IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v91y2012i1d10.1007_s11192-012-0617-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tendencies in scientific output on carbon nanotubes and graphene in global centers of excellence for nanotechnology

Author

Listed:
  • Goio Etxebarria

    () (University of the Basque Country, UPV-EHU)

  • Mikel Gomez-Uranga

    (University of the Basque Country, UPV-EHU)

  • Jon Barrutia

    (University of the Basque Country, UPV-EHU)

Abstract

A change has been taking place in the world of nanotechnologies since 2009, marking the beginning of a new era of end consumer goods related to these new technologies. In this article, our aim is to know the dominant tendencies observed in scientific output on carbon nanotubes at centres and poles from different countries and considered to be at the forefront of nanotechnologies research. We have selected a sample comprised of eight universities and locally coherent concentrations from different geographic areas: Europe, America and Asia. Based on this sample, we have used the Scopus database to analyse scientific output on carbon nanotubes in order to determine if there are significant differences in behaviour. We observe that dynamics of scientific output on nanotubes are similar in the universities and clusters analysed over time although a drop in publications was noted in 2009 in part of the organizations included in the sample. We have seen a large amount of publications on graphene in the last several years, due to the fact that researchers working in the field of carbon nanotubes gradually move towards the study of graphene, explained by the high expectations concerning the use of this element. The results lead us to conclude that advances in knowledge on carbon nanotubes and graphene will make it possible to meet the growing needs of a new and powerful market for products that are progressively including these new elements.

Suggested Citation

  • Goio Etxebarria & Mikel Gomez-Uranga & Jon Barrutia, 2012. "Tendencies in scientific output on carbon nanotubes and graphene in global centers of excellence for nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(1), pages 253-268, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:91:y:2012:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0617-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0617-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-012-0617-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    ---><---

    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. Robinson, Douglas K.R. & Rip, Arie & Mangematin, Vincent, 2007. "Technological agglomeration and the emergence of clusters and networks in nanotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 871-879, July.
    2. Masatsura Igami, 2008. "Exploration of the evolution of nanotechnology via mapping of patent applications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 77(2), pages 289-308, November.
    3. Peng Hui Lv & Gui-Fang Wang & Yong Wan & Jia Liu & Qing Liu & Fei-cheng Ma, 2011. "Bibliometric trend analysis on global graphene research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(2), pages 399-419, August.
    4. 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.
    5. Ronald N. Kostoff & Ryan B. Barth & Clifford G. Y. Lau, 2008. "Relation of seminal nanotechnology document production to total nanotechnology document production — South Korea," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 76(1), pages 43-67, July.
    6. 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.
    7. Loet Leydesdorff & Caroline Wagner, 2009. "Is the United States losing ground in science? A global perspective on the world science system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 78(1), pages 23-36, January.
    8. Ronald N. Kostoff & Raymond G. Koytcheff & Clifford G. Y. Lau, 2007. "Global nanotechnology research metrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 565-601, March.
    9. 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.
    10. Douglas K. R. Robinson & Arie Rip & Vincent Mangematin, 2007. "Technological agglomeration and the emergence of clusters and networks in nanotechnology," Post-Print hal-00424519, HAL.
    11. Selen Onel & Abe Zeid & Sagar Kamarthi, 2011. "The structure and analysis of nanotechnology co-author and citation networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 119-138, October.
    12. Ugo Finardi, 2011. "Time relations between scientific production and patenting of knowledge: the case of nanotechnologies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 37-50, October.
    13. Philip Shapira & Jan Youtie & Luciano Kay, 2011. "National innovation systems and the globalization of nanotechnology innovation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(6), pages 587-604, December.
    14. David Mowery, 2011. "Nanotechnology and the US national innovation system: continuity and change," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(6), pages 697-711, December.
    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. Ji Yeon Lee & Richa Kumari & Jae Yun Jeong & Tae-Hyun Kim & Byeong-Hee Lee, 2020. "Knowledge Discovering on Graphene Green Technology by Text Mining in National R&D Projects in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(23), pages 1-16, November.
    2. 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.
    3. Xi Yang & Xiang Yu & Xin Liu, 2018. "Obtaining a Sustainable Competitive Advantage from Patent Information: A Patent Analysis of the Graphene Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 10(12), pages 1-25, December.

    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. Guang Yu & Ming-Yang Wang & Da-Ren Yu, 2010. "Characterizing knowledge diffusion of Nanoscience & Nanotechnology by citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(1), pages 81-97, July.
    2. 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.
    3. Ehsan Mohammadi, 2012. "Knowledge mapping of the Iranian nanoscience and technology: a text mining approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(3), pages 593-608, September.
    4. 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.
    5. Davide Consoli & Pier Paolo Patrucco, 2011. "Complexity and the Coordination of Technological Knowledge: The Case of Innovation Platforms," Chapters, in: Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 8 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Corine Genet & Vincent Mangematin & Franck Aggeri & Caroline Lanciano-Morandat, 2007. "Modèle d'activité dans l'instrumentation en biotechnologies : construire l'offre ou répondre à la demande," Post-Print halshs-00436954, HAL.
    7. Philippe Larédo & Carole Rieu & Lionel Villard & Bernard Kahane & Aurélie Delemarle & Corine Genet & Vincent Mangematin, 2009. "Emergence des nanotechnologies : Vers un nouveau "modèle industriel "?," Post-Print hal-00424261, HAL.
    8. Yusuf, Shahid, 2008. "Intermediating knowledge exchange between universities and businesses," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1167-1174, September.
    9. Eisingerich, Andreas B. & Bell, Simon J. & Tracey, Paul, 2010. "How can clusters sustain performance? The role of network strength, network openness, and environmental uncertainty," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 239-253, March.
    10. Lisa De Propris & Carlo Corradini, 2013. "Technological platforms and global opportunities," ERSA conference papers ersa13p867, European Regional Science Association.
    11. Annika Lorenz & Michael Raven & Knut Blind, 2019. "The role of standardization at the interface of product and process development in biotechnology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1097-1133, August.
    12. Vivek Kumar Singh & Sumit Kumar Banshal & Khushboo Singhal & Ashraf Uddin, 2015. "Scientometric mapping of research on ‘Big Data’," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(2), pages 727-741, November.
    13. Qiu, Ranfeng & Cantwell, John, 2018. "General Purpose Technologies and local knowledge accumulation — A study on MNC subunits and local innovation centers," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 826-837.
    14. Yin Li & Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira, 2015. "Why do technology firms publish scientific papers? The strategic use of science by small and midsize enterprises in nanotechnology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(6), pages 1016-1033, December.
    15. Roelofsen, Anneloes & Boon, Wouter P.C. & Kloet, Roy R. & Broerse, Jacqueline E.W., 2011. "Stakeholder interaction within research consortia on emerging technologies: Learning how and what?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 341-354, April.
    16. Martine Gadille & Tremblay Diane-Gabrielle & Antoine Vion, 2013. "Territorialized Meta-Organization, the Engine of Collective Learning [La méta-organisation territorialisée, moteur d’apprentissages collectifs]," Post-Print hal-02922186, HAL.
    17. F. Xavier Molina-Morales & Josep Capó-Vicedo & M. Teresa Martínez-Fernández & Manuel Expósito-Langa, 2013. "Social capital in industrial districts: Influence of the strength of ties and density of the network on the sense of belonging to the district," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 92(4), pages 773-789, November.
    18. Scott D. Bass & Lukasz A. Kurgan, 2010. "Discovery of factors influencing patent value based on machine learning in patents in the field of nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(2), pages 217-241, February.
    19. Bozeman, Barry & Laredo, Philippe & Mangematin, Vincent, 2007. "Understanding the emergence and deployment of "nano" S&T," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 807-812, July.
    20. Branco Ponomariov, 2013. "Government-sponsored university-industry collaboration and the production of nanotechnology patents in US universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(6), pages 749-767, 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:spr:scient:v:91:y:2012:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0617-9. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.