Visualizing nanotechnology research in Canada: evidence from publication activities, 1990–2009
Over the last two decades the scientific community has witnessed unprecedented growth of nanotechnology research in Canada. Although recent studies have shown that Canada consistently maintains a position in the first tier of productive countries in terms of its share of the world’s nano-publications, a number of key questions remain unanswered. Using a unique nano-related publication dataset, this paper combines bibliometric analysis and science overlay mapping to visualize the ‘invisible college’ of Canadian nano research. The present analysis finds that the rapid growth of nanotechnology research in Canada is, for the most part, externally driven. In recent years, research content has shifted toward nanobiotechnology fields. The geographical distribution of Canadian domestic nanotechnology research is characterized by regional imbalance: most research hubs are located near US–Canadian borders. Canadian nanotechnology scientists have collaborated with a variety of countries, but Chinese scholars in particular play a leading role in Canada’s research exchange across national borders. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- 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.
- Ismael Rafols & Alan Porter & Loet Leydesdorff, 2009. "Overlay Maps of Science: a New Tool for Research Policy," SPRU Working Paper Series 179, SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex.
- Catherine Beaudry & Andrea Schiffauerova, 2011. "Is Canadian intellectual property leaving Canada? A study of nanotechnology patenting," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(6), pages 665-679, December.
- 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.
- Raffo, Julio & Lhuillery, Stéphane, 2009. "How to play the "Names Game": Patent retrieval comparing different heuristics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 1617-1627, December.
- Levin, Sharon G & Stephan, Paula E, 1991. "Research Productivity over the Life Cycle: Evidence for Academic Scientists," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(1), pages 114-32, March.
- Heinze, Thomas & Shapira, Philip & Senker, Jacqueline & Kuhlmann, Stefan, 2006. "Identifying creative research accomplishments : methodology and results for nanotechnology and human genetics," Discussion Papers "Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis" 8, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:37:y:2012:i:4:p:550-562. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn)or (Christopher F. Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.