IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v112y2017i3d10.1007_s11192-017-2452-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tracking the emergence of synthetic biology

Author

Listed:
  • Philip Shapira

    (University of Manchester
    Georgia Institute of Technology
    University of Manchester)

  • Seokbeom Kwon

    (Georgia Institute of Technology
    Georgia Institute of Technology)

  • Jan Youtie

    (Georgia Institute of Technology)

Abstract

Synthetic biology is an emerging domain that combines biological and engineering concepts and which has seen rapid growth in research, innovation, and policy interest in recent years. This paper contributes to efforts to delineate this emerging domain by presenting a newly constructed bibliometric definition of synthetic biology. Our approach is dimensioned from a core set of papers in synthetic biology, using procedures to obtain benchmark synthetic biology publication records, extract keywords from these benchmark records, and refine the keywords, supplemented with articles published in dedicated synthetic biology journals. We compare our search strategy with other recent bibliometric approaches to define synthetic biology, using a common source of publication data for the period from 2000 to 2015. The paper details the rapid growth and international spread of research in synthetic biology in recent years, demonstrates that diverse research disciplines are contributing to the multidisciplinary development of synthetic biology research, and visualizes this by profiling synthetic biology research on the map of science. We further show the roles of a relatively concentrated set of research sponsors in funding the growth and trajectories of synthetic biology. In addition to discussing these analyses, the paper notes limitations and suggests lines for further work.

Suggested Citation

  • Philip Shapira & Seokbeom Kwon & Jan Youtie, 2017. "Tracking the emergence of synthetic biology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1439-1469, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:112:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2452-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-017-2452-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-017-2452-5
    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/s11192-017-2452-5?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. 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.
    2. Ying Huang & Jannik Schuehle & Alan L. Porter & Jan Youtie, 2015. "A systematic method to create search strategies for emerging technologies based on the Web of Science: illustrated for ‘Big Data’," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 2005-2022, December.
    3. Sanjay K. Arora & Alan L. Porter & Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira, 2013. "Capturing new developments in an emerging technology: an updated search strategy for identifying nanotechnology research outputs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(1), pages 351-370, April.
    4. Pedro Albarrán & Antonio Perianes-Rodríguez & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2015. "Differences in citation impact across countries," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(3), pages 512-525, March.
    5. Philip Shapira & Jue Wang, 2010. "Follow the money," Nature, Nature, vol. 468(7324), pages 627-628, December.
    6. Ismael Rafols & Alan L. Porter & Loet Leydesdorff, 2010. "Science overlay maps: A new tool for research policy and library management," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(9), pages 1871-1887, September.
    7. Small, Henry & Boyack, Kevin W. & Klavans, Richard, 2014. "Identifying emerging topics in science and technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1450-1467.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Rotolo, Daniele & Hicks, Diana & Martin, Ben R., 2015. "What is an emerging technology?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1827-1843.
    11. Bei Wen & Edwin Horlings & Mariëlle van der Zouwen & Peter van den Besselaar, 2017. "Mapping science through bibliometric triangulation: An experimental approach applied to water research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(3), pages 724-738, March.
    12. Wagner, Caroline S. & Roessner, J. David & Bobb, Kamau & Klein, Julie Thompson & Boyack, Kevin W. & Keyton, Joann & Rafols, Ismael & Börner, Katy, 2011. "Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): A review of the literature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 14-26.
    13. Li Tang & Philip Shapira & Jan Youtie, 2015. "Is there a clubbing effect underlying Chinese research citation Increases?," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(9), pages 1923-1932, September.
    14. 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.
    15. Yingying Zhou, 2015. "The rapid rise of a research nation," Nature, Nature, vol. 528(7582), pages 170-173, December.
    16. Yi Zhang & Xiao Zhou & Alan L. Porter & Jose M. Vicente Gomila, 2014. "How to combine term clumping and technology roadmapping for newly emerging science & technology competitive intelligence: “problem & solution” pattern based semantic TRIZ tool and case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(2), pages 1375-1389, November.
    17. Loet Leydesdorff & Félix Moya-Anegón & Wouter Nooy, 2016. "Aggregated journal–journal citation relations in scopus and web of science matched and compared in terms of networks, maps, and interactive overlays," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(9), pages 2194-2211, September.
    18. Alan L. Porter & Ismael Rafols, 2009. "Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(3), pages 719-745, December.
    19. Dag W Aksnes, 2003. "Characteristics of highly cited papers," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 159-170, December.
    20. Morgan Meyer, 2013. "Assembling, Governing, and Debating an Emerging Science: The Rise of Synthetic Biology in France," Post-Print hal-00824479, HAL.
    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. Scott L. Greer & Benjamin Trump, 2019. "Regulation and regime: the comparative politics of adaptive regulation in synthetic biology," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(4), pages 505-524, December.
    2. Haydar Yalcin & Tugrul Daim, 2021. "Mining research and invention activity for innovation trends: case of blockchain technology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 3775-3806, May.
    3. Ribeiro, Barbara & Shapira, Philip, 2019. "Anticipating governance challenges in synthetic biology: Insights from biosynthetic menthol," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 311-320.
    4. Porter, Alan L. & Chiavetta, Denise & Newman, Nils C., 2020. "Measuring tech emergence: A contest," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    5. Na Liu & Philip Shapira & Xiaoxu Yue, 2021. "Tracking developments in artificial intelligence research: constructing and applying a new search strategy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 3153-3192, April.
    6. Alejandro Martínez & Juan Carlos Henao & Mario A. Pinzón Camargo, 2021. "Disrupción tecnológica, transformación digital y sociedad. Tomo I, ¿Cuarta revolución industrial? : contribuciones tecnosociales para la transformación social," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 1280, October.
    7. Li Tang & Jennifer Kuzma & Xi Zhang & Xinyu Song & Yin Li & Hongxu Liu & Guangyuan Hu, 2023. "Synthetic biology and governance research in China: a 40-year evolution," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(9), pages 5293-5310, September.
    8. Ribeiro, Barbara & Shapira, Philip, 2020. "Private and public values of innovation: A patent analysis of synthetic biology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    9. Bordoloi, Tausif & Shapira, Philip & Mativenga, Paul, 2022. "Policy interactions with research trajectories: The case of cyber-physical convergence in manufacturing and industrials," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    10. Leonid Gokhberg & Dirk Meissner & Ilya Kuzminov, 2023. "What semantic analysis can tell us about long term trends in the global STI policy agenda," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 2249-2277, December.
    11. Juliana A. Ivar do Sul & Alexander S. Tagg & Matthias Labrenz, 2018. "Exploring the common denominator between microplastics and microbiology: a scientometric approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 2145-2157, December.
    12. Kwon, Seokbeom & Liu, Xiaoyu & Porter, Alan L. & Youtie, Jan, 2019. "Research addressing emerging technological ideas has greater scientific impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    13. Li, Munan & Porter, Alan L. & Suominen, Arho & Burmaoglu, Serhat & Carley, Stephen, 2021. "An exploratory perspective to measure the emergence degree for a specific technology based on the philosophy of swarm intelligence," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).

    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. Kwon, Seokbeom & Liu, Xiaoyu & Porter, Alan L. & Youtie, Jan, 2019. "Research addressing emerging technological ideas has greater scientific impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    2. Na Liu & Philip Shapira & Xiaoxu Yue, 2021. "Tracking developments in artificial intelligence research: constructing and applying a new search strategy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 3153-3192, April.
    3. Muñoz-Écija, Teresa & Vargas-Quesada, Benjamín & Chinchilla Rodríguez, Zaida, 2019. "Coping with methods for delineating emerging fields: Nanoscience and nanotechnology as a case study," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).
    4. Coccia, Mario & Wang, Lili, 2015. "Path-breaking directions of nanotechnology-based chemotherapy and molecular cancer therapy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 155-169.
    5. Zhang, Yi & Huang, Ying & Porter, Alan L. & Zhang, Guangquan & Lu, Jie, 2019. "Discovering and forecasting interactions in big data research: A learning-enhanced bibliometric study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 795-807.
    6. Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Konstantin Fursov & Alina Kadyrova, 2017. "How the analysis of transitionary references in knowledge networks and their centrality characteristics helps in understanding the genesis of growing technology areas," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1947-1963, June.
    10. Sanjay K. Arora & Alan L. Porter & Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira, 2013. "Capturing new developments in an emerging technology: an updated search strategy for identifying nanotechnology research outputs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(1), pages 351-370, April.
    11. Zehra Taşkın & Arsev U. Aydinoglu, 2015. "Collaborative interdisciplinary astrobiology research: a bibliometric study of the NASA Astrobiology Institute," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(3), pages 1003-1022, June.
    12. Porter, Alan L. & Garner, Jon & Carley, Stephen F. & Newman, Nils C., 2019. "Emergence scoring to identify frontier R&D topics and key players," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 628-643.
    13. Rotolo, Daniele & Hicks, Diana & Martin, Ben R., 2015. "What is an emerging technology?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1827-1843.
    14. 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.
    15. Kavitha Karunan & Hiran H. Lathabai & Thara Prabhakaran, 2017. "Discovering interdisciplinary interactions between two research fields using citation networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 335-367, October.
    16. Karmen Stopar & Damjana Drobne & Klemen Eler & Tomaz Bartol, 2016. "Citation analysis and mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology: identifying the scope and interdisciplinarity of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(2), pages 563-581, February.
    17. Porter, Alan L. & Chiavetta, Denise & Newman, Nils C., 2020. "Measuring tech emergence: A contest," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    18. Wooseok Jang & Heeyeul Kwon & Yongtae Park & Hakyeon Lee, 2018. "Predicting the degree of interdisciplinarity in academic fields: the case of nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 231-254, July.
    19. 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.
    20. Santiago Ruiz-Navas & Kumiko Miyazaki, 2018. "A complement to lexical query’s search-term selection for emerging technologies: the case of “big data”," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 141-162, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Emerging technology; Synthetic biology; Bibliometric analysis; Search strategy; Map of science; Research sponsors;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives

    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:112:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2452-5. 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.