IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Science funding and research output: a study on 10 countries


  • Xianwen Wang

    () (Dalian University of Technology)

  • Di Liu

    (Dalian University of Technology)

  • Kun Ding

    (Dalian University of Technology)

  • Xinran Wang

    (Dalian University of Technology)


This study reports research on analyzing the impact of government funding on research output. 500,807 SCI papers published in 2009 in 10 countries are collected and analyzed. The results show that, in China, 70.34% of SCI papers are supported by some research funding, among which 89.57% are supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC). Average grants per funding-supported paper in China is 2.95, when in the USA the number is 2.93 and in Japan it is 2.40. The results of funding agency analysis show that, China, Germany and Spain are single funding agency dominated countries, while USA, Japan, Canada and Australia are double funding agencies dominated countries, and the source of funding in UK, France and Italy is diversified.

Suggested Citation

  • Xianwen Wang & Di Liu & Kun Ding & Xinran Wang, 2012. "Science funding and research output: a study on 10 countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(2), pages 591-599, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:91:y:2012:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-011-0576-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-011-0576-6

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    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

    1. Leydesdorff, Loet & Wagner, Caroline, 2009. "Macro-level indicators of the relations between research funding and research output," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 353-362.
    2. Linda Butler, 2001. "Revisiting bibliometric issues using new empirical data," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 59-65, April.
    3. Ulf Sandström, 2009. "Research quality and diversity of funding: A model for relating research money to output of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 79(2), pages 341-349, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Weishu Liu & Li Tang & Guangyuan Hu, 2020. "Funding information in Web of Science: an updated overview," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(3), pages 1509-1524, March.
    2. Hottenrott, Hanna & Lawson, Cornelia, 2013. "Fishing for Complementarities: Competitive Research Funding and Research Productivity," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201354, University of Turin.
    3. Mu-Hsuan Huang & Mei-Jhen Huang, 2018. "An analysis of global research funding from subject field and funding agencies perspectives in the G9 countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 833-847, May.
    4. Fiorenzo Franceschini & Domenico Maisano & Luca Mastrogiacomo, 2013. "Evaluating research institutions: the potential of the success-index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(1), pages 85-101, July.
    5. Zhao, Star X. & Tan, Alice M. & Yu, Shuang & Xu, Xin, 2018. "Analyzing the research funding in physics: The perspective of production and collaboration at institution level," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 508(C), pages 662-674.
    6. Houcemeddine Turki & Mohamed Ali Hadj Taieb & Mohamed Ben Aouicha & Ajith Abraham, 2020. "Nature or Science: what Google Trends says," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1367-1385, August.
    7. Houcemeddine Turki & Mohamed Ali Hadj Taieb & Mohamed Ben Aouicha & Ajith Abraham, 0. "Nature or Science: what Google Trends says," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 0, pages 1-19.
    8. Saad Ahmed Javed & Sifeng Liu, 2018. "Predicting the research output/growth of selected countries: application of Even GM (1, 1) and NDGM models," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 395-413, April.
    9. Yongrae Cho & Wonjoon Kim, 2014. "Technology–industry networks in technology commercialization: evidence from Korean university patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(3), pages 1785-1810, March.
    10. Xin Xu & Alice M. Tan & Star X. Zhao, 2015. "Funding ratios in social science: the perspective of countries/territories level and comparison with natural sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 673-684, September.
    11. Pan, Xuelian & Yan, Erjia & Cui, Ming & Hua, Weina, 2019. "How important is software to library and information science research? A content analysis of full-text publications," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 397-406.
    12. Belén Álvarez-Bornstein & Fernanda Morillo & María Bordons, 2017. "Funding acknowledgments in the Web of Science: completeness and accuracy of collected data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1793-1812, September.
    13. Lin Zhang & Wenjing Zhao & Jianhua Liu & Gunnar Sivertsen & Ying Huang, 0. "Do national funding organizations properly address the diseases with the highest burden?: Observations from China and the UK," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 0, pages 1-29.

    More about this item


    SCI; Science funding; Funding agency; NSFC;


    Access and download statistics


    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:2:d:10.1007_s11192-011-0576-6. 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: .

    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.