International perspective on nanotechnology papers, patents, and NSF awards (2000–2016)
Source abstract
Abstract
This paper presents the development of nanotechnology between 2000 and 2016 as reflected in the Web of Science papers, United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), World International Property Organization (WIPO) patents, and National Science Foundation (NSF) awards, with a special reference to the United States (US), European Union (EU27), P.R. China, Japan, and South Korea. The field of nanotechnology is branching out into novel scientific and technology platforms, and it is increasingly difficult to separate foundational nanoscale components from divergent application areas. The average global growth rate has been sustained at about 15% for both papers and patents in the selected interval. The growth rates among regions are non-uniform. P.R. China and South Korea have increased faster in both the numbers and quality of their scientific publications, and currently P.R. China has the largest volume of nanotechnology publications and South Korea the most publications per capita in the field of nanotechnology. The US, EU27, and Japan are maintaining leadership in the upstream, better cited, conceptual components of nanotechnology research and development.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: scientometrics and bibliometrics research · Academic Publishing and Open Access
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (23)
Show source-provided references
1. Arora SK, Porter AL, Youtie J, Shapira P (2013) Capturing new developments in an emerging technology: an updated search strategy for identifying nanotechnology research outputs. Scientometrics 95:351–37010.1007/s11192-012-0903-6 ↗
2. Chen H, Roco MC, Li X, Lin Y (2008) Trends in nanotechnology patents. Nature Nanotech 3:123–12510.1038/nnano.2008.51 ↗
3. Chen H, Roco MC, Son J (2013a) Nanotechnology public funding and impact analysis: a tale of two decades (1991-2010). IEEE Nanotech 7:9–1410.1109/MNANO.2012.2237312 ↗
4. Chen H, Roco MC, Son J, Jiang S, Larson CA, Gao Q (2013b) Global nanotechnology development from 1991 to 2012: patents, scientific publications, and effect of NSF funding. J Nanopart Res 15:1–21
5. Dang Y, Zhang Y, Fan L, Chen H, Roco MC (2010) Trends in worldwide nanotechnology patent applications: 1991 to 2008. J Nanopart Res 12:687–70610.1007/s11051-009-9831-7 ↗
6. Huang Z, Chen H, Yan L, Roco MC (2003) Longitudinal patent analysis for nanoscale science and engineering: country, institution and technology field. J Nanopart Res 5:333–36310.1023/A:1025556800994 ↗
7. Huang Z, Chen H, Yan L, Roco MC (2005) Longitudinal nanotechnology development (1991–2002): National Science Foundation funding and its impact on patents. J Nanopart Res 7(4):343–37610.1007/s11051-005-5468-3 ↗
8. Jiang S, Gao Q, Chen H (2015) The roles of sharing, transfer, and public funding in nanotechnology knowledge diffusion networks. J Am Soc Inf Sci & Tech 66:1017–102910.1002/asi.23223 ↗
9. Jordan CC, Kaiser I, Moore VC (2013) Nanotechnology patent literature review: graphitic carbon-based nanotechnology and energy applications are on the rise. Nanotech L & Bus 11:111
10. Kay L, Newman N, Youtie J, Porter AL, Rafols I (2014) Patent overlay mapping: visualizing technological distance. J Assoc Inf Sci & Tech 65:2432–244310.1002/asi.23146 ↗
11. Leydesdorff L (2013) An evaluation of impacts in “nanoscience & nanotechnology”: steps towards standards for citation analysis. Scientometrics 94:35–5510.1007/s11192-012-0750-5 ↗
12. Li X, Lin Y, Chen H, Roco MC (2007) Worldwide nanotechnology development: a comparative study of USPTO, EPO, and JPO patents (1976–2004). J Nanopart Res 9:977–100210.1007/s11051-007-9273-z ↗
13. Li X, Hu D, Dang Y, Chen H, Roco MC, Larson CA, Chan J (2009) Nano mapper: an internet knowledge mapping system for nanotechnology development. J Nanopart Res 11:529–55210.1007/s11051-008-9491-z ↗
14. Liu X, Kaza S, Zhang P, Chen H (2011) Determining inventor status and its effect on knowledge diffusion: a study on nanotechnology literature from P.R. China, Russia, and India. J Am Soc Inf Sci & Tech 62:1166–117610.1002/asi.21528 ↗
15. Lux Research (2014) Nanotechnology update: corporations up their spending as revenues for nano-enabled products increase. Ed. H. Flynn, D. Hwang and M. Holman, 18p
16. Roco MC (2016) Building foundational knowledge and infrastructure for nanotechnology: 2000-2030. Chapter 4. In: Cheng et al (eds) Nanotechnology: delivering the promise, vol 1. ACS, Washington, DC, pp 39–5210.1021/bk-2016-1220.ch004 ↗
17. Roco MC, Williams RS, Alivisatos P (2000) Nanotechnology research directions: vision for the next decade. Springer (former Kluwer Academic Publishers), Boston, 316p. Available on: http://www.wtec.org/loyola/nano/IWGN.Research.Directions/
18. Roco MC, Mirkin CA, Hersam MC (2011) Nanotechnology research directions for societal needs in 2020. Springer, Berlin, 600p. Available on www.wtec.org/nano2/10.1007/978-94-007-1168-6 ↗
19. Suominen A, Li Y, Youtie J, Shapira P (2016) A bibliometric analysis of the development of next generation active nanotechnologies. J Nanopart Res 18:27010.1007/s11051-016-3578-8 ↗
20. Tahmooresnejad L, Beaudry C, Schiffauerova A (2015) The role of public funding in nanotechnology scientific production: where Canada stands in comparison to the United States. Scientometrics 102:753–78710.1007/s11192-014-1432-2 ↗
21. Tang L, Shapira P (2011) P.R. China–US scientific collaboration in nanotechnology: patterns and dynamics. Scientometrics 88:1–1610.1007/s11192-011-0376-z ↗
22. Youtie J, Shapira P, Porter AL (2008) Nanotechnology publications and citations by leading countries and blocs. J Nanopart Res 10:981–98610.1007/s11051-008-9360-9 ↗
23. Zheng J, Zhao Z, Zhang X, Chen D, Huang M (2014) International collaboration development in nanotechnology: a perspective of patent network analysis. Scientometrics 98:683–70210.1007/s11192-013-1081-x ↗