IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/chsofr/v167y2023ics0960077922011997.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scale-free growth in regional scientific capacity building explains long-term scientific dominance

Author

Listed:
  • Servedio, Vito D.P.
  • Ferreira, Márcia R.
  • Reisz, Niklas
  • Costas, Rodrigo
  • Thurner, Stefan

Abstract

The regional capability of performing front-running research and technological development has been identified as a necessary condition for future wealth creation. The quality and amount of scientific capabilities in specific fields vary dramatically across different world regions. Capabilities, knowledge, and skills are embodied by scientists working in research institutions or companies. The conditions for the emergence of a leading regional scientific environment – and the resulting early technological leadership – are poorly understood. The existence of a critical mass – the threshold above which a region can build comparably strong scientific capabilities – of scientists is often assumed. Using a unique dataset of global scientific activity and researcher mobility over several decades, we present empirical evidence in three scientific areas (semiconductor research, embryonic stem cells, and Internet research) that the process of scientific knowledge accumulation is remarkably general and applies to practically all regions. Regional knowledge accumulation data obtained from an analysis of scientists’ geolocated trajectories follow a preferential attachment mechanism characterized by a sub-linear kernel with a robust growth exponent. Scale-free growth patterns suggest that regions that move early into new technologies tend to dominate the corresponding scientific fields. We find no evidence that critical mass is required to achieve prolonged scientific dominance. We propose a simple preferential attachment model that explains the empirical data and allows us to understand deviations from the growth exponent as focused interventions to strategically attract scientists at regional level. We demonstrate this explicitly for China in the three scientific fields examined.

Suggested Citation

  • Servedio, Vito D.P. & Ferreira, Márcia R. & Reisz, Niklas & Costas, Rodrigo & Thurner, Stefan, 2023. "Scale-free growth in regional scientific capacity building explains long-term scientific dominance," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:chsofr:v:167:y:2023:i:c:s0960077922011997
    DOI: 10.1016/j.chaos.2022.113020
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960077922011997
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.chaos.2022.113020?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. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    2. Matthias Menter & Erik E. Lehmann & Torben Klarl, 2018. "In search of excellence: a case study of the first excellence initiative of Germany," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 88(9), pages 1105-1132, December.
    3. Gibbons, Michael & Johnston, Ron, 1974. "The roles of science in technological innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 220-242, November.
    4. Thijs Bol & Mathijs de Vaan & Arnout van de Rijt, 2018. "The Matthew effect in science funding," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 115(19), pages 4887-4890, May.
    5. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2010. "Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 523-538, August.
    6. Thong Pham & Paul Sheridan & Hidetoshi Shimodaira, 2015. "PAFit: A Statistical Method for Measuring Preferential Attachment in Temporal Complex Networks," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-18, September.
    7. Michaela Trippl, 2009. "Islands of Innovation and Internationally Networked Labor Markets: Magnetic Centers for Star Scientists?," SRE-Disc sre-disc-2009_06, Institute for Multilevel Governance and Development, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    8. Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Nicolas Robinson-Garcia & Dakota S. Murray & Alfredo Yegros-Yegros & Rodrigo Costas & Vincent Larivière, 2017. "Scientists have most impact when they're free to move," Nature, Nature, vol. 550(7674), pages 29-31, October.
    9. Ching Jin & Chaoming Song & Johannes Bjelland & Geoffrey Canright & Dashun Wang, 2019. "Emergence of scaling in complex substitutive systems," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(8), pages 837-846, August.
    10. M Ángeles Serrano & Alessandro Flammini & Filippo Menczer, 2009. "Modeling Statistical Properties of Written Text," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(4), pages 1-8, April.
    11. Henry Small, 1973. "Co‐citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 24(4), pages 265-269, July.
    12. Robinson-Garcia, Nicolás & Sugimoto, Cassidy R. & Murray, Dakota & Yegros-Yegros, Alfredo & Larivière, Vincent & Costas, Rodrigo, 2019. "The many faces of mobility: Using bibliometric data to measure the movement of scientists," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 50-63.
    13. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby, 2009. "Star Scientists, Innovation and Regional and National Immigration," Chapters, in: David B. Audretsch & Robert E. Litan & Robert Strom (ed.), Entrepreneurship and Openness, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Waltman, Ludo & van Eck, Nees Jan, 2015. "Field-normalized citation impact indicators and the choice of an appropriate counting method," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 872-894.
    15. Derek De Solla Price, 1976. "A general theory of bibliometric and other cumulative advantage processes," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 27(5), pages 292-306, September.
    16. Howard D. White & Belver C. Griffith, 1981. "Author cocitation: A literature measure of intellectual structure," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 32(3), pages 163-171, May.
    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. Perianes-Rodriguez, Antonio & Waltman, Ludo & van Eck, Nees Jan, 2016. "Constructing bibliometric networks: A comparison between full and fractional counting," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 1178-1195.
    2. Gaviria-Marin, Magaly & Merigó, José M. & Baier-Fuentes, Hugo, 2019. "Knowledge management: A global examination based on bibliometric analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 194-220.
    3. Thor, Andreas & Marx, Werner & Leydesdorff, Loet & Bornmann, Lutz, 2016. "Introducing CitedReferencesExplorer (CRExplorer): A program for reference publication year spectroscopy with cited references standardization," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 503-515.
    4. Ying Huang & Wolfgang Glänzel & Lin Zhang, 2021. "Tracing the development of mapping knowledge domains," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 6201-6224, July.
    5. Jun-Ping Qiu & Ke Dong & Hou-Qiang Yu, 2014. "Comparative study on structure and correlation among author co-occurrence networks in bibliometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(2), pages 1345-1360, November.
    6. Bruno Miranda Henrique & Vinicius Amorim Sobreiro & Herbert Kimura, 2018. "Building direct citation networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 817-832, May.
    7. Boyack, Kevin W. & Klavans, Richard, 2014. "Including cited non-source items in a large-scale map of science: What difference does it make?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 569-580.
    8. Saurav Chandra Talukder & Zoltán Lakner, 2023. "Exploring the Landscape of Social Entrepreneurship and Crowdfunding: A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-22, June.
    9. Francesca Iandolo & Pietro Vito & Francesca Loia & Irene Fulco & Mario Calabrese, 2021. "Drilling down the viable system theories in business, management and accounting: A bibliometric review," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 738-755, November.
    10. Xiaofeng Ji & Haotian Guan & Mengyuan Lu & Fang Chen & Wenwen Qin, 2022. "International Research Progress in School Travel and Behavior: A Literature Review and Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-25, July.
    11. Singh, Shiwangi & Dhir, Sanjay & Das, V. Mukunda & Sharma, Anuj, 2020. "Bibliometric overview of the Technological Forecasting and Social Change journal: Analysis from 1970 to 2018," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    12. Guillermo Armando Ronda-Pupo & Thong Pham, 2018. "The evolutions of the rich get richer and the fit get richer phenomena in scholarly networks: the case of the strategic management journal," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 363-383, July.
    13. Francisco García-Lillo & Enrique Claver-Cortés & Bartolomé Marco-Lajara & Mercedes Úbeda-García, 2017. "Mapping the Intellectual Structure of Research on ‘Born Global’ Firms and INVs: A Citation/Co-citation Analysis," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 57(4), pages 631-652, August.
    14. Dahesh, Mehran Badin & Tabarsa, Gholamali & Zandieh, Mostafa & Hamidizadeh, Mohammadreza, 2020. "Reviewing the intellectual structure and evolution of the innovation systems approach: A social network analysis," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    15. Li, Kai & Yan, Erjia, 2018. "Co-mention network of R packages: Scientific impact and clustering structure," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 87-100.
    16. Katalin Orosz & Illés J. Farkas & Péter Pollner, 2016. "Quantifying the changing role of past publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(2), pages 829-853, August.
    17. Yong Huang & Yi Bu & Ying Ding & Wei Lu, 2018. "Number versus structure: towards citing cascades," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 2177-2193, December.
    18. Gina Santos & Carla Susana Marques & João J. Ferreira, 2018. "A look back over the past 40 years of female entrepreneurship: mapping knowledge networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 953-987, May.
    19. Peter Wittek & Sándor Darányi & Gustaf Nelhans, 2017. "Ruling out static latent homophily in citation networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 765-777, February.
    20. Pedro López-Rubio & Norat Roig-Tierno & Alicia Mas-Tur, 2020. "Regional innovation system research trends: toward knowledge management and entrepreneurial ecosystems," International Journal of Quality Innovation, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 1-16, December.

    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:eee:chsofr:v:167:y:2023:i:c:s0960077922011997. 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: Thayer, Thomas R. (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/chaos-solitons-and-fractals .

    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.