IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v110y2017i2d10.1007_s11192-016-2201-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

International collaboration in scientific research in Vietnam: an analysis of patterns and impact

Author

Listed:
  • Tuan V. Nguyen

    (University of Technology
    Garvan Institute of Medical Research
    Ton Duc Thang University)

  • Thao P. Ho-Le

    (University of Technology
    Ha Tinh University)

  • Ut V. Le

    (Ton Duc Thang University)

Abstract

The present study sought to examine the trend and impact of international collaboration in scientific research in Vietnam during the period after the introduction of the a reform policy and the normalization of relations with the United States. Using the Thomson Reuters’ Web of Science data (2001–2015) we found that 77% of Vietnam’s scientific output (n = 18,044 papers) involved international collaborations, with the United States and Japan researchers being the most frequent partners. The proportion of international collaborations has decreased slightly over time at the expense of an increased rate of domestic collaborations. The rate of growth in Vietnam’s scientific output was 17% per annum, and three-quarters of the growth was associated with international collaborations rather than purely domestic production. Moreover, internationally coauthored papers received twice the average citation as domestic papers. Of note, papers with overseas corresponding author had higher citation rate than papers with domestic corresponding author. These data suggest that the vast majority of scientific papers from Vietnam was attributable to international collaboration, and this had a positive impact on the quality and visibility of Vietnam science. The data also indicate that Vietnam is in the growth phase of building up research capacity.

Suggested Citation

  • Tuan V. Nguyen & Thao P. Ho-Le & Ut V. Le, 2017. "International collaboration in scientific research in Vietnam: an analysis of patterns and impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 1035-1051, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:110:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-016-2201-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-016-2201-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-016-2201-1
    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/s11192-016-2201-1?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. F. Moya-Anegón & V. Herrero-Solana, 1999. "Science in america latina: A comparison of bibliometric and scientific-technical indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 46(2), pages 299-320, October.
    2. Noriko Hara & Paul Solomon & Seung‐Lye Kim & Diane H. Sonnenwald, 2003. "An emerging view of scientific collaboration: Scientists' perspectives on collaboration and factors that impact collaboration," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 54(10), pages 952-965, August.
    3. Jian Wang, 2013. "Citation time window choice for research impact evaluation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 851-872, March.
    4. Ulrich Schmoch & Torben Schubert, 2008. "Are international co-publications an indicator for quality of scientific research?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(3), pages 361-377, March.
    5. Omid Mahian, 2015. "Is there fame bias in editorial choice?," Nature, Nature, vol. 519(7544), pages 414-414, March.
    6. Kaufmann, Alexander & Todtling, Franz, 2001. "Science-industry interaction in the process of innovation: the importance of boundary-crossing between systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 791-804, May.
    7. Tuan V. Nguyen & Ly T. Pham, 2011. "Scientific output and its relationship to knowledge economy: an analysis of ASEAN countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 107-117, October.
    8. Kiran Savanur & R. Srikanth, 2010. "Modified collaborative coefficient: a new measure for quantifying the degree of research collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 365-371, August.
    9. Wolfgang Glänzel, 2001. "National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 51(1), pages 69-115, April.
    10. Ernesto R. Gantman, 2012. "Economic, linguistic, and political factors in the scientific productivity of countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 967-985, December.
    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. Barbara S. Lancho-Barrantes & Hector G. Ceballos-Cancino & Francisco J. Cantu-Ortiz, 2021. "Comparing the efficiency of countries to assimilate and apply research investment," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 55(4), pages 1347-1369, August.
    2. Valeria Aman, 2016. "How collaboration impacts citation flows within the German science system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 2195-2216, December.
    3. Zhu, Nibing & Liu, Chang & Yang, Zhilin, 2021. "Team Size, Research Variety, and Research Performance: Do Coauthors’ Coauthors Matter?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    4. Tanel Hirv, 2022. "The interplay of the size of the research system, ways of collaboration, level, and method of funding in determining bibliometric outputs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(3), pages 1295-1316, March.
    5. Yong Yi & Wei Qi & Dandan Wu, 2013. "Are CIVETS the next BRICs? A comparative analysis from scientometrics perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(2), pages 615-628, February.
    6. Liu, Meijun & Jaiswal, Ajay & Bu, Yi & Min, Chao & Yang, Sijie & Liu, Zhibo & Acuña, Daniel & Ding, Ying, 2022. "Team formation and team impact: The balance between team freshness and repeat collaboration," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    7. Sameer Kumar & Vala Ali Rohani & Kuru Ratnavelu, 2014. "International research collaborations of ASEAN Nations in economics, 1979–2010," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 847-867, October.
    8. Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez & Ricardo Arencibia-Jorge & Félix Moya-Anegón & Elena Corera-Álvarez, 2015. "Somes patterns of Cuban scientific publication in Scopus: the current situation and challenges," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(3), pages 779-794, June.
    9. Alonso Rodríguez-Navarro & Ricardo Brito, 2022. "The link between countries’ economic and scientific wealth has a complex dependence on technological activity and research policy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2871-2896, May.
    10. Ki-Seok Kwon & Han Woo Park & Minho So & Loet Leydesdorff, 2012. "Has globalization strengthened South Korea’s national research system? National and international dynamics of the Triple Helix of scientific co-authorship relationships in South Korea," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(1), pages 163-176, January.
    11. Ricardo Arencibia-Jorge & Felix Moya-Anegón, 2010. "Challenges in the study of Cuban scientific output," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(3), pages 723-737, June.
    12. Maria JOSE SILVA & Gastão SOUSA & Jacinta MOREIRA & Jorge SIMÕES, 2011. "Innovation Activities in the Service Sector: Empirical Evidence from Portuguese Firms," Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics and Information Technology, ScientificPapers.org, vol. 1(6), pages 1-17, October.
    13. Hyeonchae Yang & Woo-Sung Jung, 2015. "A strategic management approach for Korean public research institutes based on bibliometric investigation," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 1437-1464, July.
    14. 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.
    15. Bornmann, Lutz & Leydesdorff, Loet & Wang, Jian, 2014. "How to improve the prediction based on citation impact percentiles for years shortly after the publication date?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 175-180.
    16. Schubert, Torben, 2009. "Empirical observations on New Public Management to increase efficiency in public research--Boon or bane?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1225-1234, October.
    17. Moustafa, Khaled, 2018. "Is there bias in editorial choice? Yes," arabixiv.org vyt79, Center for Open Science.
    18. Vanessa Sandoval-Romero & Vincent Larivière, 2020. "The national system of researchers in Mexico: implications of publication incentives for researchers in social sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 99-126, January.
    19. Lemarchand, Guillermo A., 2012. "The long-term dynamics of co-authorship scientific networks: Iberoamerican countries (1973–2010)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 291-305.
    20. Asheim, Bjorn T. & Coenen, Lars, 2005. "Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: Comparing Nordic clusters," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1173-1190, October.

    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:110:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-016-2201-1. 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.