Measuring nanotechnology development through the study of the dividing pattern between developed and developing countries during 2000–2014
Source abstract
Abstract
This paper investigates the global nanotechnology and nanoscience (NN) indicators in a developmental context, during three 5-year periods from 2000 to 2014. Through bibliometric analyses of the longitudinal data from well-known databases, the growth patterns of NN articles and patents were investigated. Furthermore, the causal relationships among these indicators and some characteristics of the 105 countries studied were examined using regression and correlation analyses leading to the identification of the top 20 “science and innovation giants,” in terms of all indicators, as well as the existence of significant, yet different, correlations among the indicators in developing and developed countries. In general, China’s growth rate (GR) in NN publications was found to surpass USA, from 2010 to 2014, leading to a change in the ranking of the top countries and moving China, with about 25 % of world’s NN articles, to top. A different trend was distinguished for patents in the area of nanotechnology, where USA, as the origin of over half of the world’s granted patents, has been the undisputed leader. The shares of developing countries (i.e., the percent ratios of the number of nanotech patents granted to the citizens of developing countries over the total number of nanotech patents granted worldwide) was found to be incompatible with the countries’ shares in the total NN articles, indicating a poor correlation between the two factors. However, developing countries were found to be superior in the GR of both NN articles and patents. Finally, the top countries identified can be regarded as suitable for comparative studies, and benchmarking by researchers and policy makers.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Economic Growth and Productivity · Economic Growth and Development · Energy, Environment, Economic Growth
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (33)
Show source-provided references
1. Alibolandi M, Abnous K, Sadeghi F, Hosseinkhani H, Ramezani M, Hadizadeh F (2016) Folate receptor-targeted multimodal polymersomes for delivery of quantum dots and doxorubicin to breast adenocarcinoma: in vitro and in vivo evaluation. Int J Pharm 500(1–2):162–17810.1016/j.ijpharm.2016.01.040 ↗
2. Bajwa R, Yaldram K, Rafique S (2013) A scientometric assessment of research output in nanoscience and nanotechnology: Pakistan perspective. Scientometrics 94(1):333–34210.1007/s11192-012-0699-4 ↗
3. Bassecoulard E, Lelu A, Zitt M (2007) Mapping nanosciences by citation flows: a preliminary analysis. Scientometrics 70(3):859–88010.1007/s11192-007-0315-1 ↗
4. Beise M, Stahl H (1999) Public research and industrial innovations in Germany. Res Policy 28(4):397–42210.1016/S0048-7333(98)00126-7 ↗
5. Bhushan B (2010) Springer handbook of nanotechnology. Springer Science & Business Media, New York.10.1007/978-3-642-02525-9 ↗
6. Chen H, Roco M, Son J, Jiang S, Larson C, Gao Q (2013) Global nanotechnology development from 1991 to 2012: patents, scientific publications, and effect of NSF funding. J Nanopart Res 15(9):1–21
7. Choi S, Yang J, Park H (2015) Quantifying the Triple Helix relationship in scientific research: statistical analyses on the dividing pattern between developed and developing countries. Qual Quant 49(4):1381–139610.1007/s11135-014-0052-5 ↗
8. French B, Heagerty PJ (2008) Analysis of longitudinal data to evaluate a policy change. Stat Med 27(24):5005–502510.1002/sim.3340 ↗
9. Geuna A, Nesta LJJ (2006) University patenting and its effects on academic research: the emerging European evidence. Res Policy 35(6):790–80710.1016/j.respol.2006.04.005 ↗
10. Gholivand MB, Mohammadi-Behzad L, Hosseinkhani H (2016) Application of a Cu–chitosan/multiwalled carbon nanotube film-modified electrode for the sensitive determination of rutin. Anal Biochem 493:35–4310.1016/j.ab.2015.08.033 ↗
11. Gorjiara T, Baldock C (2014) Nanoscience and nanotechnology research publications: a comparison between Australia and the rest of the world. Scientometrics 100(1):121–14810.1007/s11192-014-1287-6 ↗
12. Grimm H, Jaenicke J (2015) Testing the causal relationship between academic patenting and scientific publishing in Germany: Crowding-out or reinforcement? J Technol Transf 40(3):512–53510.1007/s10961-014-9353-z ↗
13. Guan J, Liu N (2014) Measuring scientific research in emerging nano-energy field. J Nanopart Res 16(4):1–1510.1007/s11051-014-2356-8 ↗
14. Han HC, Lo HC, Wu CY, Chen KH, Chen LC, Ou KL, Hosseinkhani H (2015) Nano-textured fluidic biochip as biological filter for selective survival of neuronal cells. J Biomed Mater Res Part A 103(6):2015–202310.1002/jbm.a.35338 ↗
15. Hirsch JE (2005) An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102(46):16569–1657210.1073/pnas.0507655102 ↗
16. Hollander M, Wolfe D, Chicken E (2013) Nonparametric statistical methods. Wiley, New York
17. Huang Z, Chen H, Yan L, Roco M (2005) Longitudinal nanotechnology development (1991–2002): national science foundation funding and its impact on patents. J Nanopart Res 7(4–5):343–37610.1007/s11051-005-5468-3 ↗
18. Huang C, Notten A, Rasters N (2011) Nanoscience and technology publications and patents: a review of social science studies and search strategies. J Technol Transf 36(2):145–17210.1007/s10961-009-9149-8 ↗
19. Jiang S, Gao Q, Chen H, Roco MC (2015) The roles of sharing, transfer, and public funding in nanotechnology knowledge-diffusion networks. J Assoc Inform Sci Technol 66(5):1017–102910.1002/asi.23223 ↗
20. Karpagam R, Gopalakrishnan S, Ramesh Babu B (2011) Mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology research in India: a scientometric analysis, 1990–2009. Scientometrics 89(2):501–52210.1007/s11192-011-0477-8 ↗
21. Li X, Lin Y, Chen H, Roco M (2007) Worldwide nanotechnology development: a comparative study of USPTO, EPO, and JPO patents (1976–2004). J Nanopart Res 9(6):977–100210.1007/s11051-007-9273-z ↗
22. Liu X, Zhang P, Li X, Chen H, Dang Y, Larson C et al (2009) Trends for nanotechnology development in China, Russia, and India. J Nanopart Res 11(8):1845–186610.1007/s11051-009-9698-7 ↗
23. Maghrebi M, Abbasi A, Amiri S, Monsefi R, Harati A (2011) A collective and abridged lexical query for delineation of nanotechnology publications. Scientometrics 86(1):15–2510.1007/s11192-010-0304-7 ↗
24. Mahapatra M (1985) On the validity of the theory of exponential growth of scientific literature. In Proceedings of the 15th IASLIC conference, Bangalore (pp. 61–70)
25. Miyazaki K, Islam N (2007) Nanotechnology systems of innovation—an analysis of industry and academia research activities. Technovation 27(11):661–67510.1016/j.technovation.2007.05.009 ↗
26. Molinari A, Molinari JF (2008a) Mathematical aspects of a new criterion for ranking scientific institutions based on the H-index. Scientometrics 75(2):339–35610.1007/s11192-007-1872-z ↗
27. Molinari JF, Molinari A (2008b) A new methodology for ranking scientific institutions. Scientometrics 75(1):163–17410.1007/s11192-007-1853-2 ↗
28. Mottaghitalab F, Farokhi M, Shokrgozar MA, Atyabi, Hosseinkhani H (2015) Silk fibroin nanoparticle as a novel drug delivery system. J Controlled Release 206:161–17610.1016/j.jconrel.2015.03.020 ↗
29. Reiss T, Dominguez Lacasa I (2008) The performance of European countries in biotechnology: how does Europe compare to the USA? Int J Biotechnol 10(4):303–32610.1504/IJBT.2008.019556 ↗
30. Roco MC, Bainbridge WS (2005) Societal implications of nanoscience and nanotechnology: maximizing human benefit. J Nanopart Res 7(1):1–1310.1007/s11051-004-2336-5 ↗
31. Sastry K, Rashmi HB, Rao NH (2010) Nanotechnology patents as R&D indicators for disease management strategies in agriculture. J Intellect Prop Rights 15:197–205
32. Soltani A, Tabatabaeian S, Hanafizadeh P, Bamdad Soofi J (2011) An evaluation scheme for nanotechnology policies. J Nanopart Res 13(12):7303–731210.1007/s11051-011-0584-8 ↗
33. Wang J, Shapira P (2011) Funding acknowledgement analysis: an enhanced tool to investigate research sponsorship impacts: the case of nanotechnology. Scientometrics 87(3):563–58610.1007/s11192-011-0362-5 ↗