No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Where Is Science Going?
Abstract
Do researchers produce scientific and technical knowledge differently than they did ten years ago? What will scientific research look like ten years from now? Addressing such questions means looking at science from a dynamic systems perspective. Two recent books about the social system of science, by Ziman and by Gibbons, Limoges, Nowotny, Schwartzman, Scoff and Trow, accept this challenge and argue that the research enterprise is changing. This article uses bibliometric data to examine the extent and nature of changes identified by these authors, taking as an example British research. We use their theoretical frameworks; to investigate five characteristics of research said to be increasingly pervasive-namely, application, interdisciplinarity, networking, internationalization, and concentration of resources. Results indicate that research may be becoming more interdisciplinary and that research is increasingly conducted more in networks, both domestic and international; but the data are more ambiguous regarding application and concentration.
... As described by the academic capitalism literature and others (see Hessels and van Lente, 2008 for a review), the growth of international partnerships is a common example of organizational transformations. This is a long standing trend that was severely strengthened in the last decades (Coccia and Wang, 2016;Frame and Carpenter, 1979;Glänzel, 2001;Hicks and Katz, 1996;Luukkonen et al., 1992). ...
... The increasing participation of diverse organizations in scientific production is yet another organizational transformation that is important to tackle. In fact, an increasing heterogeneity in papers' authorships has been shown in diverse geographies and scientific fields (Godin and Gingras, 2000;Hicks and Katz, 1996;Martin, 2011), with biomedical organizations (Godin and Gingras, 2000;Hicks and Katz, 1996) and industry (Godin and Gingras, 2000) increasing their relevance. In spite of these data, to the best of our knowledge, no studies have mapped the interconnections between academia and other organizations in Portugal in any area of scientific research. ...
... The increasing participation of diverse organizations in scientific production is yet another organizational transformation that is important to tackle. In fact, an increasing heterogeneity in papers' authorships has been shown in diverse geographies and scientific fields (Godin and Gingras, 2000;Hicks and Katz, 1996;Martin, 2011), with biomedical organizations (Godin and Gingras, 2000;Hicks and Katz, 1996) and industry (Godin and Gingras, 2000) increasing their relevance. In spite of these data, to the best of our knowledge, no studies have mapped the interconnections between academia and other organizations in Portugal in any area of scientific research. ...
Synergies between globalization and knowledge economy were suggested to direct biomedical research towards economically-interested activities. In this context, research in malaria, a disease endemic to poverty, may be at a paradoxical stance. This study addresses this issue assessing whether malaria research is driven by the accumulation of economic and/or other forms of capital. Drawing upon academic and epistemic capitalism, malaria research is characterized through the analysis of all Web of science-indexed publications involving Portuguese organizations (1900-2014; n=467). First, data was systematized by content and bibliometric analyses. Subsequently, multiple correspondence analysis revealed a bi-dimensional landscape (who’s publishing; what’s published) and cluster analysis identified three profiles (beginners; local appropriations; global science). This study reveals the construction of Portugal’s scientific system and unveils the assimilation of dominant modes of organizing, doing and thinking despite malaria’s research low profit potential. Extending this approach to other biomedical fields can unravel the dimensions underlying science’s (re)construction.
... The second application is largely geared toward quantitative examination of scientific collaboration through co-authorship publication patterns over time (Leclerc et al. 1992;Luukkonen et al. 1992;Hicks and Katz 1996). In large part this body of research recognizes that, although collaboration has always characterized science and technology, the past several decades have witnessed a sharp increase in interdisciplinarity and collaboration (both national and international), which poses problems for science policy and calls for new methods of R&D evaluation (Hicks and Katz 1996). ...
... The second application is largely geared toward quantitative examination of scientific collaboration through co-authorship publication patterns over time (Leclerc et al. 1992;Luukkonen et al. 1992;Hicks and Katz 1996). In large part this body of research recognizes that, although collaboration has always characterized science and technology, the past several decades have witnessed a sharp increase in interdisciplinarity and collaboration (both national and international), which poses problems for science policy and calls for new methods of R&D evaluation (Hicks and Katz 1996). The overwhelming majority of the findings from constructing maps of co-authorship and co-citation patterns over time just confirm through sophisticated network means characterizations of changes in modern science like greater networking and collaboration, increased globalization, and growing interdisciplinarity (Gibbons et al. 1994;Ziman 1994). ...
... The overwhelming majority of the findings from constructing maps of co-authorship and co-citation patterns over time just confirm through sophisticated network means characterizations of changes in modern science like greater networking and collaboration, increased globalization, and growing interdisciplinarity (Gibbons et al. 1994;Ziman 1994). However, they rarely address such important issues as what these processes entail for the funding, planning, management, and evaluation of R&D; when they do (see, e.g., Hicks and Katz 1996), no concrete solutions are offered. ...
How technology and bureaucracy shape collaborative scientific research projects: an empirical study of multiorganizational collaboration in the physical sciences.
Collaboration among organizations is rapidly becoming common in scientific research as globalization and new communication technologies make it possible for researchers from different locations and institutions to work together on common projects. These scientific and technological collaborations are part of a general trend toward more fluid, flexible, and temporary organizational arrangements, but they have received very limited scholarly attention. Structures of Scientific Collaboration is the first study to examine multi-organizational collaboration systematically, drawing on a database of 53 collaborations documented for the Center for History of Physics of the American Institute of Physics. By integrating quantitative sociological analyses with detailed case histories, Shrum, Genuth, and Chompalov pioneer a new and truly interdisciplinary method for the study of science and technology. Scientists undertake multi-organizational collaborations because individual institutions often lack sufficient resources—including the latest technology—to achieve a given research objective. The authors find that collaborative research depends on both technology and bureaucracy; scientists claim to abhor bureaucracy, but most collaborations use it constructively to achieve their goals. The book analyzes the structural elements of collaboration (among them formation, size and duration, organization, technological practices, and participant experiences) and the relationships among them. The authors find that trust, though viewed as positive, is not necessarily associated with successful projects; indeed, the formal structures of bureaucracy reduce the need for high levels of trust—and make possible the independence so valued by participating scientists.
... Os indícios desta internacionalização da ciência têm sido revelados nas mais diversas áreas científicas (Coccia and Wang 2016;Frame and Carpenter 1979;Luukkonen et al. 1992) e contextos nacionais (Glänzel 2001;Hicks and Katz 1996;Santos Pereira 1996). ...
... Isto implica que à ciência concretizada através da aplicação do método científico, e durante muito tempo entendida como circunscrita no interior de um campo (semi) autónomo, teremos uma ciência que se revela, crescentemente, como um empreendimento heterogéneo resultante de constantes lutas, alianças e reposicionamentos de atores académicos, empresariais, (não)governamentais e da sociedade civil (Böhme et al. 1983;Edquist 1997;Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff 1998;Funtowicz and Ravetz 1993;Gibbons et al. 1994;Irvine and Martin 1984;Moore et al. 2011;Nowotny et al. 2001;Slaughter and Leslie 1999;Ziman 2002). Esta heterogeneidade organizacional, trazendo novos contributos ao "fazer ciência", nomeadamente um alargamento social da reflexividade científica, traduzir-se-á, simultaneamente, em decréscimos de autonomia do campo científico (Funtowicz and Ravetz 1993;Garcia and Martins 2009;Gibbons et al. 1994;Slaughter and Leslie 1999 (Hicks and Katz 1996). Godin e Gingras, por seu lado, mostraram que entre 1980 e 1997 ocorreu uma diversificação dos contextos organizacionais onde decorrem as práticas científicas no Canadá. ...
... É precisamente partindo deste quadro que este artigo centrar-se-á no mapeamento e caracterização exploratória da investigação científica em malária concretizada parcial ou totalmente em instituições Portuguesas entre 1900 e 2014. Esta caracterização basear-se-á no recurso a indicadores bibliométricos, uma abordagem recorrentemente mobilizada para aferir empiricamente as transformações na produção de conhecimento científico (Hicks and Katz 1996;Martin 2011). Mais especificamente, mobilizar-se-ão todos os artigos científicos indexados num dos locus de legitimação máxima destas práticas: a Web of Science. ...
... Yet empirical cases, of certain fields in particular contexts, are needed to test the framework's broader applicability. Acknowledged as an important conceptual approach to assess transformations in the organization of research, Mode 2 has also been critiqued for lacking empirical validity, among other concerns (see, e.g., Hicks and Katz (1996); Weingart (1997); Shinn (1999); Crompton (2007)). Here, we address this lacuna by operationalizing Mode 2 concepts in the context of an empirical case we argue is particularly germane. ...
... 3. Applying the Mode 2 concept to educational research While many of these dimensions of the Mode 2 concept address important trends and patterns in knowledge production and science productivity, it is necessary to empirically analyze and reconstruct the shift from the traditional Mode 1 type to Mode 2. Indeed, of the various critiques Mode 2 has garnered, the concept's lack of broad empirical validation is perhaps the most important (see, e.g., Hicks and Katz (1996); Weingart (1997); Shinn (1999); Crompton (2007)). The often-suggested historical order-that Mode 2 is contemporary, whereas Mode 1 is science's original form-has been contested. ...
... Other authors point to the need to further specify national and scientific disciplinary settings to do justice to the varied dynamics, challenging the universality of the proposed shift (Hicks and Katz 1996;Weingart 1997;Albert 2003;Tuunainen 2005). The lack of empirical evidence supporting the claim of the general rise of Mode 2 applies to the social sciences in particular. ...
The 'Mode 2' approach is among the most widely used to analyze changes in contemporary science and innovation systems. This approach suggests that application-driven, transdisciplinary, reflexive , and contextualized scientific knowledge will be produced by an increasingly heterogeneous set of organizations, with universities no longer as dominant. Analyzing the case of educational research (ER) in Germany, which has undergone profound institutional and paradigmatic change since 2000, allows us to ask whether the Mode 2 thesis holds. Considerable investments in 'empir-ical' research and the top-down setting of the research agenda have, we argue, fundamentally altered the research infrastructure of this increasingly diverse multidisciplinary field, challenging the traditional humanities-based P€ adagogik. Especially based on waves of large-scale assessments of school performance, the rapidly-growing 'empirical' ER field is characterized by quantitative and policy-relevant (applied) knowledge claims. Finally, we identify risks associated with rapid and policy-induced shifts in ER from Mode 1 to Mode 2.
... To do so, we classified organisational actors into five institutional groups. The classification of institutional groups is based on the idiosyncrasies of the research activity performed by the different typologies of organisational actors, on the basis of the classification provided by Hicks and Katz (1996). However, we revised the classification of Hicks and Katz (1996) and merged some institutional groups that have similar dynamics when involved in research activities. ...
... The classification of institutional groups is based on the idiosyncrasies of the research activity performed by the different typologies of organisational actors, on the basis of the classification provided by Hicks and Katz (1996). However, we revised the classification of Hicks and Katz (1996) and merged some institutional groups that have similar dynamics when involved in research activities. As outlined and detailed in Table 2, these groups include GOV and NGO organisations; HC providers (i.e. ...
This paper extends our understanding of how institutional logics contribute to inter-organisational collaboration formation during the emergence of a technology. We classify organisations into five institutional groups-Government (GOV), Healthcare (HC), Industry (IND), Non-Governmental (NGO), and Research and Higher Education (RHE). We then examine the extent to which collaborative relationships within (homophily) and across (heterophily) these groups shape network dynamics. We focus on an emerging technology, namely, microneedles, and estimate a series of Exponential Random Graphs Models (ERGMs) using publication co-authorship data. Our analysis provides evidence that institutional homophily contributes to the formation of inter-organisational ties-indicating that organisational actors tend to establish ties within their group rather than across different groups. However, the impact of this mechanism varies across groups and phases of technological emergence. In the early development stages, institutional homophily drives the formation of homo-philous ties within the GOV and IND groups, where collaborations focus on basic technical challenges. This is followed by the HC group, where collaborations centre around clinical applications. In the later development stages, homophily continues to influence the formation of intra-group ties among the GOV, IND, HC, and NGO groups, with collaborations expanding to clinical applications and informing decision-making processes.
... Crowds are wise when their members have access to independent data 13 or utilize independent methods 14 to derive their answers, but they falter when engaged in centralized communication 15,16 and share prior experience, knowledge and methods 17 . By contrast, modern science is characterized by intensive and repeated collaboration [18][19][20] , increasingly large 21,22 and distributed teams 23 , star scientists 24,25 , canonical citations [26][27][28] and expensive shared equipment 18,20 . ...
... Crowds are wise when their members have access to independent data 13 or utilize independent methods 14 to derive their answers, but they falter when engaged in centralized communication 15,16 and share prior experience, knowledge and methods 17 . By contrast, modern science is characterized by intensive and repeated collaboration [18][19][20] , increasingly large 21,22 and distributed teams 23 , star scientists 24,25 , canonical citations [26][27][28] and expensive shared equipment 18,20 . ...
The growth of published science in recent years has escalated the difficulty that human and algorithmic agents face in reasoning over prior knowledge to select the next experiment. This challenge is increased by uncertainty about the reproducibility of published findings. The availability of massive digital archives, machine reading, extraction tools and automated high-throughput experiments allows us to evaluate these challenges computationally at scale and identify novel opportunities to craft policies that accelerate scientific progress. Here we demonstrate a Bayesian calculus that enables positive prediction of robust scientific claims with findings extracted from published literature, weighted by scientific, social and institutional factors demonstrated to increase replicability. Illustrated with the case of gene regulatory interactions, our approach automatically estimates and counteracts sources of bias, revealing that scientifically focused but socially and institutionally diverse research activity is most likely to replicate. This results in updated certainty about the literature, which accurately predicts robust scientific facts on which new experiments should build. Our findings allow us to identify and evaluate policy recommendations for scientific institutions that may increase robust scientific knowledge, including sponsorship of increased diversity of and independence between investigations of any particular scientific phenomenon, and diversity of scientific phenomena investigated.
... Table 1 presents these eight thematic subfields as well as the number of papers identified for each one, their key ideas, and selected papers that we believe to be exemplars of each thematic area. -Rigor and relevance of the academic production -How to improve utilization of academic research -Development of socially relevant research -Usefulness of academic research Thomas and Tymon (1982) Daft and Lewin (1990) Pettigrew ( -University missions -Cooperation between university and public sector -Cooperation between university and industry -Public-private partnerships Faulkner and Senker (1994) Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff (1998; Godin and Gingras (2000) Barnes et al. (2002) Shinn (2002 Knowledge utilization 78 (15%) -Knowledge utilization -Social relevance of knowledge generated in the academy -Research outcomes to innovation, patents and policies Beyer and Trice (1982) Corwin and Louis (1982) Mansfield (1991) Nicolai (2004 Debackere and Veugelers (2005) Knowledge generation 65 (13%) -Nature of management and organizational knowledge and implications for practice -Knowledge generation in society -Scientific versus technological knowledge Whitley (1984aWhitley ( , 1984b Bailey and Ford (1996) Hicks and Katz (1996) Tsoukas (1994 Anderson et al. (2001) Bartunek (2007) Mode 1/mode 2 knowledge production 31 (6%) -Traditional versus new production knowledge systems -Mode 1/mode 2 knowledge production -Challenges for mode 2 knowledge production Gibbons (1999Gibbons ( , 2000 Starkey ( Bresnen and Burrell (2012) These eight thematic subfields do not represent a strict classification of scientific publications addressing the social relevance of management research. Rather, they can be considered as capturing nuances of the debate over the social relevance of management research. ...
... Gibbons et al. (1994) criticized the traditional and dominant knowledge production system (mode 1), which prioritizes rigor, and proposed an alternative system (mode 2) that is more concerned with the social implications of knowledge, giving priority to relevance. Their proposal has been met with both appreciation and criticism over the years (e.g., Hicks and Katz 1996;Ziman 1996;Weingart 1997;Godin 1998;Pestre 2003;Bresnen and Burrell 2012). ...
In the last decade, there has been growing interest in the subject of the social relevance of management research, which has been followed by a burgeoning scientific literature. This study contributes by mapping this vast territory. We performed a two-step bibliometric study. First, we conducted a general literature review covering the subject of the social relevance of management research that yielded 517 papers. Those papers were then classified into eight thematic subfields: rigor versus relevance, university-industry-government collaboration, knowledge generation, knowledge utilization, basic versus applied research, role of business schools, researcher-practitioner collaboration, and mode 1/mode 2 knowledge production. Second, we took the mode 1/mode 2 knowledge production subfield, given its influence in the advancement of socially relevant research, and conducted a citation network analysis. Among other outcomes, this analysis yielded 701 papers and identified the top citers (those who offer an overview of the literature), top citees (those who made seminal contributions to the field) and the main path through the network (the trajectory of development for the literature in the field since the 1950s). Our conclusion is that although the mode 2 knowledge production thesis has preeminence as a frame for guiding research projects that are relevant to society, it still lacks empirical evidence. Future research should therefore address this gap.
... It was proposed in the 1960s by Weinberg (1961) and Price (1963) after the big research projects that took place in the US during the Second World War, like the famous Manhattan project which resulted in the development of the first atomic bomb. However, in recent decades the term big science has increased its popularity with the emergence of more and more projects that fit with this idea (Etzkowitz;Kemelgor, 1998;Hicks;Katz, 1996;Knorr-Cetina, 1999). Thus, both academics and research funding agencies have an increased interest in better understanding the structures and characteristics of big science collaborations. ...
... It was proposed in the 1960s by Weinberg (1961) and Price (1963) after the big research projects that took place in the US during the Second World War, like the famous Manhattan project which resulted in the development of the first atomic bomb. However, in recent decades the term big science has increased its popularity with the emergence of more and more projects that fit with this idea (Etzkowitz;Kemelgor, 1998;Hicks;Katz, 1996;Knorr-Cetina, 1999). Thus, both academics and research funding agencies have an increased interest in better understanding the structures and characteristics of big science collaborations. ...
Nowadays big scientific experiments require large organizations and hundreds of researchers who participate from several institutions. An interesting, yet rarely studied aspect of this new kind of scientific enterprise is the internal collaboration between the members of the participating institutions. Here we assess this matter in one of the most well-known examples of big science: The ATLAS experiment at CERN. Applying different network analysis techniques to data from internal CERN databases, we have identified several collaboration patterns in the experiment. We observe, on the one hand, the high level of collaboration between the institutions represented in ATLAS, higher than the average in the field of physics, and we identify the key institutions in the collaboration network. On the other hand, we notice that the collaboration network does not follow a scale-free or power-law model, contrary to what happens in other studied collaboration networks in physics and other areas. Finally, we observe that geographic distance between two institutions does not seem to affect the probability of establishing collaboration relationships, in contrast also to what happens in other kinds of collaboration networks.
... Collaboration is held as something to be encouraged 4 , and over the years there has in fact been a trend towards its increase. Hicks and Katz (1996) examined UK publications in the period 1981-1991, and showed that, not only did the number of co-authors per article increase but also that the number of institutionally co-authored publications increased, both as a number and as a percentage of the total. In 1994, 88% of all UK academic publications involved two or more authors and 55% involved two or more institutions (Katz, 2000). ...
Policy makers, at various levels of governance, generally encourage the development of research collaboration. However the underlying determinants of collaboration are not completely clear. In particular, the literature lacks studies that, taking the individual researcher as the unit of analysis, attempt to understand if and to what extent the researcher's scientific performance might impact on his/her degree of collaboration with foreign colleagues. The current work examines the international collaborations of Italian university researchers for the period 2001-2005, and puts them in relation to each individual's research performance. The results of the investigation, which assumes co-authorship as proxy of research collaboration, show that both research productivity and average quality of output have positive effects on the degree of international collaboration achieved by a scientist.
... Indeed, collaboration constitutes an intrinsic feature of scientific research, to the extent that is probably more a need than a choice (Beaver & Rosen, 1978). It is no accident that over time, the resort to collaboration in research has systematically increased (Hicks & Katz, 1996;Wuchty et al., 2007;Schmoch & Schubert, 2008). Collaborations at the international level have also registered a constant increase (Zitt & Bassecoulard, 2004;Archibugi & Coco, 2004). ...
The practice of collaboration, and particularly international collaboration, is becoming ever more widespread in scientific research, and is likewise receiving greater interest and stimulus from policy-makers. However, the relation between research performance and degree of internationalization at the level of single researchers still presents unresolved questions. The present work, through a bibliometric analysis of the entire Italian university population working in the hard sciences over the period 2001-2005, seeks to answer some of these questions. The results show that the researchers with top performance with respect to their national colleagues are also those who collaborate more abroad, but that the reverse is not always true. Also, interesting differences emerge at the sectorial level. Finally, the effect of the nation involved in the international partnership plays a role that should not be ignored.
... Scientists are integral members of society, they construct knowledge within their scientific communities while being employed by various social institutions. As demonstrated by Hicks and Katz (1996), using bibliometric data from the modern UK research system, scientific knowledge is generated not only within universities but also through collaborations with non-university institutions such as medical organizations, industrial laboratories, research councils, and other government facilities. This work influences societal development and the lives of the public (Allchin, 2011;Dagher & Erduran, 2016;Martins, 2016). ...
This paper presents the findings of a validation study for an instrument designed to assess the views on the non-epistemic nature of science (NE-NOS) among pre-service physics teachers (PSPTs). Despite the acknowledged significance of the nature of science (NOS), research has predominantly focused on its epistemological aspects, sidelining non-epistemological facets that encompass contextual, social, and psychological dimensions relevant to science and its practitioners. Drawing from a comprehensive literature review within science education research, we developed a construct map describing three underlying components of NE-NOS. This construct map forms the basis for a proposed hypothetical progression outlining the developmental stages of PSPTs’ views on NE-NOS, categorized as naïve, mixed, and informed. The items comprising the NE-NOS assessment adopt an ordered multiple-choice format, where each response option reflects a specific level of views on NE-NOS. Results from a validation study involving 309 PSPTs demonstrate robust reliability and validity through Rasch analysis, corroborated by evidence in internal scale validity, construct validity, concurrent validity, and response process validity. The evaluation of PSPTs using the instrument reveals a prevailing mixed level of views on NE-NOS. The implications of the NE-NOS instrument for enhancing theoretical understanding of NOS and NOS-based teacher training are discussed. In conclusion, the NE-NOS assessment validly measures PSPTs’ NE-NOS views and could serve as a valuable tool for raising awareness of NE-NOS. Researchers and teacher educators can utilize it as a diagnostic instrument to study the effects of NOS education.
... Any WoS-indexed journal is assigned to a SC, but can also be assigned to multiple categories, which is known as multiple assignment (Morillo et al., 2001). Most journals are assigned to one SC, and some journals are linked to two or more SCs (Hicks & Katz, 1996;Leydesdorff & Cozzens, 1993). Although there are some criticisms of WoS's SC being imperfect and too old (developed 40 years ago), its classification being done manually, and its algorithm not being made public (Boyack et al., 2005;Loet Leydesdorff, 2006;Leydesdorff & Cozzens, 1993), the majority of researchers use search results from WoS database as their data source when carrying out bibliometric studies (Waltman & van Eck, 2012). ...
Nowadays, research in second language acquisition (SLA) is becoming increasingly interdisciplinary while many technical frontiers and research hotspots have emerged. Many studies focus on interdisciplinary topics, but few in-depth studies have been conducted on interdisciplinarity. This study examined the interdisciplinarity of SLA and the interdisciplinary development process using a bibliometrics approach. The study has found that the SLA discipline has played roles as both the provider and recipient of knowledge in the development of interdisciplines. In the first case, SLA theories and methods flow into the research areas of life sciences and technology to form interdisciplinary studies with brain research, neurology, cognition, computer technology, and engineering, making SLA a provider of knowledge In the second case, SLA research receives knowledge from areas of arts and humanities and social sciences as well as from interdisciplinary studies within its own discipline, making SLA a receiver of knowledge. The new insights into the interdisciplinarity of SLA provided in this study are helpful for our deeper understanding of the interdisciplinary nature of the SLA discipline.
... ITD institutes and networks play an enabling role for individuals and institutions, by providing structure as well as symbolic and material support to university change makers (Bolger 2021a, b;Norton et al. 2022). Research centres on urban sustainability are found to be one main institutional response to the quest for ITD research (Hicks and Katz 1996) and have enormously helped the early development of interdisciplinary research (Bozeman and Boardman 2003). They display huge variability in goals, functions, organisational structures, and underlying activities (Sá 2008). ...
Inter/transdisciplinarity (ITD) is a pillar of sustainability studies, often presented as the way to conduct research and practice especially in conflictual and politicised real-world stakeholder constellations. Several studies emphasise the need to consider the communicative processes through which it is put into practice. However, there is still a dearth of research that explores the meanings key actors associate with ITD and how they account for the material, practical and communicative facets of their everyday experience. This work seeks to collect the voice of leaders of inter/transdisciplinary research centres, identify shared repertoires used to interpret their experience in the field, and reflect on how shared narratives could inspire or impede researchers engaged in ITD. A discursive analysis was applied to 23 semi-structured interviews conducted with leaders of research centres on urban sustainability. Results identified diverse interpretative repertoires used to define ITD and to interpret the barriers that, in the eyes of these key actors, have to be crossed to become ITD researchers. These elements are combined into three main narratives used by participants to position themselves and the researchers involved in ITD. Despite being functional to self-representation, these shared narratives contribute towards depicting ITD as an individual escape, and interdisciplinary research centres as sanctuaries of a sort, thus paradoxically preserving the status quo. A third narrative advocates structural shifts and is coherent with the need for deeper changes and persistent recognition of ITD in sustainability studies.
... The first scientific paper published by cooperation appeared in 1665 (Luukkonen et al., 1992), and since then the cooperation of knowledge production has been a growing fashion in academia. Evidence from the UK showed that the average number of journal paper authors increased from 2.63 in 1981 to 3.34 in 1991, the number of institutions for each paper increased from 1.19 to 1.28, and the number of countries for every paper increased from 1.17 to 1.25 (Hicks & Katz, 1996). At the broad field level, most fields have witnessed an upward trend of research cooperation though their publication habitus is utterly different. ...
Based on the data of 1882 Chinese doctoral students in social science fields, this study examined the initial placement of PhD holders in the academic labor market. Findings indicate the research network of doctorate holders is significantly related to their academic career identity attainment. There was an inverted U-shape curve between the research network scale and the probability of pursuing an academic career. Those occupying more structural hole locations were more likely to choose an academic career. However, neither the scale nor location of the research network could guarantee a faculty position in a prestigious university or department. No significant correlation was found between the research network and academic career status attainment.
... Despite the absence of an equivalent, systematic study, the literature points to similar conclusions for European countries, confirming the growth of the size of teams and the expansion of inter-institutional and interdisciplinary collaborations (Hicks and Katz, 1996a;Grossetti and Milard, 2003;Sandström and Wadskog, 2005). ...
... Most inventors are highly qualified workers that master a small set of specific knowledge and have become a part of a larger group to access complementary capabilities from other highly qualified inventors. In fact, scientific team size (Wuchty et al. 2007) and academic co-authorship (Hicks and Katz 1996;Adams et al. 2005) are presently growing. The cooperative behavior of inventors is thus enlightened. ...
This paper uses a unique database that combines Brazilian patent data and personal microdata on formal employees from 2000 to 2011 to study the effect of inventor’s individual attributes on the propensity to cooperate. Our main contributions derive from (1) using a dominance coefficient decomposition to examine each individual’s returns based on the non-explicit hierarchy of the link and (2) finding what attributes inventors take into consideration when seeking working partnerships. The main results reveal that inventors tend to collaborate with others with similar educational background and centrality level, and there is a great likelihood of connectivity if educational and centrality levels are high. The dominance coefficient decomposition revealed that a type of social hierarchy emerges in the network.
... The reasons for such a rise are varied. Interdisciplinary research may be regarded as: the result of changes associated with knowledge-based economies (Hicks and Katz, 1996); a necessary turn away from reductionist approaches to scientific progress (Lessard, 2007); a response to the challenges of an increasingly complex world (Latour, 1998) an approach to refine tools for practical work (Hukkinen, 2003); or a complementary element to ongoing specialisation in knowledge production (Weingart, 2000). Formerly unchallenged knowledge and expertise hierarchies may be called into question by a wide array of scientific communities and the public (Klein, 1996). ...
Introduction:
Interdisciplinary approaches are necessary today for meeting the most critical and complex technological and socio-cultural challenges of knowledge sharing in the world. This paper aims at investigating a doctoral course that took place at Uppsala University in autumn semester 2018.
Objetives:
The purpose of the study is to describe the processes of joint learning of doctoral students, on their pathway in exploring multi- and interdisciplinary research.
Methods:
The qualitative approach was used, literature studies, inquires, observations, focus group discussions, interviews and course evaluations with students as well as documentation over the course design were all used as empirical sources.
Results:
The major implication of the study is that the course gave students a possibility to deepen their understanding over the both barriers and benefits of multi- and transdisciplinary research by interacting and discussing with co-students and teachers from different disciplines.
Conclusions:
It is suggested in this study, though, that multi- and interdisciplinarity and even undisciplinarity can be the way of co-operating cross the disciplines, learning collectively and creating value for researchers in both solving big problems, in creating something new and innovative, finding solutions and future development for the world. The task for educators and learning agents as well as policy makers is to facilitate participative and systemic critical learning systems and situations where these conditions can be realized.
... In a review by Rhoten (2004), it was found that some analysts claim that academic science has already embraced the idea of consilience and that a transformation is well underway from the traditional manner of doing research -homogeneous, disciplinary, hierarchical -to a new approach that is heterogeneous, interdisciplinary, horizontal, and fluid (for example, Cooke, 1998;Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 1998;Gibbons et al., 1994). Others, however, suggest that the university's metamorphosis toward interdisciplinarity is nowhere as far along as those in the first camp maintain (for example, Hakala & Ylijoki, 2001;Hicks & Katz, 1996;Slaughter & Leslie, 1997). In fact, some would even argue that there is no empirical evidence of any fundamental change encompassing the university science system (Shinn, 1999;Weingart, 1997). ...
Based on empirical studies carrying a common thread of design creativity as well as systemic analysis, interdisciplinarity's fostering of innovation is exemplified. The studies illustrate contexts for systems perspectives in design. A lot of transformation in socio-economic systems is taking place, individuals have a choice to either react to it as it happens or attempt to take the lead on change and position themselves in the frontline or ahead of the fundamental changes that are bound to occur. Designers are well versed in the knowledge and skills necessary to lead this transformational process, requiring forward looking, focusing on problems, working across disciplines, participating in teams and leading by example and inspiration, while adopting a systems perspective and focusing on people. Systemic analysis triggers design work, through the development of solutions, as illustrated in the two cases. One concerns sustainable solutions for water management in a community. The other focuses on the production system for a Portuguese semi-artisanal certified cheese.
... According to Boix Mansilla et al. (2000, p. 219), interdisciplinarity is defined as "[t]he capacity to integrate knowledge and modes of thinking in two or more disciplines or established areas of expertise to produce a cognitive advancement-such as explaining a phenomenon, solving a problem, or creating a product-in ways that would have been impossible or unlikely through single disciplinary means." A number of scholars believe that interdisciplinarity holds forth great promise in so far as it helps teaching and research connect strands of knowledge with a view to improving our understanding of complex, multifaceted dynamics (Klein, 1990;Hicks and Katz, 1996;Spelt et al., 2009;Jones, 2010). ...
The world needs a systemic transformation from a social, economic and environmental point of view in order to deal with present and future challenges, which are crosscutting in nature. Education and research can become powerful drivers for this radical change, provided they can break free from narrow disciplinary approaches and cultivate the interconnectedness of knowledge. With a view to repurposing teaching and research toward an integrated approach, Italy has introduced a number of reforms, including a mandatory module for all schools and an interdisciplinary course for universities, largely modeled on the interdisciplinary concept of sustainability. Italy was the first country in the world to do so and the news had resonance throughout the globe, indicating a thirst for innovative methods in education and research. This article discusses the approach and the obstacles faced, with the aim of encouraging debate over its structure and contents and potentially replicating its implementation in other parts of the world.
LINK to ARTICLE [OPEN ACCESS] https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frsus.2021.631610/full
... The task of fund raising for projects has become vital for research to be pursued and must be managed. Third, there is also increasing collaboration between researchers (Hicks and Katz, 1997;Ravetz, 1996). This is a collective activity that calls for more planning of research, increasing leadership activities, distribution of tasks and co-ordination of staff. ...
This article discusses how management could be used in promoting creativity in academic research. First, research management is introduced with the observation that management often creates tension in academic research. Second, a comprehensive research management model is presented as a tool for analysis. Third, studies of creative and innovative working groups are applied to academic research management. Finally, a conclusion is drawn with six implications for the improvement of creativity supported by research management.
... Specifically, in the Web of Science, one of the major bibliographic databases from the publisher of IF, the journals such as Nature, Science and PNAS are classified in a category called "multidisciplinary". This name can be confusing, because it is not that the individual articles in those journals are necessarily multidisciplinary themselves, rather these journals carry disciplinary articles from a large number of disciplines (Hicks & Katz, 1996;Katz & Hicks, 1995;Waltman & van Eck, 2012). . ...
Nature, Science, and PNAS are the three most prestigious general-science journals, and Nature and Science are among the most influential journals overall, based on the journal Impact Factor (IF). In this paper we perform automatic classification of ~50,000 articles in these journals (published in the period 2005-2015) into 14 broad areas, to explore disciplinary profiles and to determine their field-specific IFs. We find that in all three journals the articles from Bioscience, Astronomy, and Geosciences are over-represented, with other areas being under-represented, some of them severely. Discipline-specific IFs in these journals vary greatly, for example, between 18 and 46 for Nature. We find that the areas that have the highest disciplinary IFs are not the ones that contribute the most articles. We also find that publishing articles in these three journals brings prestige for articles in all areas, but at different levels, the least being for Astronomy. Comparing field-specific IFs of Nature, Science and PNAS to other top journals in six largest areas (Bioscience, Medicine, Geosciences, Physics, Astronomy, and Chemistry) these three journals are always among the top seven journals, with Nature being at the very top for all fields except in Medicine.
... For decades, the knowledge within the framework of scientific communication and the effectiveness and expediency of this scientific communication system have been the subject of debate in the scientific community (Simon et al., 2010), in which it is repeatedly questioned and described as being of limited suitability (Brembs, 2013;Havemann, 2002;Hicks & Katz, 1996;Hornbostel, 1997;Warnke, 2012). The challenges in the existing system of formal scientific communication relate primarily to nine aspects: ...
Although opening up of research is considered an appropriate and trend-setting model for future scientific communication, it can still be difficult to put open science into practice. How open and transparent can a scientific work be? This article investigates the potential to make all information and the whole work process of a qualification project such as a doctoral thesis comprehensively and freely accessible on the internet with an open free license both in the final form and completely traceable in development. The answer to the initial question, the self-experiment and the associated demand for openness, posed several challenges for a doctoral student, the institution, and the examination regulations, which are still based on the publication of an individually written and completed work that cannot be viewed by the public during the creation process. In the case of data and other documents, publication is usually not planned even after completion. This state of affairs in the use of open science in the humanities will be compared with open science best practices in the physical sciences. The reasons and influencing factors for open developments in science and research are presented, empirically and experimentally tested in the development of the first completely open humanities-based PhD thesis. The results of this two-part study show that it is possible to publish everything related to the doctoral study, qualification, and research process as soon as possible, as comprehensively as possible, and under an open license.
... Specifically, in the Web of Science, one of the major bibliographic databases from the publisher of IF, the journals such as Nature, Science and PNAS are classified in a category called "multidisciplinary". This name can be confusing, because it is not that the individual articles in those journals are necessarily multidisciplinary themselves, rather these journals carry disciplinary articles from a large number of disciplines (Hicks and Katz 1996;Katz and Hicks 1995;Waltman and van Eck 2012). ...
Nature, Science, and PNAS are the three most prestigious general-science journals, and Nature and Science are among the most influential journals overall, based on the journal Impact Factor (IF). In this paper we perform automatic classification of ~ 50,000 articles in these journals (published in the period 2005–2015) into 14 broad areas, to explore disciplinary profiles of these journals and to determine their field-specific IFs. We find that in all three journals the articles from Bioscience, Astronomy, and Geosciences are over-represented, with other areas being under-represented, some of them severely. Discipline-specific IFs in these journals vary greatly, for example, between 18 and 46 for Nature. We find that the areas that have the highest disciplinary IFs are not the ones that contribute the most articles. We also find that publishing articles in these three journals brings the prestige for articles in all areas, but at different levels, the least being for Astronomy. Comparing field-specific IFs of Nature, Science and PNAS to other top journals in six largest areas (Bioscience, Medicine, Geosciences, Physics, Astronomy, and Chemistry) these three journals are always among the top seven journals, with Nature being at the very top for all fields except in Medicine.
... Ezz et al (2006) have highlighted the need of transdisciplinary research in the context of large scale ICT and information systems projects. Bruce et al (2004) highlight Hicks and Katz (1996) arguments concerning increasing calls for more interdisciplinary approaches to problems, along with encouragement for greater collaboration and networking among institutions and researchers. Such encouragement is often based on the assumption that the research will contribute to more effective innovation and enhanced competitiveness. ...
Aim International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research is a double peer-reviewed online journal which publishes original research papers, Review and theoretical manuscripts. This journal provides immediate open access to its content, on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. To ensure that information, practices, problems and suggestions regarding education, training and social sciences are presented, discussed and delivered to the parties on a scientific, academic and theoretical basis. Scope Articles in the field of education and social sciences are featured in the IJSSER. The articles take into account the criteria of being based on research, contributing to the field, revealing practical problems, and examining new and different developments. In order for research, review and review articles to be published in IJSSER, they must not have been previously published in another publication or accepted for publication. In the papers presented at scientific meetings such as symposiums or congresses, the name, place and date of the scientific meeting should be specified. The name of the organization that provides support in studies supported by a research institution or organization; name of the project, date (if any), number and number should be mentioned.
... One important finding two decades ago is that journals focusing on physics published the greatest number of NST publications, followed by interdisciplinary journals (Meyer & Persson, 1998). The search involved articles with the prefix nano in their titles between 1991 and 1996 retrieved from the Science Citation Index, distributing them according to the journal classification scheme proposed by Hicks and Katz (1996). Schummer (2004) ran a co-author analysis of over 600 articles published in nano journals in 2002 and 2003. ...
Proper field delineation plays an important role in scientometric studies, although it is a tough task. Based on an emerging and interdisciplinary field nanoscience and nanotechnology– this paper highlights the problem of field delineation. First we review the related literature. Then, three different approaches to delineate a field of knowledge were applied at three different levels of aggregation: subject category, publication level, and journal level. Expert opinion interviews served to assess the data, and precision and recall of each approach were calculated for comparison. Our findings confirm that field delineation is a complicated issue at both the quantitative and the qualitative level, even when experts validate results.
... One important finding two decades ago is that journals focusing on physics published the greatest number of NST publications, followed by interdisciplinary journals (Meyer & Persson, 1998). The search involved articles with the prefix nano in their titles between 1991 and 1996 retrieved from the Science Citation Index, distributing them according to the journal classification scheme proposed by Hicks & Katz (1996). ...
Proper field delineation plays an important role in scientometric studies, although it is a tough task. Based on an emerging and interdisciplinary field-nanoscience and nanotechnology-this paper highlights the problem of field delineation. First we review the related literature. Then, three different approaches to delineate a field of knowledge were applied at three different levels of aggregation: subject category, publication level, and journal level. Expert opinion interviews served to assess the data, and precision and recall of each approach were calculated for comparison. Our findings confirm that field delineation is a complicated issue at both the quantitative and the qualitative level, even when experts validate results. Highlights: This study offers an updated literature review of NST as a delineated field. We provide an extended and unified NST search strategy suitable for two databases, Scopus and Web of Science. After formulating a conceptual framework as to how to employ different approaches described in the literature, we tried to delineate the NST field at the journal level through a seven-step procedure. Three approaches-at subject category, publication and journal levels-were adopted to explore and analyze these two databases. The results are compared, and we offer a detailed explanation of the topics related to the journals included in each level. At the publication level, we compare the potential of the micro-field classification system developed by Waltman and van Eck (2012) with the other two approaches. Finally, we examine our findings in the light of NST expert opinions to assess the reliability of the results. The findings of this survey confirm certain problems inherent to field delineation at the quantitative and qualitative levels, especially when dealing with interdisciplinary fields
... ICT applications are essential components of scientific and technical R&D activities [11] In the history of mankind, technology has detained a key to political and economic power. The forces with which industrial age technologies altered the world are clearly visible from printing press to jet engine. ...
In the globalized environment, the economic growth significantly depends on the countries capacity to develop, to apply new technologies and vice versa. Diffusion of information communication technologies is a global phenomenon. Despite of rapid globalization there are considerable differences between nations in terms of adoption and usage of new technologies. This paper aims to draw together the highly eclectic literature on the diffusion of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Innovation in order to know what have been done, highlight the generic issues, relevant to policy and will initiate further research and develop potential opportunities. This paper also highlight the low level and high level income countries data and ICT policies frame work to draw conclusions and some case studies as an example. The objective is to review the finding the social economic factor for diffusion of ICT Innovation to make policy recommendation for the development of the country.
... Such perceived decline of industrial research contrasts with the thesis of Gibbons et al. [9] who, more than two decades ago, heralded the demise of the academic control of science-and the corresponding rise of other sectors' research activities. While several studies have since sought to demonstrate the central role of universities, as well as the contribution of other sectors to the production of knowledge [10,11,12,13,14,15], they have failed to provide historical or global trends. This paper addresses this gap by providing a historical analysis of institutional sectors' basic and applied research production across the past four decades, using scholarly articles and utility patents as evidence of this production. ...
Anecdotes abound regarding the decline of basic research in industrial and governmental settings, but very little empirical evidence exists about the phenomenon. This article provides a systematic and historical analysis of the contribution of various institutional sectors to knowledge production at the world and country levels across the past four decades. It highlights a dramatic decline in the diffusion of basic research by industrial and governmental sectors across all countries—with a corresponding increase in the share from universities—as well as an increase of partnerships between universities and other sectors. Results also shows an increase in the relative share of industries in applied research, as measured through patents. Such divergence in university and industry research activities may hinder industries’ ability to translate basic knowledge into technological innovation, and could lead to a growing misalignment between doctoral training and future job expectations. Industries and universities must rethink strategies for partnerships and publishing to maximize scientific progress and to ensure the greatest gains for society.
... Professional cultural differences (Davidson et al. 2001;Evely et al. 2008;Pohl et al. 2010;Schein 2010) can play out within a research project in ways that frustrate and disincentivize both parties (Hicks and Katz 1996;Melin 2000). Scientists, who are generally rewarded for research outputs, may wish to move slowly through the research in order to focus on publishable outputs. ...
This review paper addresses the challenging question of “how to” design and implement co-production of knowledge in climate science and other environmental and agricultural sciences. Based on a grounded theory review of nine (9) published case studies of transdisciplinary and collaborative research projects, the paper offers a set of common themes regarding specific components and processes for the design, implementation, and achievement of co-production of knowledge work, which represent the “Modus Operandi” of knowledge co-production. The analysis focuses on practical methodological guidance based on lessons from how different research teams have approached the challenges of complex collaborative research. We begin by identifying broad factors or actions that inhibit or facilitate the process, then highlight specific practices associated with co-production of knowledge and necessary competencies for undertaking co-production. We provide insights on issues such as the integration of social and professional cultures, gender and social equity, and power dynamics, and illustrate the different ways in which researchers have addressed these issues. By exploring the specific practices involved in knowledge co-production, this paper provides guidance to researchers on how to navigate different possibilities of the process of conducting transdisciplinary and co-production of knowledge research projects that best fit their research context, stakeholder needs, and research team capacities.
... Further, these indicators have been increasingly applied in the 4 context of science policy and research evaluation . Hence, bibliometric indicators have been widely used to measure the performance of the 5 scientific community in general and to evaluate the scientific production of 6 a scientist or a scientific journal in particular . ...
The paper discusses a comparative study of h and g indices of prominent scientists from India in five
selected subject fields viz. Chemistry, Physics, Materials Science, Engineering and Medicine. It throws
light on various indices proposed by different scientists from 2006 to 2015. The analysis of the present
study is based on publications and citations data extracted from the Web of Science for the time span
1999-2014. It is evident from the study that almost all authors' g-index is higher than that of h-index.
The average g/h of all subjects' authors is around 1.5.
... The number of collaboration in science has been steadily increasing for decades [52,53]. This trend towards 'team science' has been particularly pronounced in the biological sciences, medicine and neuroscience [54]. ...
... We contend that these changes are, in large part, irreversible because they reflect a significant transformation in the nature of knowledge. We agree with Hicks and Katz [1996] that "research collaboration among geographically-separated institutions will become the normal way of conducting research-the rule, not the exception" (p. 394). ...
The realms of science and technology in the life sciences are converging through the commercialization of university research. Major changes in the mandate of research universities were facilitated by both federal legislation that has promoted technology transfer, and the increased reliance of business firms on university research and development (R&D). This article discusses the primary factors that are blurring the division of labor between industry and academia in the life sciences, and analyzes the consequences for universities of treating knowledge as intellectual property. Universities' efforts to enhance the commercial value of life sciences research is causing increased politicization of government research funding, a growing winner-take-all contest between the "have" and "have-not" universities, and subtle but potentially profound changes in the culture of academic research. INTRODUaiON Over the past decade there has been a remarkable shift in the division of labor between universities, industi^, and the federal government. In our view, this transformation is most pronounced in the life sciences and the commercial fields of medicine, pharmaceuticals, and biotechnology. The post-Cold War focus of federal science and technology policy on "competitiveness" has been noted by many observers, and the intensified interest in basic research and collaborative product development by large private corporations in various high-technology fields has been widely studied. But the accompanying change in the mandate of research universities toward a greater focus on commer-ciahzing research findings is much less understood. Our goal in this article is to enhance the understanding of the ways in which the relationship between universities and the private economy has changed, particularly in the life sciences. We highlight the primary forces that have blurred the traditionally distinct roles of the academy and industry, illustrating these trends with data from
... What we want to do here is to concentrate on the aspect of disciplinary and interdisciplinary research. It is without doubt that in recent years there has been a growing call for interdisciplinary research (Hicks and Katz 1996;Katz and Martin 1997;Cummings and Kiesler 2005;Jacobs and Frickel 2009), as testified for example by the clear call for integrated research approaches in the European Commission's Framework Programmes (Bruce et al. 2004;Breschi and Cusmano 2004;Maggioni et al. 2014). We thus want to analyse the longitudinal evolution of scientific research in Italian Academia by looking at disciplinary and interdisciplinary collaboration, to see if such calls have been followed by Italian scientists. ...
In sociology of science much attention is dedicated to the study of scientific networks, especially to co-authorship and citations in publications. Other trends of research have investigated the advantages, limits, performances and difficulties of interdisciplinary research, which is increasingly advocated by the main lines of public research funding. This paper explores the dynamics of interdisciplinary research in Italy over 10 years of scientific collaboration on research projects. Instead of looking at the output of research, i.e. publications, we analyse the original research proposals that have been funded by the Ministry of University and Research for a specific line of funding, the Research Projects of National Interest. In particular, we want to see how much interdisciplinary research has been conducted during the period under analysis and how changes in the overall amount of public funding might have affected disciplinary and interdisciplinary collaboration. We also want to cluster the similarities and differences of the amount of disciplinary and interdisciplinary collaboration across scientific disciplines, and see if it changes over time. Finally, we want to see if interdisciplinary projects receive an increasing share of funding compared to their disciplinary bounded counterparts. Our results indicate that while interdisciplinary research diminishes along the years, potentially responding to the contraction of public funding, research that cut across disciplinary boundaries overall receives more funding than research confined within disciplinary boundaries. Furthermore, the clustering procedure do not indicate clear and stable distinction between disciplines, but similar patterns of disciplinary and interdisciplinary collaboration are shown by discipline with common epistemological frameworks, which share compatible epistemologies of scientific investigations. We conclude by reflecting upon the implications of our findings for research policies and practices and by discussing future research in this area.
... Many journals are categorized into two or more Subject Categories. Moreover, Leydesdorff et al. (1994) and Hicks and Katz (1996) insisted that using Subject Category makes comparisons of trend difficult because it evolves. ...
Understanding the research trends and intellectual structure of nanoscience and nanotechnology (nano) is important for governments as well as researchers. This paper investigates the intellectual structure of nano field and explores its interdisciplinary characteristics through journal citation networks. The nano journal network, where 41 journals are nodes and citation among the journals are links, is constructed and analyzed using centrality measures and brokerage analysis. The journals that have high centrality scores are identified as important journals in terms of knowledge flow. Moreover, an intermediary role of each journal in exchanging knowledge between nano subareas is identified by brokerage analysis. Further, the nano subarea network is constructed and investigated from the macro view of nano field. This paper can provide the micro and macro views of intellectual structure of nano field and therefore help researchers who seek appropriate journals to acquire knowledge and governments who develop R&D strategies for nano.
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to examine the trends and impact of collaborative research in food science, highlighting the rise in collaborative efforts, especially in international partnerships, and their effects on research output and impact. This study delves into the evolving landscape of collaborative research in food science over the past one decade, using publication and citation data from Scopus.
Design/methodology/approach
The study uses a systematic analysis of publication and citation data from Scopus to track the development of collaborative research in food science. It evaluates academic-industry collaborations and assesses their performance in terms of impact and commercialization potential.
Findings
The findings reveal a significant increase in collaborative research efforts over the past one decade, which has led to enhanced research output and impact. Academic-industry collaborations outperform global averages in both impact and commercialization potential. Key drivers of collaboration include geographic and thematic proximity. Prolific author analysis identifies momentum areas for future exploration. The study also highlights the importance of robust research funding, despite existing funding disparities between universities and elite institutions. Private and multinational investments in R&D are on the rise, compensating for domestic funding limitations.
Practical implications
This study unveils the critical role of industry-academia synergy in driving food science innovation by quantifying the surge in partnerships and their impact on research outcomes. By benchmarking performance, identifying key drivers and barriers and exploring emerging research frontiers, it provides actionable insights for policymakers, industry stakeholders and funding agencies to optimize research investments, foster a thriving ecosystem and accelerate commercialization.
Originality/value
This study underscores the critical need for policy interventions to improve funding and strengthen academic–corporate interactions in food science. It provides valuable insights into the factors driving successful collaborations and the importance of sustained investment in research and development for advancing innovation and socio-economic well-being.
Non-technical summary
Transdisciplinary approaches for sustainability brings natural and social science researchers together with non researchers to fill gaps in scientific knowledge and catalyze change. By connecting diverse academic fields and sectors, it addresses complex problems and enables learning for problem solving. However, institutional barriers, funding constraints, time limitations, and evaluation criteria hinder collaborative progress. Our review reveals tensions at institutional and individual levels. Our findings underscore the significance of soft skills in assembling effective transdisciplinary teams. Embracing transdisciplinary science, as suggested by our review, can enhance problem-solving, and foster transformations for sustainability and resilience.
Technical summary
Sustainability challenges in the age of the Anthropocene require researchers and practitioners to collaborate across multiple academic disciplines and multiple professions outside of universities. In this paper we draw on theories of institutional logics to explore how those involved in transdisciplinary environmental research and practice draw on particular sets of values and norms but encounter challenges to collaboration. These institutional logics include (among others) seeking societal/environmental impact, commercial objectives, and academic knowledge generation. In this paper we review the growing literature on the research experience of transdisciplinarity in sustainability; discuss the processes of managing such research; and present a framework that outlines the challenges and tensions at each stage of the innovation/research process. We set out an agenda for managing tension that calls for recognizing the challenges, learning how to work with tensions, and building capabilities for future careers involving transdisciplinary research. The paper shows a key competence or skill for transdisciplinarians is the ability to develop complex collaborative relationships for sustainability drawing together different institutional logics, approaches, methods, goals, and values.
Social media summary
Transdisciplinary science: bridging disciplines, solving challenges. Soft skills and collaboration key to success.
The system of innovation, which was introduced in the 1980's, includes a wide range of concepts that have been increasingly considered by researchers due to the increasing importance of innovation. The purpose of this study is to obtain the intellectual structure of innovation systems through topic modeling. Topic modeling is a statistical tool for extracting concepts from the body of large texts. Through topic modeling, a large number of documents can be examined and concepts that were not previously considered can be obtained. For this purpose, 3513 researches, related to innovation systems that are available in the web of science database, have been used. In the first step, to apply natural language processing algorithms to research abstracts, their text must be analyzable for the computer. Hence, research abstracts need to be pre-processed. Then, using LDA and Mallet methods, topic modeling is performed, during which all researches are divided into 13 topics. Then, using Pcoa algorithm, it is concluded that the subjects of sustainability transition, technological and energy innovation system and agricultural innovation system, as well as issues of triple helix, innovation system measurement, innovation ecosystem and regional innovation system have some common points in their theories. Innovation policy literature and the national innovation system are also basic subjects in this area. In the next stage, using the time trend of subjects and Mann-Kendall statistical test, the subjects of issues of sustainability transition, technological and energy innovation system, agricultural innovation system, innovation measurement and innovation ecosystem have upward trend. In contrast, subject of firm behavior in innovation system, national system Innovation, regional innovation system and sectoral innovation system have downward trend. In addition, the issues of innovation networks and technological cooperation, health innovation system, triple helix and innovation policy have random trends. These results indicate that concepts of the innovation system are of interest to researchers that identify processes, dynamics, systems and technology in the innovation system. As a result, policymakers or stakeholders in this field should pay special attention to these concepts.
This is a qualitative empirical study of the governance of nanotechnologies and nanosciences that explores decision making and the decision-making processes in thelight of the emergence of a novel technology and scientific field in Sweden, Finland and the UK. The study, which took place between 2008 and 2011, particularly utilised Gibbons et al. and Rip’s models for science governance, the Mode 1/Mode 2 theses, and Arie Rip’s Strategic Science, alongside thinking around the Knowledge-based Economy as a springboard to examine a selection of characteristics related to organisational diversity and social accountability in decision-making. The data was collected through 42 semi-structured interviews held with 46 actors involved with nanotechnologies and nanosciences related decision-making in the three countries. Additionally, a case study utilising interpretative phenomenological analysis was conducted to capture more detailed accounts of the experiences of three interviewees concerning their participation in decision-making. 'The main conclusions drawn from this study is that the decision-making processes and policy outcomes were very different in the three countries, despite their similarities in terms of socio-economic characteristics, geographic location, and the importance of 'R&D to their economies. The differences were caused by the structures of their respective science governance systems, past controversies, and, possibly, cultural characteristics. The novelty of nanotechnologies and nanosciences, didn't affect policy outcomes, and more organisational diversity and social accountability did not make them more robust. However, the study found support for a more balanced discussion that included both regulatory issues and the promotion of nanotechnologies and nanosciences in the UK as opposed to both Sweden and Finland, which could be related to more organisational diversity and social accountability as noted for the UK. Exploring Gibbons et al. and Rip’s models of science governance showed that neither model is generally applicable to all three countries, and that there is a need for flexibility in order to capture national differences in science governance. The Strategic Science model came across as being more easily applicable in these circumstances.
While interdisciplinarity is not a new concept, the political and discursive mobilisation of interdisciplinarity is. Since the 1990s, this movement has intensified, and this has affected central funding bodies so that interdisciplinarity is now a de facto requirement in successful grant application. As a result, the literature is ripe with definitions, taxonomies, discussions and other attempts to grasp and define the concept of interdisciplinarity. In this paper, we explore how strategic demands for interdisciplinarity meet, interact with and change local research practices and results of higher education and research. Our aim is to question and trace the consequences of applying the slippery and difficult term interdisciplinarity in research. The paper is based on ethnographic fieldwork in a Danish interdisciplinary research programme, where we observed and analysed practices of writing, publishing, collaboration and educational development in five different research projects. We show how the call for interdisciplinarity was mobilised in a way that rendered the incentives and motives behind the programme unclear. Furthermore, we argue that the absence of clear definitions and assessment criteria produced a dominant, all-inclusive, but vague, configuration of interdisciplinarity that affected the research outcome, and ultimately, promoted and reproduced the existing monodisciplinary research and power structures.
The objective of this paper is to analyse the application of Bradford's Law of
scattering to the Chemical Science literature published during 2002 to 2016. The
paper presents an overview on scholarly contribution presented on Bradford Law
applied in different studies from both theoretical as well as practical aspects and
the law is being tested here. The data for this study has been taken from Web of
Science.
In the last decades, there has been growing interest in the subject of social relevance of management knowledge. A burgeoning scientific literature followed. This study seeks to map this vast territory and aspires to contribute to the discussion on how to make management research more socially relevant. We performed a citation network analysis centered on the Mode 1/Mode 2 knowledge production argument, given its influence in the debate on socially relevant research. The citation network encompasses 701 papers. We identified the top citers (authors who offer an overview of the literature), top citees (authors who made seminal contributions to the field) and the main path through the network (the trajectory of development for the literature in the field). These findings show a plethora of knowledge production models, conceptually attractive but empirically untested. We discuss how history and institutional features explain the current state of things, and discuss changes that would make management research more suited to create relevant, impactful knowledge.
This paper focuses on entrepreneurship by academic leaders. With the use of patents, inventions, and spin‐offs to measure commercialization, and directors, research group leaders, and business owners as academic leaders, results, using a sample of more than 2,500 German researchers, show differences across academic leaders and commercialization. Findings for spin‐offs are different from those for patents and inventions. Academic leaders in sciences were more likely to commercialize. Doctoral degrees helped patents by business owners and spin‐offs by group leaders, whereas female business owners and female group leaders faced challenges patenting and inventing, respectively. For business owners, age increased the likelihood of patenting but lowered spin‐offs.
Tıp bilimleri alanında gerçekleştirilen her bir yeni teknoloji, uygulama, ürün veya
hizmet hayat kurtarıyor veya insanın yaşam süresini uzatma konusunda bir adım daha
atılmasına olanak veriyor. Tıpta ve sağlık bilimlerinde meydana gelen yeniliklerin ölçümü
ve değerlendirilmesi Türkiye’nin ulusal inovasyon politikaları açısından oldukça önem
taşımaktadır. Tıp alanında inovasyon performansı çıktısını belirleyen en önemli faktörler
arasında bilimsel yayınlar ve patentler ile birlikte hastane, araştırma enstitüleri, üniversiteler
ve diğer kurumlar işbirliğinde gerçekleştirilen projeler bulunmaktadır. Bu çalışmada Sağlık
Bakanlığı Kurumları ve üniversitelerin Türkiye’nin bilimsel yayın performansına dolayısıyla
yenilikçiliğine şehir düzeyinde katkıları betimsel olarak değerlendirilmektedir. Ankara,
İstanbul, İzmir, Konya ve Adana’nın içinde bulunduğu beş şehir hem üniversite hastaneleri
hem de eğitim ve araştırma hastaneleri seviyelerinde Türkiye adresli bilimsel yayınların
büyük bir çoğunluğunu oluşturmaktadır. Üniversite hastaneleri ile eğitim ve araştırma
hastanelerinin odaklandıkları araştırma alanlarında ise hem hastane düzeyinde hem de şehir
düzeyinde önemli farklılıklar bulunmaktadır. Ankara klinik tıp alanında Türkiye adresli
gerçekleşen yayınlardan en çok payı alırken, daha küçük şehirlerde üniversite hastaneleri ve
Tıp Fakülteleri hem sayıca yayınların büyük yüzdesini oluşturmakta hem de büyük ölçüde
araştırma odaklarını belirlemektedir.
This study sheds light on the unexplored phenomenon of multiple institutional affiliations using scientific publications. Institutional affiliations are important in the organisation and governance of science. Multiple affiliations may alter the traditional framework of academic employment and careers and may require a reappraisal of institutional assessment based on research outcomes of affiliated staff. Results for authors in three major science and technology nations (Germany, Japan and the UK) and in three fields (biology, chemistry, and engineering) show that multiple affiliations have at least doubled over the past few years. The analysis proposes three major types of multiple affiliations that depend on the structure of the research sector and its international openness. Highly internationalised and higher education-centred affiliations are most common for researchers in the UK whereas Germany and Japan have stronger cross-sector affiliation patterns. International multiple affiliations are, however, still more common in Germany compared to Japan which is characterised by a domestic, cross-sector affiliation distribution. Moreover, multiple affiliation authors are more often found on high impact papers, particularly in the case of authors from Japan and Germany in the fields of biology and chemistry.
This study presents situational analysis as a suitable framework for the development of qualitatively-oriented interdisciplinary research in the social sciences. The article argues that even though interdisciplinary research is considered a coveted form of research practice, it is not particularly well developed in the social sciences. This is partly due to institutional barriers, but also because the majority of disciplines lack a suitable theoretical and methodological framework capable of unifying a variety of theoretical bases and primarily methodological processes. Situational analysis, which is based on the work of second generation grounded theorists, is ideal for this purpose, as it offers a frame for theoretical, epistemological, empirical and methodological interdisciplinarity.
As Hall, Griliches and Hausman (1986, p. 265) state, “The annual research and development expenditures of a firm are considered to be investments which add to the firm’s stock of knowledge.” Firms undertake R&D activities, in large part, to create innovations that will ultimately provide new products and therefore profits.
International scientific collaboration has increased both in volume and importance. In this article, the authors study the interpretation of macro-level data on international co authorship collaboration. They address such questions as how one might explain country- to-country differences in the rates of international coauthorship, networks of interna tional scientific collaboration among countries, and patterns of international collaboration in scientific fields. Attention is drawn to cognitive, social, historical, geopolitical, and economic factors as potential determinants of the observed patterns. They present a methodology that gives one a measure, independent of size, of countries'propensities to collaborate internationally.
Defining structure and detecting the emergence of complexity in nature are inherently subjective, though essential, scientific activities. Despite the difficulties, these problems can be analyzed in terms of how model-building observers infer from measurements the computational capabilities embedded in nonlinear processes. An observer's notion of what is ordered, what is random, and what is complex in its environment depends directly on its computational resources: the amount of raw measurement data, of memory, and of time available for estimation and inference. The discovery of structure in an environment depends more critically and subtlely though on how those resources are organized. The descriptive power of the observer's chosen (or implicit) computational model class, for example, can be an overwhelming determinant in finding regularity in data.This paper presents an overview of an inductive framework-hierarchical ϵ-machine reconstruction—in which the emergence of complexity is associated with the innovation of new computational model classes. Complexity metrics for detecting structure and quantifying emergence, along with an analysis of the constraints on the dynamics of innovation, are outlined. Illustrative examples are drawn from the onset of unpredictability in nonlinear systems, finitary nondeterministic processes, and cellular automata pattern recognition. They demonstrate how finite inference resources drive the innovation of new structures and so lead to the emergence of complexity.
This paper focuses on the movement of scientific and technological knowledge. It explores companies' reasons for publishing in the scientific and technical literature; reasons that turn on the need to link with other research organizations. The analysis begins by establishing that firms do indeed publish. Such publishing mediates links with other organizations, serving to signal the presence of tacit knowledge and to build the technical reputation necessary to engage in the barter-governed exchange of scientific and technical knowledge. Similar processes are seen in other areas of technical knowledge exchange. Copyright 1995 by Oxford University Press.