IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/inf/wpaper/2011.4.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Who and where are the co-authors? The relationship between institutional and geographical distance in scientific publications

Author

Listed:
  • Rosamaria d’Amore

    (University of Salerno)

  • Roberto Iorio

    (University of Salerno)

  • Agnieszka Stawinoga

    (University of Naples Federico II)

Abstract

This paper analyses the phenomenon of collaborations between university and other research institutions with industry, seen through the lens of co-autorship of scientific publications in the Italian biotech sector. We analyse a database including the publications done by the Italian biotech firms from 2003 to 2005; the institutions the authors of the publications belong to are registered and classified in four categories (firms, universities, hospitals and research centres); their localization is registered too. The main goal of our research is to analyse the relationship between geographical and institutional distance. Given that there is institutional distance if different kinds of institutions collaborate, we want to verify if such distance changes, and in what direction, when the physical distance increases. This analysis is conducted at an aggregated level, than at a more disaggregated one, taking two factors into consideration: the quality and relevance of the papers; the different nature and aims, therefore the different behaviour, of the different institutions. Regarding the empirical tools, the social network analysis is joined with the regression analysis. The more relevant results may be synthesized in this way: at a more aggregate level the direction of the relationship between spatial and institutional distance does not emerge with full statistical evidence; at a more disaggregate level the results emerge more clearly: taking into consideration the papers that receive few citations (that may be considered as results of project of limited scientific relevance or quality), the relationship between geographical and institutional distance is inverse (the variety of institutions is more limited among papers written as results of international collaborations than among papers deriving from national co-autorships); among more cited papers, the relationship is direct. On another side, taking the behaviour of different institutions into consideration, we observe an inverse relationship between spatial and institutional distance for firms, universities and research centres, a direct relationship for hospitals. This kind of analysis may shed more light on the way knowledge flows among innovative agents and should be taken into consideration by the policy maker that aims to promote research collaboration between different institutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Rosamaria d’Amore & Roberto Iorio & Agnieszka Stawinoga, 2011. "Who and where are the co-authors? The relationship between institutional and geographical distance in scientific publications," Working Papers 2011.4, International Network for Economic Research - INFER.
  • Handle: RePEc:inf:wpaper:2011.4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://infer-research.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/i5t4e60hh8fhn0jiwp4bzkrrbgbj36zc1467806767.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2011
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frank Van Oort & Roderik Ponds & Koen Frenken, 2006. "The Geographical and Institutional Proximity of Scientific Collaboration Networks," ERSA conference papers ersa06p762, European Regional Science Association.
    2. Michelle Gittelman, 2005. "What Makes Research Socially Useful ? Complementarities between in-House Research and Firm-University Collaboration in Biotechnology," Revue d'Économie Industrielle, Programme National Persée, vol. 110(1), pages 57-73.
    3. Corinne Autant‐Bernard & Pascal Billand & David Frachisse & Nadine Massard, 2007. "Social distance versus spatial distance in R&D cooperation: Empirical evidence from European collaboration choices in micro and nanotechnologies," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 86(3), pages 495-519, August.
    4. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    5. Sanjeev Goyal & Marco J. van der Leij & José Luis Moraga-Gonzalez, 2006. "Economics: An Emerging Small World," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(2), pages 403-432, April.
    6. Roberto Iorio & Sandrine Labory & Daniele Paci, 2012. "Research Collaboration and Publication's Citation Impact: Evidence in the Italian Biotech Sector," Rivista italiana degli economisti, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 1, pages 75-100.
    7. Anthony Arundel & Aldo Geuna, 2004. "Proximity and the use of public science by innovative European firms," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(6), pages 559-580.
    8. Broström, Anders, 2010. "Working with distant researchers--Distance and content in university-industry interaction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 1311-1320, December.
    9. Murray, Fiona & Stern, Scott, 2007. "Do formal intellectual property rights hinder the free flow of scientific knowledge?: An empirical test of the anti-commons hypothesis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 648-687, August.
    10. Barabási, A.L & Jeong, H & Néda, Z & Ravasz, E & Schubert, A & Vicsek, T, 2002. "Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 311(3), pages 590-614.
    11. Liming Liang & Ling Zhu, 2002. "Major factors affecting China's inter-regional research collaboration: Regional scientific productivity and geographical proximity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 55(2), pages 287-316, August.
    12. Thomas Scherngell & Michael J. Barber, 2009. "Spatial interaction modelling of cross‐region R&D collaborations: empirical evidence from the 5th EU framework programme," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 88(3), pages 531-546, August.
    13. Bonaccorsi, Andrea & Thoma, Grid, 2007. "Institutional complementarity and inventive performance in nano science and technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 813-831, July.
    14. 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.
    15. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
    16. Thomas Scherngell & Michael Barber, 2011. "Distinct spatial characteristics of industrial and public research collaborations: evidence from the fifth EU Framework Programme," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 46(2), pages 247-266, April.
    17. McKelvey, Maureen & Alm, Hakan & Riccaboni, Massimo, 2003. "Does co-location matter for formal knowledge collaboration in the Swedish biotechnology-pharmaceutical sector?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 483-501, March.
    18. Domenico De Stefano & Giuseppe Giordano & Maria Vitale, 2011. "Issues in the analysis of co-authorship networks," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 45(5), pages 1091-1107, August.
    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. Rosamaria D'Amore & Roberto Iorio & Sandrine Labory & Agnieszka Stawinoga, 2012. "How Do the Institutions Involved in Scientific Collaboration Deal with Different Kinds of Distance? An Analysis of the Co-Autorships of Scientific Publications," Working Papers 3_222, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Statistiche, Università degli Studi di Salerno.

    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. Rosamaria D'Amore & Roberto Iorio & Sandrine Labory & Agnieszka Stawinoga, 2012. "How Do the Institutions Involved in Scientific Collaboration Deal with Different Kinds of Distance? An Analysis of the Co-Autorships of Scientific Publications," Working Papers 3_222, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Statistiche, Università degli Studi di Salerno.
    2. Rosamaria D'Amore & Roberto Iorio, 2014. "New Insights on the Relationship between Geographic and Institutional Distance in Research Collaborations: A Long Period Analysis," Working Papers 3_229, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Statistiche, Università degli Studi di Salerno.
    3. repec:sep:wpaper:3_321 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. repec:sep:wpaper:3_322 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Koen Frenken & Roderik Ponds & Frank Van Oort, 2010. "The citation impact of research collaboration in science‐based industries: A spatial‐institutional analysis," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 89(2), pages 351-271, June.
    6. Rens L.J. Vandeberg & Ellen H.M. Moors, 2008. "A framework for interactive learning in emerging technologies," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-06, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Feb 2008.
    7. Sara Amoroso & Alex Coad & Nicola Grassano, 2017. "European R&D networks: A snapshot from the 7th EU Framework Programme," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation JRC107546, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    8. Di Cagno, Daniela & Fabrizi, Andrea & Meliciani, Valentina & Wanzenböck, Iris, 2016. "The impact of relational spillovers from joint research projects on knowledge creation across European regions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 83-94.
    9. Cilem Selin Hazir & Corinne Autant-Bernard, 2012. "Using Affiliation Networks to Study the Determinants of Multilateral Research Cooperation Some empirical evidence from EU Framework Programs in biotechnology," Working Papers halshs-00697556, HAL.
    10. Thomas Scherngell & Michael Barber, 2011. "Distinct spatial characteristics of industrial and public research collaborations: evidence from the fifth EU Framework Programme," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 46(2), pages 247-266, April.
    11. Mafini Dosso & Antonio Vezzani, 2020. "Firm market valuation and intellectual property assets," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(7), pages 705-729, August.
    12. Tatiana Plotnikova & Bastian Rake, 2014. "Collaboration in pharmaceutical research: exploration of country-level determinants," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1173-1202, February.
    13. Sara Amoroso & Alex Coad & Nicola Grassano, 2018. "European R&D networks: a snapshot from the 7th EU Framework Programme," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(5-6), pages 404-419, August.
    14. Balland, Pierre-Alexandre & Boschma, Ron, 2022. "Do scientific capabilities in specific domains matter for technological diversification in European regions?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    15. Ron Boschma & Simona Iammarino & Raffaele Paci & Jordy Suriñach & Corinne Autant-Bernard & Sylvie Chalaye & Elisa Gagliardini & Stefano Usai, 2017. "European Knowledge Neighbourhood: Knowledge Production in EU Neighbouring Countries and Intensity of the Relationship with EU Countries," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 108(1), pages 52-75, February.
    16. Iris Wanzenböck & Thomas Scherngell & Thomas Brenner, 2014. "Embeddedness of regions in European knowledge networks: a comparative analysis of inter-regional R&D collaborations, co-patents and co-publications," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 53(2), pages 337-368, September.
    17. Chin-Chang Tsai & Elizabeth A. Corley & Barry Bozeman, 2016. "Collaboration experiences across scientific disciplines and cohorts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(2), pages 505-529, August.
    18. Mario Maggioni & Teodora Uberti & Mario Nosvelli, 2014. "Does intentional mean hierarchical? Knowledge flows and innovative performance of European regions," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 53(2), pages 453-485, September.
    19. Buchmann, Tobias & Hain, Daniel & Kudic, Muhamed & Müller, Matthias, 2014. "Exploring the Evolution of Innovation Networks in Science-driven and Scale-intensive Industries: New Evidence from a Stochastic Actor-based Approach," IWH Discussion Papers 1/2014, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    20. Valentina Meliciani & Daniela Cagno & Andrea Fabrizi & Marco Marini, 2022. "Knowledge networks in joint research projects, innovation and economic growth across European regions," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 68(3), pages 549-586, June.
    21. Frank Van Oort & Roderik Ponds & Koen Frenken, 2006. "The Geographical and Institutional Proximity of Scientific Collaboration Networks," ERSA conference papers ersa06p762, European Regional Science Association.
    22. Leten, Bart & Landoni, Paolo & Van Looy, Bart, 2014. "Science or graduates: How do firms benefit from the proximity of universities?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1398-1412.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    University-industry collaboration; Institutional distance; Spatial distance; Co-autorships; Knowledge flows; Scientific and Technological Policy.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L65 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Chemicals; Rubber; Drugs; Biotechnology; Plastics
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives

    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:inf:wpaper:2011.4. 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: Pedro Cerqueira (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inferea.html .

    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.