IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v49y2022i1p85-97..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Researchers’ institutional mobility: bibliometric evidence on academic inbreeding and internationalization
[Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification (ANZSRC)]

Author

Listed:
  • Vít Macháček
  • Martin Srholec
  • Márcia R Ferreira
  • Nicolas Robinson-Garcia
  • Rodrigo Costas

Abstract

We propose institutional mobility indicators based on researchers’ mobility flows in 22 major fields of science across 1,130 Leiden Ranking institutions from 64 countries. We base our indicators on data from the Dimensions database and Global Research Identifier Database. We use researchers’ first and last affiliations to estimate the extent authors have moved across institutions as well as countries. For each institution, we quantify the shares of researchers with the same affiliation (insiders), those who came from another institution within the country (domestic outsiders), and those coming from a different country (foreign outsiders). Institutions in Central, Eastern, and Southern Europe have the highest share of insiders, whereas institutions in Northern America and Western and Northern Europe have a higher share of foreign outsiders. Foreign outsiders are most common in small and wealthy countries. No disciplinary differences are observed, as captured by the field classification scheme of Dimensions.

Suggested Citation

  • Vít Macháček & Martin Srholec & Márcia R Ferreira & Nicolas Robinson-Garcia & Rodrigo Costas, 2022. "Researchers’ institutional mobility: bibliometric evidence on academic inbreeding and internationalization [Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification (ANZSRC)]," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(1), pages 85-97.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:49:y:2022:i:1:p:85-97.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scab064
    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:85-97.. 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.