IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v91y2012i1d10.1007_s11192-012-0617-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tendencies in scientific output on carbon nanotubes and graphene in global centers of excellence for nanotechnology

Author

Listed:
  • Goio Etxebarria

    (University of the Basque Country, UPV-EHU)

  • Mikel Gomez-Uranga

    (University of the Basque Country, UPV-EHU)

  • Jon Barrutia

    (University of the Basque Country, UPV-EHU)

Abstract

A change has been taking place in the world of nanotechnologies since 2009, marking the beginning of a new era of end consumer goods related to these new technologies. In this article, our aim is to know the dominant tendencies observed in scientific output on carbon nanotubes at centres and poles from different countries and considered to be at the forefront of nanotechnologies research. We have selected a sample comprised of eight universities and locally coherent concentrations from different geographic areas: Europe, America and Asia. Based on this sample, we have used the Scopus database to analyse scientific output on carbon nanotubes in order to determine if there are significant differences in behaviour. We observe that dynamics of scientific output on nanotubes are similar in the universities and clusters analysed over time although a drop in publications was noted in 2009 in part of the organizations included in the sample. We have seen a large amount of publications on graphene in the last several years, due to the fact that researchers working in the field of carbon nanotubes gradually move towards the study of graphene, explained by the high expectations concerning the use of this element. The results lead us to conclude that advances in knowledge on carbon nanotubes and graphene will make it possible to meet the growing needs of a new and powerful market for products that are progressively including these new elements.

Suggested Citation

  • Goio Etxebarria & Mikel Gomez-Uranga & Jon Barrutia, 2012. "Tendencies in scientific output on carbon nanotubes and graphene in global centers of excellence for nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(1), pages 253-268, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:91:y:2012:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0617-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0617-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-012-0617-9
    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/s11192-012-0617-9?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. Robinson, Douglas K.R. & Rip, Arie & Mangematin, Vincent, 2007. "Technological agglomeration and the emergence of clusters and networks in nanotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 871-879, July.
    2. Jue Wang & Philip Shapira, 2011. "Funding acknowledgement analysis: an enhanced tool to investigate research sponsorship impacts: the case of nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 563-586, June.
    3. Ronald N. Kostoff & Ryan B. Barth & Clifford G. Y. Lau, 2008. "Relation of seminal nanotechnology document production to total nanotechnology document production — South Korea," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 76(1), pages 43-67, July.
    4. 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.
    5. Ronald N. Kostoff & Raymond G. Koytcheff & Clifford G. Y. Lau, 2007. "Global nanotechnology research metrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 565-601, March.
    6. Guang Yu & Ming-Yang Wang & Da-Ren Yu, 2010. "Characterizing knowledge diffusion of Nanoscience & Nanotechnology by citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(1), pages 81-97, July.
    7. Martin S. Meyer, 2001. "Patent citation analysis in a novel field of technology:An exploration of nano-science and nano-technology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 51(1), pages 163-183, April.
    8. Douglas K. R. Robinson & Arie Rip & Vincent Mangematin, 2007. "Technological agglomeration and the emergence of clusters and networks in nanotechnology," Post-Print hal-00424519, HAL.
    9. Philip Shapira & Jue Wang, 2010. "Follow the money," Nature, Nature, vol. 468(7324), pages 627-628, December.
    10. Selen Onel & Abe Zeid & Sagar Kamarthi, 2011. "The structure and analysis of nanotechnology co-author and citation networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 119-138, October.
    11. Masatsura Igami, 2008. "Exploration of the evolution of nanotechnology via mapping of patent applications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 77(2), pages 289-308, November.
    12. Peng Hui Lv & Gui-Fang Wang & Yong Wan & Jia Liu & Qing Liu & Fei-cheng Ma, 2011. "Bibliometric trend analysis on global graphene research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(2), pages 399-419, August.
    13. Philip Shapira & Jan Youtie, 2011. "Introduction to the symposium issue: nanotechnology innovation and policy—current strategies and future trajectories," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(6), pages 581-586, December.
    14. Ugo Finardi, 2011. "Time relations between scientific production and patenting of knowledge: the case of nanotechnologies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 37-50, October.
    15. Philip Shapira & Jan Youtie & Luciano Kay, 2011. "National innovation systems and the globalization of nanotechnology innovation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(6), pages 587-604, December.
    16. David Mowery, 2011. "Nanotechnology and the US national innovation system: continuity and change," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(6), pages 697-711, December.
    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. Xi Yang & Xiang Yu & Xin Liu, 2018. "Obtaining a Sustainable Competitive Advantage from Patent Information: A Patent Analysis of the Graphene Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-25, December.
    2. Ji Yeon Lee & Richa Kumari & Jae Yun Jeong & Tae-Hyun Kim & Byeong-Hee Lee, 2020. "Knowledge Discovering on Graphene Green Technology by Text Mining in National R&D Projects in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-16, November.
    3. T. Gorjiara & C. Baldock, 2014. "Nanoscience and nanotechnology research publications: a comparison between Australia and the rest of the world," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(1), pages 121-148, July.
    4. Hou, Jianhua & Tang, Shiqi & Zhang, Yang & Song, Haoyang, 2023. "Does prior knowledge affect patent technology diffusion? A semantic-based patent citation contribution analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2).

    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. Guang Yu & Ming-Yang Wang & Da-Ren Yu, 2010. "Characterizing knowledge diffusion of Nanoscience & Nanotechnology by citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(1), pages 81-97, July.
    2. Mario Coccia, 2011. "Evolutionary dynamics and scientific flows of nanotechnology research across geo-economic areas," CERIS Working Paper 201101, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
    3. Sabatier, Mareva & Chollet, Barthélemy, 2017. "Is there a first mover advantage in science? Pioneering behavior and scientific production in nanotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 522-533.
    4. R. Karpagam & S. Gopalakrishnan & M. Natarajan & B. Ramesh Babu, 2011. "Mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology research in India: a scientometric analysis, 1990–2009," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(2), pages 501-522, November.
    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. Guijie Zhang & Yuqiang Feng & Guang Yu & Luning Liu & Yanqiqi Hao, 2017. "Analyzing the time delay between scientific research and technology patents based on the citation distribution model," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1287-1306, June.
    7. Yin Li & Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira, 2015. "Why do technology firms publish scientific papers? The strategic use of science by small and midsize enterprises in nanotechnology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(6), pages 1016-1033, December.
    8. Ehsan Mohammadi, 2012. "Knowledge mapping of the Iranian nanoscience and technology: a text mining approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(3), pages 593-608, September.
    9. Elena M. Tur & Evangelos Bourelos & Maureen McKelvey, 2022. "The case of sleeping beauties in nanotechnology: a study of potential breakthrough inventions in emerging technologies," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 69(3), pages 683-708, December.
    10. Davide Consoli & Pier Paolo Patrucco, 2011. "Complexity and the Coordination of Technological Knowledge: The Case of Innovation Platforms," Chapters, in: Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 8 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Luna-Ochoa, Sergio Marco A. & Robles-Belmont, Eduardo & Suaste-Gomez, Ernesto, 2016. "A profile of Mexico’s technological agglomerations: The case of the aerospace and nanotechnology industry in Querétaro and Monterrey," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 120-125.
    12. Corine Genet & Vincent Mangematin & Franck Aggeri & Caroline Lanciano-Morandat, 2007. "Modèle d'activité dans l'instrumentation en biotechnologies : construire l'offre ou répondre à la demande," Post-Print halshs-00436954, HAL.
    13. Vincent Mangematin & Steve Walsh, 2012. "The Future Of Nanotechnologies," Post-Print hal-00658034, HAL.
    14. Xin Xu & Alice M. Tan & Star X. Zhao, 2015. "Funding ratios in social science: the perspective of countries/territories level and comparison with natural sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 673-684, September.
    15. Philippe Larédo & Carole Rieu & Lionel Villard & Bernard Kahane & Aurélie Delemarle & Corine Genet & Vincent Mangematin, 2009. "Emergence des nanotechnologies : Vers un nouveau "modèle industriel "?," Post-Print hal-00424261, HAL.
    16. Yusuf, Shahid, 2008. "Intermediating knowledge exchange between universities and businesses," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1167-1174, September.
    17. Eisingerich, Andreas B. & Bell, Simon J. & Tracey, Paul, 2010. "How can clusters sustain performance? The role of network strength, network openness, and environmental uncertainty," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 239-253, March.
    18. Nicola Grassano & Daniele Rotolo & Joshua Hutton & Frédérique Lang & Michael M. Hopkins, 2017. "Funding Data from Publication Acknowledgments: Coverage, Uses, and Limitations," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(4), pages 999-1017, April.
    19. Lisa De Propris & Carlo Corradini, 2013. "Technological platforms and global opportunities," ERSA conference papers ersa13p867, European Regional Science Association.
    20. Annika Lorenz & Michael Raven & Knut Blind, 2019. "The role of standardization at the interface of product and process development in biotechnology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1097-1133, August.

    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:91:y:2012:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0617-9. 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.