55(3), 411–419.
Zhou, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (2006). The emergence of China as a leading nation in science. Research Policy, 35(1), 83–104.
Zhou, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (2008). China ranks second in scientific publications since 2006. ISSI Newsletter, 4(1), 7–9.
Zhou, P., Thijs, B., & Glänzel, W. (2009). Is China also becoming a giant in social sciences? Scientometrics, 79(3), 593–621.
Zitt, M., Thèves, J., Laurens, P., Ramanana-Rahary, S., Bassecaulard, E., & Filliatreau, G. (2006). Assessing international visibility of nations in science: Citations performances of large emerging actors (BRIC). Poster presented at the 9th Science & Technology Indicators Conference, 7–9 September, Leuven (Belgium).
Acknowledgement
We would like to thank Balázs Schlemmer for his creative assistance in preparing the ‘scientopographical’ maps of this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zhou, P., Glänzel, W. In-depth analysis on China’s international cooperation in science. Scientometrics 82, 597–612 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0174-z
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0174-z