IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zna/indecs/v11y2013i1p174-189.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scientific Productivity in Transition Countries: Trends and Obstacles

Author

Listed:
  • Hrvoje Matakovic

    (University of Zagreb, Centre for Research, Development and Technology Transfer)

  • Mirjana Pejic Bach

    (Department of Organization and Management, Faculty of Economics and Business - University of Zagreb)

  • Iva Radocaj Novak

    (University of Zagreb, Centre for Research, Development and Technology Transfer)

Abstract

Scientific productivity is one of the engines of development in the 21st century. The most common way of its measurement is through publication in peer-review articles. Current research indicates that there is a strong connection between country's development and its share in the world publication of scientific articles. Transition countries are still catching-up with the most developed countries in terms of scientific productivity, which is especially evident in Western Balkan countries. As one of the rare attempts to assess obstacles to scientific productivity in transition countries, this study investigates different factors and their effects to the scientific productivity. The obstacles are the results of the historical reasons, inadequate systems for advancement in the scientific community, and problems with the development and/or implementation of strategies for scientific development of the particular country. In addition, without efficient measurement of scientific productivity, it is hard to analyse its behaviour. Papers written by authors from transition countries are often published in local journals that are covered insufficiently by the Web of Science. Therefore, up-to-date systems for tracking scientific publications in transition countries are of the highest importance.

Suggested Citation

  • Hrvoje Matakovic & Mirjana Pejic Bach & Iva Radocaj Novak, 2013. "Scientific Productivity in Transition Countries: Trends and Obstacles," Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems - scientific journal, Croatian Interdisciplinary Society Provider Homepage: http://indecs.eu, vol. 11(2), pages 174-189.
    • Handle: RePEc:zna:indecs:v:11:y:2013:i:1:p:174-189
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://indecs.eu/2013/indecs2013-pp174-189.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Beaudry, Catherine & Allaoui, Sedki, 2012. "Impact of public and private research funding on scientific production: The case of nanotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1589-1606.
    2. Defazio, Daniela & Lockett, Andy & Wright, Mike, 2009. "Funding incentives, collaborative dynamics and scientific productivity: Evidence from the EU framework program," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 293-305, March.
    3. Porac, Joseph F. & Wade, James B. & Fischer, Harald M. & Brown, Joyce & Kanfer, Alaina & Bowker, Geoffrey, 2004. "Human capital heterogeneity, collaborative relationships, and publication patterns in a multidisciplinary scientific alliance: a comparative case study of two scientific teams," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 661-678, May.
    4. Anton Oleinik, 2012. "Publication patterns in Russia and the West compared," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(2), pages 533-551, November.
    5. David A. King, 2004. "The scientific impact of nations," Nature, Nature, vol. 430(6997), pages 311-316, July.
    6. Lazear, Edward P, 1997. "Incentives in Basic Research," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(1), pages 167-197, January.
    7. Konstantin Sonin, 2013. "The end of economic transition," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 21(1), pages 1-10, January.
    8. Maja Jokić & Krešimir Zauder & Srebrenka Letina, 2010. "Croatian scholarly productivity 1991–2005 measured by journals indexed in Web of Science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(2), pages 375-395, May.
    9. Zhou, Ping & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2006. "The emergence of China as a leading nation in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 83-104, February.
    10. Albarrán, Pedro & Crespo, Juan A. & Ortuño, Ignacio & Ruiz-Castillo, Javier, 2009. "A comparison of the scientific performance of the U. S. and the European Union at the turn of the XXI century," UC3M Working papers. Economics we095534, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    11. Van Looy, Bart & Callaert, Julie & Debackere, Koenraad, 2006. "Publication and patent behavior of academic researchers: Conflicting, reinforcing or merely co-existing?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 596-608, May.
    12. Ernesto R. Gantman, 2012. "Economic, linguistic, and political factors in the scientific productivity of countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 967-985, 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. Romina Rodela, 2016. "On the use of databases about research performance: comments on Karlovčec and Mladenić (2015) and others using the SICRIS database," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 2151-2157, 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. Annita Nugent & Ho Fai Chan & Uwe Dulleck, 2022. "Government funding of university-industry collaboration: exploring the impact of targeted funding on university patent activity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 29-73, January.
    2. Jo Royle & Louisa Coles & Dorothy Williams & Paul Evans, 2007. "Publishing in international journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 71(1), pages 59-86, April.
    3. Ebadi, Ashkan & Schiffauerova, Andrea, 2015. "How to become an important player in scientific collaboration networks?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 809-825.
    4. Duk Hee Lee & Il Won Seo & Ho Chull Choe & Hee Dae Kim, 2012. "Collaboration network patterns and research performance: the case of Korean public research institutions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 925-942, June.
    5. Belén Álvarez-Bornstein & Adrián A. Díaz-Faes & María Bordons, 2019. "What characterises funded biomedical research? Evidence from a basic and a clinical domain," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 805-825, May.
    6. Corsini, Alberto & Pezzoni, Michele, 2023. "Does grant funding foster research impact? Evidence from France," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4).
    7. de Oliveira, Thaiane Moreira & de Albuquerque, Sofia & Toth, Janderson Pereira & Bello, Debora Zava, 2018. "International cooperation networks of the BRICS bloc," SocArXiv b6x43, Center for Open Science.
    8. Esther Hormiga & Petra Saá-Pérez & Nieves L. Díaz-Díaz & José Luis Ballesteros-Rodríguez & Inmaculada Aguiar-Diaz, 2017. "The influence of entrepreneurial orientation on the performance of academic research groups: the mediating role of knowledge sharing," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 10-32, February.
    9. Yves Gingras & Mahdi Khelfaoui, 2018. "Assessing the effect of the United States’ “citation advantage” on other countries’ scientific impact as measured in the Web of Science (WoS) database," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 517-532, February.
    10. Maziar Montazerian & Edgar Dutra Zanotto & Hellmut Eckert, 2019. "A new parameter for (normalized) evaluation of H-index: countries as a case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 1065-1078, March.
    11. Munari, Federico & Toschi, Laura, 2021. "The impact of public funding on science valorisation: an analysis of the ERC Proof-of-Concept Programme," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(6).
    12. Gregory J Hather & Winston Haynes & Roger Higdon & Natali Kolker & Elizabeth A Stewart & Peter Arzberger & Patrick Chain & Dawn Field & B Robert Franza & Biaoyang Lin & Folker Meyer & Vural Ozdemir & , 2010. "The United States of America and Scientific Research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(8), pages 1-9, August.
    13. Banal-Estañol, Albert & Macho-Stadler, Inés & Pérez-Castrillo, David, 2019. "Evaluation in research funding agencies: Are structurally diverse teams biased against?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1823-1840.
    14. Charles Ayoubi & Michele Pezzoni & Fabiana Visentin, 2016. "At the Origins of Learning: Absorbing Knowledge Flows from Within or Outside the Team?," GREDEG Working Papers 2016-08, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    15. Reinhilde Veugelers, 2010. "Towards a multipolar science world: trends and impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(2), pages 439-456, February.
    16. Albert Banal-Estañol & Ines Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2016. "Key Success Drivers in Public Research Grants: Funding the Seeds of Radical Innovation in Academia?," CESifo Working Paper Series 5852, CESifo.
    17. Uwe Cantner & Martin Kalthaus & Indira Yarullina, 2022. "Outcomes of Science-Industry Collaboration: Factors and Interdependencies," Jena Economics Research Papers 2022-003, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    18. Leila Tahmooresnejad & Catherine Beaudry, 2019. "Collaboration or funding: lessons from a study of nanotechnology patenting in Canada and the United States," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 741-777, June.
    19. Ruiz-Castillo, Javier, 2016. "Research output indicators are not productivity indicators," UC3M Working papers. Economics we1601, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    20. Tanel Hirv, 2022. "The interplay of the size of the research system, ways of collaboration, level, and method of funding in determining bibliometric outputs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(3), pages 1295-1316, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    scientific productivity; transition countries; obstacles; science; Web of Science;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy

    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:zna:indecs:v:11:y:2013:i:1:p:174-189. 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: Josip Stepanic (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.