IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v70y2007i2d10.1007_s11192-007-0213-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tracking techno-science networks: A case study of fuel cells and related hydrogen technology R&D in Norway

Author

Listed:
  • Antje Klitkou

    (NIFU-STEP — Studies in Innovation, Research and Education)

  • Stian Nygaard

    (Lund University)

  • Martin Meyer

    (SPRU
    Helsinki University of Technology
    Katholieke Universiteit Leuven)

Abstract

This study explores boundary-crossing networks in fuel-cell science and technology. We use the case of Norwegian fuel cell and related hydrogen research to explore techno-science networks. Standard bibliometric and patent indicators are presented. Then we explore different types of network maps — maps based on co-authorship, co-patenting and co-activity data. Different network configurations occur for each type of map. Actors reach different levels of prominence in the different maps, but most of them are active both in science and technology. This illustrates that to appreciate fully the range of science-technology interplay, all three analyses need to be taken into account.

Suggested Citation

  • Antje Klitkou & Stian Nygaard & Martin Meyer, 2007. "Tracking techno-science networks: A case study of fuel cells and related hydrogen technology R&D in Norway," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(2), pages 491-518, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:70:y:2007:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-007-0213-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-007-0213-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-007-0213-6
    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/s11192-007-0213-6?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. Murray, Fiona, 2002. "Innovation as co-evolution of scientific and technological networks: exploring tissue engineering," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1389-1403, December.
    2. 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.
    3. Mytelka, Lynn K., 2003. "New Wave Technologies: Their Emergence, Diffusion and Impact. The Case of Hydrogen Fuel Cell Technology and the Developing World," UNU-INTECH Discussion Paper Series 2003-03, United Nations University - INTECH.
    4. Loet Leydesdorff, 2003. "The mutual information of university-industry-government relations: An indicator of the Triple Helix dynamics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(2), pages 445-467, October.
    5. Sujit Bhattacharya & Hildrun Kretschmer & Martin Meyer, 2003. "Characterizing intellectual spaces between science and technology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(2), pages 369-390, October.
    6. Loet Leydesdorff & Martin Meyer, 2003. "The Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(2), pages 191-203, October.
    7. Noyons, E. C. M. & van Raan, A. F. J. & Grupp, H. & Schmoch, U., 1994. "Exploring the science and technology interface: inventor-author relations in laser medicine research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 443-457, July.
    8. Catherine Liston-Heyes & Alan Pilkington, 2004. "Inventive concentration in the production of green technology: A comparative analysis of fuel cell patents," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(1), pages 15-25, February.
    9. Katz, J. Sylvan & Martin, Ben R., 1997. "What is research collaboration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, March.
    10. Patrick Glenisson & Wolfgang Glänzel & Olle Persson, 2005. "Combining full-text analysis and bibliometric indicators. A pilot study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 63(1), pages 163-180, March.
    11. Paula Mählck & Olle Persson, 2000. "Socio-Bibliometric Mapping of Intra-Departmental Networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 49(1), pages 81-91, August.
    12. Martin Meyer & Sujit Bhattacharya, 2004. "Commonalities and differences between scholarly and technical collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 61(3), pages 443-456, November.
    13. Sujit Bhattacharya & Martin Meyer, 2003. "Large firms and the science-technology interface Patents, patent citations, and scientific output of multinational corporations in thin films," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(2), pages 265-279, October.
    14. Engelsman, E. C. & van Raan, A. F. J., 1994. "A patent-based cartography of technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 1-26, January.
    15. Olle Persson, 2001. "All author citations versus first author citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 50(2), pages 339-344, February.
    16. Martin Meyer & Tatiana Siniläinen & Jan Timm Utecht, 2003. "Towards hybrid Triple Helix indicators: A study of university-related patents and a survey of academic inventors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(2), pages 321-350, October.
    17. Joachim Schummer, 2004. "Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 59(3), pages 425-465, March.
    18. Emmanuel Hassan, 2005. "The evolution of the knowledge structure of fuel cells," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 62(2), pages 223-238, January.
    19. Michelle Gittelman & Bruce Kogut, 2003. "Does Good Science Lead to Valuable Knowledge? Biotechnology Firms and the Evolutionary Logic of Citation Patterns," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 366-382, April.
    20. Göran Melin & Olle Persson, 1998. "Hotel cosmopolitan: A bibliometric study of collaboration at some European universities," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 49(1), pages 43-48.
    21. Angela Hullmann & Martin Meyer, 2003. "Publications and patents in nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(3), pages 507-527, November.
    22. Loet Leydesdorff, 2004. "The university–industry knowledge relationship: Analyzing patents and the science base of technologies," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 55(11), pages 991-1001, September.
    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. Ali Gazni & Zahra Ghaseminik, 2019. "The increasing dominance of science in the economy: Which nations are successful?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(3), pages 1411-1426, September.
    2. Mariia Shkolnykova, 2021. "Who shapes plant biotechnology in Germany? Joint analysis of the evolution of co-authors’ and co-inventors’ networks," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 27-54, April.
    3. Xiao-Ping Lei & Zhi-Yun Zhao & Xu Zhang & Dar-Zen Chen & Mu-Hsuan Huang & Yun-Hua Zhao, 2012. "The inventive activities and collaboration pattern of university–industry–government in China based on patent analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(1), pages 231-251, January.
    4. Xuan Shi & Lingfei Cai & Junzhi Jia, 2018. "The Evolution of International Scientific Collaboration in Fuel Cells during 1998–2017: A Social Network Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-20, December.
    5. Martin Meyer & Kevin Grant & Piera Morlacchi & Dagmara Weckowska, 2014. "Triple Helix indicators as an emergent area of enquiry: a bibliometric perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(1), pages 151-174, April.
    6. Yu-Wei Chang & Mu-Hsuan Huang & Hsiao-Wen Yang, 2016. "Analysis of coactivity in the field of fuel cells at institutional and individual levels," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(1), pages 143-158, October.
    7. Rotolo, Daniele & Camerani, Roberto & Grassano, Nicola & Martin, Ben R., 2022. "Why do firms publish? A systematic literature review and a conceptual framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    8. Hansen, Teis & Klitkou, Antje & Borup, Mads & Scordato, Lisa & Wessberg, Nina, 2017. "Path creation in Nordic energy and road transport systems – The role of technological characteristics," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 551-562.
    9. Shuo Xu & Ling Li & Xin An, 2023. "Do academic inventors have diverse interests?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(2), pages 1023-1053, February.
    10. Mu-Hsuan Huang & Hsiao-Wen Yang & Dar-Zen Chen, 2015. "Industry–academia collaboration in fuel cells: a perspective from paper and patent analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(2), pages 1301-1318, November.

    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. Meyer, Martin, 2006. "Are patenting scientists the better scholars?: An exploratory comparison of inventor-authors with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1646-1662, December.
    2. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    3. Martin Meyer & Sujit Bhattacharya, 2004. "Commonalities and differences between scholarly and technical collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 61(3), pages 443-456, November.
    4. Tom Magerman & Bart Looy & Xiaoyan Song, 2010. "Exploring the feasibility and accuracy of Latent Semantic Analysis based text mining techniques to detect similarity between patent documents and scientific publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(2), pages 289-306, February.
    5. Mu-Hsuan Huang & Hsiao-Wen Yang & Dar-Zen Chen, 2015. "Industry–academia collaboration in fuel cells: a perspective from paper and patent analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(2), pages 1301-1318, November.
    6. Rotolo, Daniele & Camerani, Roberto & Grassano, Nicola & Martin, Ben R., 2022. "Why do firms publish? A systematic literature review and a conceptual framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    7. Jo Royle & Louisa Coles & Dorothy Williams & Paul Evans, 2007. "Publishing in international journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 71(1), pages 59-86, April.
    8. Haeussler, Carolin & Sauermann, Henry, 2013. "Credit where credit is due? The impact of project contributions and social factors on authorship and inventorship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 688-703.
    9. Ronnie Ramlogan & Andrea Mina & Gindo Tampubolon & J. Stanley Metcalfe, 2007. "Networks of knowledge: The distributed nature of medical innovation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(2), pages 459-489, February.
    10. Berna Beyhan & M. Teoman Pamukçu, 2011. "Nanotechnology research in Turkey: A university-driven achievement," STPS Working Papers 1107, STPS - Science and Technology Policy Studies Center, Middle East Technical University, revised Jul 2011.
    11. Martin Meyer & Kevin Grant & Piera Morlacchi & Dagmara Weckowska, 2014. "Triple Helix indicators as an emergent area of enquiry: a bibliometric perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(1), pages 151-174, April.
    12. Wang, Gangbo & Guan, Jiancheng, 2010. "The role of patenting activity for scientific research: A study of academic inventors from China's nanotechnology," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 338-350.
    13. Lissoni, Francesco & Montobbio, Fabio & Zirulia, Lorenzo, 2013. "Inventorship and authorship as attribution rights: An enquiry into the economics of scientific credit," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 49-69.
    14. 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.
    15. Tao Zhuang & Shuliang Zhao & Mingliang Zheng & Jianxun Chu, 2021. "Triple helix relationship research on China's regional university–industry–government collaborative innovation: Based on provincial patent data," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(3), pages 1361-1386, September.
    16. Qingjun Zhao & Jiancheng Guan, 2013. "Love dynamics between science and technology: some evidences in nanoscience and nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 113-132, January.
    17. Yoshiyuki Takeda & Shiho Mae & Yuya Kajikawa & Katsumori Matsushima, 2009. "Nanobiotechnology as an emerging research domain from nanotechnology: A bibliometric approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(1), pages 23-38, July.
    18. 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.
    19. Qingjun Zhao & Jiancheng Guan, 2012. "Modeling the dynamic relation between science and technology in nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(2), pages 561-579, February.
    20. Subramanian, Annapoornima M. & Lim, Kwanghui & Soh, Pek-Hooi, 2013. "When birds of a feather don’t flock together: Different scientists and the roles they play in biotech R&D alliances," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 595-612.

    More about this item

    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:70:y:2007:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-007-0213-6. 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.