IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v78y2009i1d10.1007_s11192-008-1830-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is the United States losing ground in science? A global perspective on the world science system

Author

Listed:
  • Loet Leydesdorff

    (University of Amsterdam)

  • Caroline Wagner

    (SRI International
    George Washington University)

Abstract

Based on the Science Citation Index-Expanded web-version, the USA is still by far the strongest nation in terms of scientific performance. Its relative decline in percentage share of publications is largely due to the emergence of China and other Asian nations. In 2006, China has become the second largest nation in terms of the number of publications within this database. In terms of citations, the competitive advantage of the American “domestic market” is diminished, while the European Union (EU) is profiting more from the enlargement of the database over time than the USA. However, the USA is still outperforming all other countries in terms of highly cited papers and citation/publication ratios, and it is more successful than the EU in coordinating its research efforts in strategic priority areas like nanotechnology. In this field, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has become second largest nation in both numbers of papers published and citations behind the USA.

Suggested Citation

  • Loet Leydesdorff & Caroline Wagner, 2009. "Is the United States losing ground in science? A global perspective on the world science system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 78(1), pages 23-36, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:78:y:2009:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-008-1830-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-008-1830-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-008-1830-4
    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/s11192-008-1830-4?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. Scheu, M. & Veefkind, V. & Verbandt, Y. & Galan, E. Molina & Absalom, R. & Förster, W., 2006. "Mapping nanotechnology patents: The EPO approach," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 204-211, September.
    2. Tibor Braun & Sándor Zsindely & Ildikó Dióspatonyi & Erika Zádor, 2007. "Gatekeeping patterns in nano-titled journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 651-667, March.
    3. Loet Leydesdorff & Ping Zhou, 2005. "Are the contributions of China and Korea upsetting the world system of science?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 63(3), pages 617-630, June.
    4. Ove Granstrand, 1999. "The Economics and Management of Intellectual Property," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1651.
    5. Loet Leydesdorff & Ping Zhou, 2007. "Nanotechnology as a field of science: Its delineation in terms of journals and patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 693-713, March.
    6. Leydesdorff, Loet & Cozzens, Susan & Van den Besselaar, Peter, 1994. "Tracking areas of strategic importance using scientometric journal mappings," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 217-229, March.
    7. Narin, Francis & Hamilton, Kimberly S. & Olivastro, Dominic, 1997. "The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 317-330, October.
    8. Mogoutov, Andrei & Kahane, Bernard, 2007. "Data search strategy for science and technology emergence: A scalable and evolutionary query for nanotechnology tracking," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 893-903, July.
    9. Ping Zhou & Loet Leydesdorff, 2007. "A comparison between the China Scientific and Technical Papers and Citations Database and the Science Citation Index in terms of journal hierarchies and interjournal citation relations," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 58(2), pages 223-236, January.
    10. David A. King, 2004. "The scientific impact of nations," Nature, Nature, vol. 430(6997), pages 311-316, July.
    11. Paola Criscuolo, 2006. "The 'home advantage' effect and patent families. A comparison of OECD triadic patents, the USPTO and the EPO," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 66(1), pages 23-41, January.
    12. Robert D. Shelton & Geoffrey M. Holdridge, 2004. "The US-EU race for leadership of science and technology: Qualitative and quantitative indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 60(3), pages 353-363, August.
    13. Dosi, Giovanni & Llerena, Patrick & Labini, Mauro Sylos, 2006. "The relationships between science, technologies and their industrial exploitation: An illustration through the myths and realities of the so-called `European Paradox'," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1450-1464, December.
    14. Zhou, Ping & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2006. "The emergence of China as a leading nation in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 83-104, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Gregory J Hather & Winston Haynes & Roger Higdon & Natali Kolker & Elizabeth A Stewart & Peter Arzberger & Patrick Chain & Dawn Field & B Robert Franza & Biaoyang Lin & Folker Meyer & Vural Ozdemir & , 2010. "The United States of America and Scientific Research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(8), pages 1-9, August.
    2. Loet Leydesdorff, 2008. "The delineation of nanoscience and nanotechnology in terms of journals and patents: A most recent update," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 76(1), pages 159-167, July.
    3. Loet Leydesdorff & Ping Zhou, 2007. "Nanotechnology as a field of science: Its delineation in terms of journals and patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 693-713, March.
    4. Leydesdorff, Loet & Wagner, Caroline, 2009. "Macro-level indicators of the relations between research funding and research output," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 353-362.
    5. Patrick Herron & Aashish Mehta & Cong Cao & Timothy Lenoir, 2016. "Research diversification and impact: the case of national nanoscience development," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 629-659, November.
    6. Han Woo Park & Loet Leydesdorff, 2008. "Korean journals in the Science Citation Index: What do they reveal about the intellectual structure of S&T in Korea?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 75(3), pages 439-462, June.
    7. Can Huang & Ad Notten & Nico Rasters, 2011. "Nanoscience and technology publications and patents: a review of social science studies and search strategies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 145-172, April.
    8. Frenken, Koen & Hardeman, Sjoerd & Hoekman, Jarno, 2009. "Spatial scientometrics: Towards a cumulative research program," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 222-232.
    9. Wolfgang Glänzel & Koenraad Debackere & Martin Meyer, 2008. "‘Triad’ or ‘tetrad’? On global changes in a dynamic world," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(1), pages 71-88, January.
    10. Yves Gingras & Mahdi Khelfaoui, 2018. "Assessing the effect of the United States’ “citation advantage” on other countries’ scientific impact as measured in the Web of Science (WoS) database," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 517-532, February.
    11. Jo Royle & Louisa Coles & Dorothy Williams & Paul Evans, 2007. "Publishing in international journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 71(1), pages 59-86, April.
    12. Rodríguez-Navarro, Alonso & Brito, Ricardo, 2018. "Technological research in the EU is less efficient than the world average. EU research policy risks Europeans’ future," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 718-731.
    13. Qingjun Zhao & Jiancheng Guan, 2012. "Modeling the dynamic relation between science and technology in nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(2), pages 561-579, February.
    14. Gazni, Ali, 2020. "The growing number of patent citations to scientific papers: Changes in the world, nations, and fields," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    15. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    16. Aashish Mehta & Patrick Herron & Yasuyuki Motoyama & Richard Appelbaum & Timothy Lenoir, 2012. "Globalization and de-globalization in nanotechnology research: the role of China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(2), pages 439-458, November.
    17. Kostoff, Ronald N., 2008. "Comparison of China/USA science and technology performance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 354-363.
    18. Wong, Chan-Yuan & Goh, Kim-Leng, 2010. "Growth behavior of publications and patents: A comparative study on selected Asian economies," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 460-474.
    19. Guan, Jiancheng & Ma, Nan, 2007. "China's emerging presence in nanoscience and nanotechnology: A comparative bibliometric study of several nanoscience `giants'," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 880-886, July.
    20. Xiaojun Hu & Ronald Rousseau, 2009. "A comparative study of the difference in research performance in biomedical fields among selected Western and Asian countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(2), pages 475-491, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:78:y:2009:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-008-1830-4. 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.