IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v125y2020i1d10.1007_s11192-020-03626-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bibliometric analysis of bioeconomy research in South Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Thabang Lazarus Bambo

    (University of Pretoria)

  • Anastassios Pouris

    (University of Pretoria)

Abstract

This document provides an analysis of bioeconomy research in South Africa and it discusses sources of growth in the country’s bioeconomy literature in general. We performed bibliometric analysis as indexed in the Web of Science (WoS) for number of South African authored publications and citations in bioeconomy, and compared them with Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRICS) and selected countries for the period 2008 to 2018. The WoS is used for research dealing with the scientific dynamic of a particular topic in most widely diffused journals and for citation analysis. The results highlight South Africa ranked last in the BRICS group in terms of number of bioeconomy publications produced in the selected period, and has a world share of 0.8%, which is higher than the national research average of 0.5%. The citations growth for South Africa bioeconomy publication increased by 6.8%, higher than Brazil, Russia and world citations during the period under review. The University of Cape Town is a leader in bioeconomy publications in South Africa followed by University of Stellenbosch and the University of KwaZulu Natal, with majority of the publications on environmental sciences ecology. South Africa collaborates the most with institutions from the United States of America in bioeconomy research, and the percent of international collaboration is similar with that of national scientific publications. However, South Africa experienced a decline in bioeconomy industry collaboration publications during this period.

Suggested Citation

  • Thabang Lazarus Bambo & Anastassios Pouris, 2020. "Bibliometric analysis of bioeconomy research in South Africa," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 29-51, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:125:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-020-03626-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-020-03626-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-020-03626-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-020-03626-y?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. Marisela Rodríguez-Salvador & Rosa María Rio-Belver & Gaizka Garechana-Anacabe, 2017. "Scientometric and patentometric analyses to determine the knowledge landscape in innovative technologies: The case of 3D bioprinting," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(6), pages 1-22, June.
    2. McMillan, G. Steven & Narin, Francis & Deeds, David L., 2000. "An analysis of the critical role of public science in innovation: the case of biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 1-8, January.
    3. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Tindaro Cicero, 2012. "What is the appropriate length of the publication period over which to assess research performance?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 1005-1017, December.
    4. Louise Staffas & Mathias Gustavsson & Kes McCormick, 2013. "Strategies and Policies for the Bioeconomy and Bio-Based Economy: An Analysis of Official National Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(6), pages 1-19, June.
    5. Nora Narváez-Berthelemot & Jane M. Russell & Rigas Arvanitis & Roland Waast & Jacques Gaillard, 2002. "Science in Africa: An overview of mainstream scientific output," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 54(2), pages 229-241, June.
    6. Isidro F. Aguillo, 2012. "Is Google Scholar useful for bibliometrics? A webometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(2), pages 343-351, May.
    7. Anastassios Pouris, 2012. "Scientometric research in South Africa and successful policy instruments," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(2), pages 317-325, May.
    8. Loet Leydesdorff & Gaston Heimeriks, 2001. "The self‐organization of the European Information Society: The case of “biotechnology”," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 52(14), pages 1262-1274.
    9. Parthasarathi Banerjee & B. M. Gupta & K. C. Garg, 2000. "Patent Statistics as Indicators of Competition an Analysis of Patenting in Biotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 47(1), pages 95-116, January.
    10. Lutz Bornmann & Caroline Wagner & Loet Leydesdorff, 2015. "BRICS countries and scientific excellence: A bibliometric analysis of most frequently cited papers," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(7), pages 1507-1513, July.
    11. Garrett Dash Nelson & Alasdair Rae, 2016. "An Economic Geography of the United States: From Commutes to Megaregions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-23, November.
    12. Martín-Martín, Alberto & Orduna-Malea, Enrique & Thelwall, Mike & Delgado López-Cózar, Emilio, 2018. "Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1160-1177.
    13. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby & Marilynn B. Brewer, 1994. "Intellectual Capital and the Birth of U.S. Biotechnology Enterprises," NBER Working Papers 4653, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Elizabeth A Mack & Sarah Wrase, 2017. "A Burgeoning Crisis? A Nationwide Assessment of the Geography of Water Affordability in the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-19, January.
    15. Anastassios Pouris & Anthipi Pouris, 2009. "The state of science and technology in Africa (2000–2004): A scientometric assessment," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 79(2), pages 297-309, May.
    16. Swinda F. Pfau & Janneke E. Hagens & Ben Dankbaar & Antoine J. M. Smits, 2014. "Visions of Sustainability in Bioeconomy Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-28, March.
    17. R. S. Bajwa & K. Yaldram, 2013. "Bibliometric analysis of biotechnology research in Pakistan," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 529-540, May.
    18. Alan Peter Matthews, 2012. "South African universities in world rankings," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(3), pages 675-695, September.
    19. Katherine W. McCain, 1995. "Biotechnology in context: A database‐filtering approach to identifying core and productive non‐core journals supporting multidisciplinary R & D," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 46(4), pages 306-317, May.
    20. Markus M. Bugge & Teis Hansen & Antje Klitkou, 2016. "What Is the Bioeconomy? A Review of the Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-22, July.
    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. Marianne Duquenne & Hélène Prost & Joachim Schöpfel & Franck Dumeignil, 2020. "Open Bioeconomy—A Bibliometric Study on the Accessibility of Articles in the Field of Bioeconomy," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-33, December.
    2. Hamdi A. Al-Jamimi & Galal M. BinMakhashen & Lutz Bornmann, 2022. "Use of bibliometrics for research evaluation in emerging markets economies: a review and discussion of bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(10), pages 5879-5930, October.
    3. Hamdi A. Al-Jamimi & Galal M. BinMakhashen & Lutz Bornmann & Yousif Ahmed Al Wajih, 2023. "Saudi Arabia research: academic insights and trend analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(10), pages 5595-5627, October.
    4. Similo Ngwenya & Nelius Boshoff, 2022. "Different manifestations of ‘context’: examples from a bibliometric study of research in Zimbabwe in Southern Africa," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(7), pages 3911-3933, July.
    5. Benoit Mougenot & Jean-Pierre Doussoulin, 2022. "Conceptual evolution of the bioeconomy: a bibliometric analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 1031-1047, January.

    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. Mauricio Alviar & Andrés García-Suaza & Laura Ramírez-Gómez & Simón Villegas-Velásquez, 2021. "Measuring the Contribution of the Bioeconomy: The Case of Colombia and Antioquia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-26, February.
    2. Befort, N., 2020. "Going beyond definitions to understand tensions within the bioeconomy: The contribution of sociotechnical regimes to contested fields," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    3. George B. Frisvold & Steven M. Moss & Andrea Hodgson & Mary E. Maxon, 2021. "Understanding the U.S. Bioeconomy: A New Definition and Landscape," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-24, February.
    4. Walther Zeug & Alberto Bezama & Urs Moesenfechtel & Anne Jähkel & Daniela Thrän, 2019. "Stakeholders’ Interests and Perceptions of Bioeconomy Monitoring Using a Sustainable Development Goal Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-24, March.
    5. Kean Birch, 2016. "Emergent Imaginaries and Fragmented Policy Frameworks in the Canadian Bio-Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-16, October.
    6. Sebastian Hinderer & Leif Brändle & Andreas Kuckertz, 2021. "Transition to a Sustainable Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-16, July.
    7. Therese Bennich & Salim Belyazid & Birgit Kopainsky & Arnaud Diemer, 2018. "Understanding the Transition to a Bio-Based Economy: Exploring Dynamics Linked to the Agricultural Sector in Sweden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-22, May.
    8. Daniel Hausknost & Ernst Schriefl & Christian Lauk & Gerald Kalt, 2017. "A Transition to Which Bioeconomy? An Exploration of Diverging Techno-Political Choices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-22, April.
    9. Lovrić, Nataša & Lovrić, Marko & Mavsar, Robert, 2020. "Factors behind development of innovations in European forest-based bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    10. Nelson Casimiro Zavale & Patrício Vitorino Langa, 2018. "University-industry linkages’ literature on Sub-Saharan Africa: systematic literature review and bibliometric account," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 1-49, July.
    11. Leire Barañano & Naroa Garbisu & Itziar Alkorta & Andrés Araujo & Carlos Garbisu, 2021. "Contextualization of the Bioeconomy Concept through Its Links with Related Concepts and the Challenges Facing Humanity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-18, July.
    12. Gerhard Weiss & Alice Ludvig & Ivana Živojinović, 2023. "Embracing the Non-Wood Forest Products Potential for Bioeconomy—Analysis of Innovation Cases across Europe," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-20, January.
    13. Juha Peltomaa, 2018. "Drumming the Barrels of Hope? Bioeconomy Narratives in the Media," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-14, November.
    14. Hurmekoski, Elias & Lovrić, Marko & Lovrić, Nataša & Hetemäki, Lauri & Winkel, Georg, 2019. "Frontiers of the forest-based bioeconomy – A European Delphi study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 86-99.
    15. Rolf Meyer, 2017. "Bioeconomy Strategies: Contexts, Visions, Guiding Implementation Principles and Resulting Debates," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-32, June.
    16. Alan Peter Matthews, 2013. "Physics publication productivity in South African universities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(1), pages 69-86, April.
    17. Carmen Priefer & Rolf Meyer, 2019. "One Concept, Many Opinions: How Scientists in Germany Think About the Concept of Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-21, August.
    18. Erik Gawel & Nadine Pannicke & Nina Hagemann, 2019. "A Path Transition Towards a Bioeconomy—The Crucial Role of Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-23, May.
    19. Franz Grossauer & Gernot Stoeglehner, 2020. "Bioeconomy—Spatial Requirements for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-28, March.
    20. Daniela Pasnicu & Mihaela Ghenta & Aniela Matei, 2019. "Transition to Bioeconomy: Perceptions and Behaviors in Central and Eastern Europe," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 21(50), pages 1-9, February.

    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:spr:scient:v:125:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-020-03626-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.