IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v49y2022i1p72-84..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Knowledge networks in Brazil’s health sciences
[As especificidades do sistema de inovação do setor saúde]

Author

Listed:
  • Ana Lúcia Tatsch
  • Janaina Ruffoni
  • Marisa dos Reis A Botelho
  • Rafael Stefani

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the network of interactions of Brazilian medical research groups, identifying key actors and their roles in generating and diffusing knowledge. Social network analysis was applied, with data from the Research Groups Directory Census of the National Council of Scientific and Technological Development, from 2016. The main results show (1) the central role of universities, public institutes, and university hospital research groups; (2) the importance of scientific infrastructure and research capability of scientists in knowledge production; (3) the minor role of the industry, denoting the fragility of university–industry interactions; (4) spatial concentration of network actors, mostly located in the south and southeast of Brazil; and (5) a great opportunity to expand flows and cooperation. Regarding these results, the recent budgetary cuts in science and technology resources since 2016 seem to be a misguided and detrimental strategy as these resources are essential for future technological and industrial development.

Suggested Citation

  • Ana Lúcia Tatsch & Janaina Ruffoni & Marisa dos Reis A Botelho & Rafael Stefani, 2022. "Knowledge networks in Brazil’s health sciences [As especificidades do sistema de inovação do setor saúde]," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(1), pages 72-84.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:49:y:2022:i:1:p:72-84.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scab063
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    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:oup:scippl:v:49:y:2022:i:1:p:72-84.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.