IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v8y2014i3p766-775.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing national strengths and weaknesses in research fields

Author

Listed:
  • Abramo, Giovanni
  • D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea

Abstract

National policies aimed at fostering the effectiveness of scientific systems should be based on reliable strategic analysis identifying strengths and weaknesses at field level. Approaches and indicators thus far proposed in the literature have not been completely satisfactory, since they fail to distinguish the effect of the size of production factors from that of their quality, particularly the quality of labor. The current work proposes an innovative “input-oriented” approach, which permits: (i) estimation of national research performance in a field and comparison to that of other nations, independent of the size of their respective research staffs; and, for fields of comparable intensity of publication, (ii) identification of the strong and weak research fields within a national research system on the basis of international comparison. In reference to the second objective, the proposed approach is applied to the Italian case, through the analysis of the 2006–2010 scientific production of the Italian academic system, in the 200 research fields where bibliometric analysis is meaningful.

Suggested Citation

  • Abramo, Giovanni & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea, 2014. "Assessing national strengths and weaknesses in research fields," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 766-775.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:8:y:2014:i:3:p:766-775
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2014.07.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157714000625
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2014.07.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bornmann, Lutz & Leydesdorff, Loet & Walch-Solimena, Christiane & Ettl, Christoph, 2011. "Mapping excellence in the geography of science: An approach based on Scopus data," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 537-546.
    2. Mansfield, Edwin, 1991. "Academic research and industrial innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 1-12, February.
    3. Rebecca Henderson & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 1998. "Universities As A Source Of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis Of University Patenting, 1965-1988," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(1), pages 119-127, February.
    4. Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo & Cristiano Giuffrida & Giovanni Abramo, 2011. "A heuristic approach to author name disambiguation in bibliometrics databases for large‐scale research assessments," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(2), pages 257-269, February.
    5. Martin, Ben R. & Irvine, John, 1993. "Assessing basic research : Some partial indicators of scientific progress in radio astronomy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 106-106, April.
    6. Abramo, Giovanni & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea & Murgia, Gianluca, 2013. "The collaboration behaviors of scientists in Italy: A field level analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 442-454.
    7. Robert J W Tijssen, 2003. "Scoreboards of research excellence," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 91-103, August.
    8. Robert J. W. Tijssen & Martijn S. Visser & Thed N. van Leeuwen, 2002. "Benchmarking international scientific excellence: Are highly cited research papers an appropriate frame of reference?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 54(3), pages 381-397, July.
    9. Lutz Bornmann & Loet Leydesdorff, 2011. "Which cities produce more excellent papers than can be expected? A new mapping approach, using Google Maps, based on statistical significance testing," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(10), pages 1954-1962, October.
    10. Adams, James D, 1990. "Fundamental Stocks of Knowledge and Productivity Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(4), pages 673-702, August.
    11. Jonathan Adams, 1998. "Benchmarking international research," Nature, Nature, vol. 396(6712), pages 615-618, December.
    12. Griliches, Zvi, 1998. "R&D and Productivity," National Bureau of Economic Research Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226308869, December.
    13. Hicks, Diana, 2012. "Performance-based university research funding systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 251-261.
    14. Etzkowitz, Henry & Webster, Andrew & Gebhardt, Christiane & Terra, Branca Regina Cantisano, 2000. "The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 313-330, February.
    15. Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo & Cristiano Giuffrida & Giovanni Abramo, 2011. "A heuristic approach to author name disambiguation in bibliometrics databases for large-scale research assessments," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(2), pages 257-269, February.
    16. David A. King, 2004. "The scientific impact of nations," Nature, Nature, vol. 430(6997), pages 311-316, July.
    17. Bornmann, Lutz & Stefaner, Moritz & de Moya Anegón, Felix & Mutz, Rüdiger, 2014. "What is the effect of country-specific characteristics on the research performance of scientific institutions? Using multi-level statistical models to rank and map universities and research-focused in," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 581-593.
    18. Mansfield, Edwin, 1995. "Academic Research Underlying Industrial Innovations:," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 77(1), pages 55-65, February.
    19. Rosenberg, Nathan & Nelson, Richard R., 1994. "American universities and technical advance in industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 323-348, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Guo Chen & Lu Xiao & Chang-ping Hu & Xue-qin Zhao, 2015. "Identifying the research focus of Library and Information Science institutions in China with institution-specific keywords," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(2), pages 707-724, May.
    2. Lee, Seonghee & Lee, Hakyeon, 2015. "Measuring and comparing the R&D performance of government research institutes: A bottom-up data envelopment analysis approach," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 942-953.
    3. Jung Ho Park & Kwangsoo Shin, 2018. "Efficiency of Government-Sponsored R&D Projects: A Metafrontier DEA Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    4. Abramo, Giovanni & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea, 2020. "A novel methodology to assess the scientific standing of nations at field level," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1).
    5. Junhee Bae & Yanghon Chung & Hyesoo Ko, 2021. "Analysis of efficiency in public research activities in terms of knowledge spillover: focusing on earthquake R&D accomplishments," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 108(2), pages 2249-2264, September.
    6. Hiran H. Lathabai & Abhirup Nandy & Vivek Kumar Singh, 2021. "x-index: Identifying core competency and thematic research strengths of institutions using an NLP and network based ranking framework," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9557-9583, December.
    7. Miguel R. Guevara & Marcelo Mendoza, 2016. "Publishing Patterns in BRIC Countries: A Network Analysis," Publications, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-14, July.
    8. Lina M. Cortés & Andrés Mora-Valencia & Javier Perote, 2016. "The productivity of top researchers: a semi-nonparametric approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 891-915, November.
    9. Mohsen Fazeli-Varzaneh & Pete Bettinger & Erfan Ghaderi-Azad & Marcin Kozak & Davood Mafi-Gholami & Abolfazl Jaafari, 2021. "Forestry Research in the Middle East: A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-19, July.
    10. Štěpán Jurajda & Stanislav Kozubek & Daniel Münich & Samuel Škoda, 2017. "Scientific publication performance in post-communist countries: still lagging far behind," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 315-328, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abramo, Giovanni & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea, 2020. "A novel methodology to assess the scientific standing of nations at field level," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1).
    2. Daraio, Cinzia & Moed, Henk F., 2011. "Is Italian science declining?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 1380-1392.
    3. Abramo, Giovanni & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea, 2015. "A methodology to compute the territorial productivity of scientists: The case of Italy," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 675-685.
    4. Ugo Rizzo & Nicolò Barbieri & Laura Ramaciotti & Demian Iannantuono, 2020. "The division of labour between academia and industry for the generation of radical inventions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 393-413, April.
    5. Aurora Teixeira & Joana Costa, 2006. "What Type of Firm Forges Closer Innovation Linkages with Portuguese Universities?," Notas Económicas, Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra, issue 24, pages 22-47, December.
    6. Abramo, Giovanni & Cicero, Tindaro & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea, 2014. "Are the authors of highly cited articles also the most productive ones?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 89-97.
    7. Nestor Gandelman & Osiris J. Parcero & Flavia Roldán, 2021. "Opportunities to upgrade the scientific disciplines space," Documentos de Investigación 126, Universidad ORT Uruguay. Facultad de Administración y Ciencias Sociales.
    8. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Flavia Di Costa, 2014. "Variability of research performance across disciplines within universities in non-competitive higher education systems," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 777-795, February.
    9. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Cassiman, Bruno, 2005. "R&D cooperation between firms and universities. Some empirical evidence from Belgian manufacturing," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(5-6), pages 355-379, June.
    10. Antonelli, Cristiano & Fassio, Claudio, 2012. "University-industry relations and the evolution of knowledge governance. the italian evidence in the first part of the xx century," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201212, University of Turin.
    11. Cinzia Daraio, 2017. "A framework for the Assessment of Research and its impacts," DIAG Technical Reports 2017-04, Department of Computer, Control and Management Engineering, Universita' degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza".
    12. Beck, Mathias & Junge, Martin & Kaiser, Ulrich, 2017. "Public Funding and Corporate Innovation," IZA Discussion Papers 11196, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Cassiman, Bruno & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2009. "Diversity of science linkages and innovation performance: some empirical evidence from Flemish firms," Economics Discussion Papers 2009-30, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    14. Lee Branstetter & Kwon Hyeog Ug, 2004. "The Restructuring Of Japanese Research And Development: The Increasing Impact Of Science On Japanese R&D," Discussion papers 04021, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    15. Gersbach, Hans & Sorger, Gerhard & Amon, Christian, 2018. "Hierarchical growth: Basic and applied research," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 434-459.
    16. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, 2022. "Drivers of academic engagement in public–private research collaboration: an empirical study," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(6), pages 1861-1884, December.
    17. Lutz Bornmann & Werner Marx, 2014. "How to evaluate individual researchers working in the natural and life sciences meaningfully? A proposal of methods based on percentiles of citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 487-509, January.
    18. Foray, Dominique & Lissoni, Francesco, 2010. "University Research and Public–Private Interaction," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 275-314, Elsevier.
    19. van Beers, Cees & Berghäll, Elina & Poot, Tom, 2008. "R&D internationalization, R&D collaboration and public knowledge institutions in small economies: Evidence from Finland and the Netherlands," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 294-308, March.
    20. Jürgen Janger, 2015. "Business Science Links For a New Growth Path. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 107," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 58413, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:8:y:2014:i:3:p:766-775. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joi .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.