, Volume 95, Issue 3, pp 885–894 | Cite as

International scientific collaboration of China: collaborating countries, institutions and individuals

  • Xianwen WangEmail author
  • Shenmeng Xu
  • Zhi Wang
  • Lian Peng
  • Chuanli Wang


Using bibliometric methods, we investigate China’s international scientific collaboration from three levels of collaborating countries, institutions and individuals. We design a database in SQL Server, and make analysis of Chinese SCI papers based on the corresponding author field. We find that China’s international scientific collaboration is focused on a handful of countries. Nearly 95 % international co-authored papers are collaborated with only 20 countries, among which the USA account for more than 40 % of all. Results also show that Chinese lineage in the international co-authorship is obvious, which means Chinese immigrant scientists are playing an important role in China’s international scientific collaboration, especially in English-speaking countries.


SCI Scientific collaboration Bibliometric Chinese immigrant Chinese lineage 



The work was supported by the project of “Social Science Foundation of China” (10CZX011), the project of “Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China” (20090041110001), and the project of “Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities” (DUT12RW309).


  1. Guan, J. C., & Ma, N. (2007). China’s emerging presence in nanoscience and nanotechnology: a comparative bibliometric study of several nanoscience ‘giants’. Research Policy, 36(6), 880–886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. He, T. (2009). International scientific collaboration of China with the G7 countries. Scientometrics, 80(3), 571–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Jin, B., & Rousseau, R. (2005). China’s quantitative expansion phase: exponential growth but low impact. In: P. Ingwersen & B. Larsen (eds.), ISSI 2005: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics (pp. 362–370). Stockholm: Karolinska University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Kostoff, R. N. (2008). Comparison of China/USA science and technology performance. J Informetr, 2(4), 354–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kostoff, R. N. (2009). China S&T assessment. IEEE Intell Syst, 24(4), 71–74.Google Scholar
  6. Kostoff, R. N., Briggs, M. B., Rushenberg, R. L., Bowles, C. A., Icenhour, A. S., Nikodym, K. F., et al. (2007a). Chinese science and technology—structure and infrastructure. Technol Forecast Soc Change, 74(9), 1539–1573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kostoff, R. N., Briggs, M. B., Rushenberg, R. L., Bowles, C. A., Pecht, M., Johnson, D., et al. (2007b). Comparisons of the structure and infrastructure of Chinese and Indian Science and Technology. Technol Forecast Soc Change, 74(9), 1609–1630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kostoff, R. N., Bhattacharya, S., & Pecht, M. (2007c). Assessment of China’s and India’s science and technology literature—introduction, background, and approach. Technol Forecast Soc Change, 74(9), 1519–1538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kostoff, R. N., Barth, R. B., & Lau, C. G. Y. (2008). Quality vs. quantity of publications in nanotechnology field from the People’s Republic of China. Chin Sci Bull, 53(8), 1272–1280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Leydesdorff, L. (2011). When can the cross-over between China and the USA be expected using Scopus data? Research Trends, (25), Retrieved Feb 15, 2012 from:
  11. Leydesdorff, L., & Wagner, C. (2009). Is the United States losing ground in science? A global perspective on the world science system. Scientometrics, 78(1), 23–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Liu, X., Zhang, P. Z., Li, X., Chen, H. C., Dang, Y., Larson, C., et al. (2009). Trends for nanotechnology development in China, Russia, and India. J Nanopart Res, 11(8), 1845–1866.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Shelton, R. & Foland, P. (2009). The race for world leadership of science and technology: status and forecasts. In: B. Larsen, J. Larsen (eds), Proceedings of the 12th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics (pp. 369–380). Brazil: Rio de Janeiro.Google Scholar
  14. Tang, L., & Shapira, P. (2011). China-US scientific collaboration in nanotechnology: patterns and dynamics. Scientometrics, 88(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Wang, X. W., Liu, D., Ding, K., & Wang, X. R. (2011a). Impact of funding on research output: an empirical study on 10 countries. In: E. Noyons, P. Ngulube, & J. Leta (eds.), Proceedings of ISSI 2011—The 13th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics (pp. 848–854). South Africa: Durban.Google Scholar
  16. Wang, X. W., Liu, D., Ding, K., & Wang, X. R. (2011b). Science funding and research output: a study on 10 countries. Scientometrics, 91(2), 591–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Wang, X. W., Xu, S. M., Liu, D., & Liang, Y. X. (2012). The role of Chinese-American scientists in China-US scientific collaboration: a study in nanotechnology. Scientometrics, 91(3), 737–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Zhou, P. (2008). China ranks second in scientific publications since 2006. ISSI Newsl, 13, 7–9.Google Scholar
  19. Zhou, P., & Glänzel, W. (2010). In-depth analysis on China’s international cooperation in science. Scientometrics, 82(3), 597–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Zhou, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (2006). The emergence of China as a leading nation in science. Res Policy, 35(1), 83–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xianwen Wang
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Shenmeng Xu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Zhi Wang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Lian Peng
    • 1
    • 2
  • Chuanli Wang
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.WISE Lab, Faculty of Humanities and Social SciencesDalian University of TechnologyDalianChina
  2. 2.School of Public Administration and LawDalian University of TechnologyDalianChina

Personalised recommendations