IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Funded collaboration research in mathematics in China


  • Ping Zhou

    () (Zhejiang University)

  • Huibao Tian

    (Institute of Scientific and Technical Information of China)


Based on publications in mathematics of Chinese authors indexed in Chinese domestic and international databases, namely, the CNKI and the Web of Science, the current paper tries to explore impact of collaboration and funding support on academic productivity. Collaboration is classified into domestic and international collaboration, and domestic collaboration is further divided into within-institutional collaboration and cross-institutional collaboration. Regional performance in terms of collaboration and funding support has also been investigated. The results show that collaboration and funded support are highly skewed among Chinese regions. Beijing, Jiangsu, Shanghai, and Zhejiang are most active in collaboration and are the major winners of research funds. Zhejiang and Shaanxi perform in a contrast way: the former publishes mostly internationally whereas the latter mainly domestically. Compared with within-institutional collaboration, cross-institutional and international collaboration perform better in raising productivity and achieving research funds.

Suggested Citation

  • Ping Zhou & Huibao Tian, 2014. "Funded collaboration research in mathematics in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(3), pages 695-715, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:99:y:2014:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-013-1212-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-013-1212-4

    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. Dale W. Jorgenson & Mun S. Ho & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2008. "A Retrospective Look at the U.S. Productivity Growth Resurgence," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 3-24, Winter.
    2. Maria Benavent-Pérez & Juan Gorraiz & Christian Gumpenberger & Félix Moya-Anegón, 2012. "The different flavors of research collaboration: a case study of their influence on university excellence in four world regions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(1), pages 41-58, October.
    3. Davis, Steven J. & Henrekson, Magnus, 2006. "Economic Performance and Work Activity in Sweden affter the Crisis of the early 1990s," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 647, Stockholm School of Economics, revised 03 Aug 2007.
    4. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jae Young Choi & Jaeyun Kim, 2011. "The determinants of research collaboration modes: exploring the effects of research and researcher characteristics on co-authorship," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(3), pages 967-983, December.
    5. Wolfgang Glänzel & András Schubert, 2001. "Double effort = Double impact? A critical view at international co-authorship in chemistry," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 50(2), pages 199-214, February.
    6. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jae Young Choi, 2012. "The taxonomy of research collaboration in science and technology: evidence from mechanical research through probabilistic clustering analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 719-735, June.
    7. Ping Zhou & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2010. "In-depth analysis on China’s international cooperation in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(3), pages 597-612, March.
    8. Olle Persson, 2010. "Are highly cited papers more international?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(2), pages 397-401, May.
    9. Ping Zhou & Yongfeng Zhong & Meigen Yu, 2013. "A bibliometric investigation on China–UK collaboration in food and agriculture," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(2), pages 267-285, November.
    10. Christoph Bartneck & Jun Hu, 2010. "The fruits of collaboration in a multidisciplinary field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(1), pages 41-52, October.
    11. Robert J. W. Tijssen & Martijn S. Visser & Thed N. van Leeuwen, 2002. "Benchmarking international scientific excellence: Are highly cited research papers an appropriate frame of reference?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 54(3), pages 381-397, July.
    12. Stefano Breschi & Franco Malerba, 2011. "Assessing the scientific and technological output of EU Framework Programmes: evidence from the FP6 projects in the ICT field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 239-257, July.
    13. Dag W Aksnes, 2003. "Characteristics of highly cited papers," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 159-170, December.
    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. 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.
    2. Shamsul Arifeen Khan Mamun & Mohammad Mafizur Rahman, 2015. "Is there any feedback effect between academic research publication and research collaboration? Evidence from an Australian university," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 2179-2196, December.
    3. Ping Zhou & Xiaojing Cai & Xiaozan Lyu, 0. "An in-depth analysis of government funding and international collaboration in scientific research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 0, pages 1-17.
    4. Liao, Huchang & Tang, Ming & Li, Zongmin & Lev, Benjamin, 2019. "Bibliometric analysis for highly cited papers in operations research and management science from 2008 to 2017 based on Essential Science Indicators," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 223-236.
    5. Ping Zhou & Xiaozan Lv, 2015. "Academic publishing and collaboration between China and Germany in physics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1875-1887, December.
    6. Adèle Paul-Hus & Adrián A Díaz-Faes & Maxime Sainte-Marie & Nadine Desrochers & Rodrigo Costas & Vincent Larivière, 2017. "Beyond funding: Acknowledgement patterns in biomedical, natural and social sciences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-14, October.
    7. 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.
    8. Dengsheng Wu & Yongjia Xie & Qianzhi Dai & Jianping Li, 2016. "A Systematic Overview of Operations Research/Management Science Research in Mainland China: Bibliometric Analysis of the Period 2001–2013," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 33(06), pages 1-26, December.
    9. Blanca De-Miguel-Molina & Scott W. Cunningham & Fernando Palop, 2017. "Analyzing Funding Patterns and Their Evolution in Two Medical Research Topics," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(02), pages 1-39, April.
    10. 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.
    11. Chen, Kaihua & Zhang, Yi & Fu, Xiaolan, 2019. "International research collaboration: An emerging domain of innovation studies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 149-168.


    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:99:y:2014:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-013-1212-4. 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.