Research potential of Warsaw in international scientific networks
•
1 like•136 views
UNICA General Assembly & seminar “Universities in the Capitals and the Grand Challenges”, University of Warsaw u 16-19 November 2016.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Research potential of Warsaw in international scientific networks
Similar to Research potential of Warsaw in international scientific networks (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Research potential of Warsaw in international scientific networks
- 1. Research potential of Warsaw in international scientific networks Agnieszka Olechnicka, Adam Płoszaj UNICA General Assembly 2016 University of Warsaw 18 November 2016
- 2. Outlook 1. Dynamics of the geography of science 2. Collaborative turn 3. Warsaw position in networks of scientific collaboration 4. The role of international collaboration 5. Enabling factors
- 3. The share of articles affiliated to the given country; SCOPUS 1999-2003 2004-2008 Royal Society (2012), Knowledge, networks and nations: Global scientific collaboration in the 21st century, s. 17.
- 6. Citations per article 2007‐2013, normalized by yearly average 119,0 - 156,9 103,8 - 118,9 91,2 - 103,7 77,5 - 91,1 61,6 - 77,4 42,2 - 61,5 21,4 - 42,1 Source: own elaboration based on Web of Science.
- 7. Knowledge sources and knowledge sinks; world (2000‐2009) Mazloumian, A., Helbing, D., Lozano, S., Light, R. P., & Börner, K. (2013). Global multi-level analysis of the ‘Scientific Food Web'. Scientific reports, 3; http://www.nature.com/articles/srep01167
- 8. Knowledge sources and knowledge sinks; Europe (2000‐2009) Mazloumian, A., Helbing, D., Lozano, S., Light, R. P., & Börner, K. (2013). Global multi-level analysis of the ‘Scientific Food Web'. Scientific reports, 3; http://www.nature.com/articles/srep01167
- 9. Average number of authors per article (WoS, 36 European countries) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Source: own elaboration based on Web of Science, articles from 36 European countries.
- 10. Average number of Nobel prizewinners in 1901‐2015 (20 years intervals) Source: on elaboration based on http://www.nobelprize.org/. 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 1901-1920 1921-1940 1941-1960 1961-1980 1981-2000 2001-2015 Physics Chemistry Physiology or Medicine
- 12. „Only a free individual can make a discovery. Can you imagine an organization of scientists making the discoveries of Charles Darwin?” A. Einstein Will YOU be Nobel prizewinner?
- 14. The Fourth Age of Research (Adams 2013) Collaboration with the USA; 2007‐2013, per cent Source: own elaboration based on Web of Science.
- 15. Positive influence of collaboration Collaboration measured by: - co-authorship (international) - number of authors, - number of affiliations/institutions - acknowledgements - shared citations Productivity number of documents (Ponomariov and Boardman 2010) number of documents and the number of citations (VanRaan 1998; Glanzel 2001) Visibility number of citations (Sooryamoorthy 2009) Quality peer quality of the contribution Franceschet and Costantini (2010) Source: own elaboration
- 16. Regressions Dependent variable: normalised citations in two periods 2007‐2013 m1 m2 m3 m4 m5 m6 m7 m8 R2: ,413 ,480 ,737 ,583 ,489 ,765 ,610 ,772 Percent of international articles ,308 ,204 Percent of collaborations with the USA ,652 ,553 ,550 Closeness (Freeman) ,442 ,201 ,399 ,330 Betweenness (normalised) ,296 ,16 GDP per capita ,643 ,474 ,324 ,481 ,533 ,299 ,386 ,312 2000‐2006 m1 m2 m3 m4 m5 m6 m7 m8 R2: ,628 ,643 ,666 ,704 ,650 ,719 ,709 ,740 Percent of international articles ,125 ,078 Percent of collaborations with the USA ,209 ,137 ,143 Closeness (Freeman) ,308 ,268 ,292 ,509 Betweenness (normalised) ,163 ‐,29 GDP per capita ,792 ,774 ,719 ,654 ,728 ,624 ,650 ,627 Source: own elaboration based on Web of Science.
- 17. Enabling factors – accessibility • Regions/cities with a major international airport are more likely to develop intensive international scientific collaboration. (Hoekman et al. 2010) • US: After Southwest Airlines enters a new route (with lower fares), scientific collaboration increases by 50% (chemistry co‐publications, 1991‐2012). (Catalini et al. 2016)
- 18. Enabling factors – policy (Hierarchy dilemma‐ different rewards from the collaboration) Collaboration with stronger partner is a chance for a lesser performing cities/science centers Collaboration with weaker partners is unattractive for the best performing cities/ scientific centers
- 19. Enabling factors – policy (Openness dilemma‐ conflicting aims of different policies) Both EU scientific policy and national scientific policies aim at strengthening interregional collaboration Innovation policy is enhancing intraregional collaboration (smart specialization approach)