International Scientific Collaboration Links of Central Eastern European Countries Measured Through Publications
Keywords:
scientific collaboration, networks, research, economicsAbstract
The countries of Central Eastern Europe (CEE) are lagging behind Western-Europe regarding scientific performance in the field of economics. A way to improve the quantity and quality of scientific output is to establish international scientific links with developed countries. The aim of this study is to analyze the international cooperation of Central and Eastern European countries in the field of economics. International scientific collaborations are measured through publications. The analyzed time period is 1996-2014. The used database is Scopus. Using network theory tools, it is shown that researchers from the CEE countries tend to publish more with researchers from Western Europe or the USA, rather than with researchers from the CEE region. It appears that geographical distance does not play a significant role in choosing international scientific collaboration partners. Policy decision makers should focus more on supporting and promoting research and educational mobility as these can help the CEE countries in the scientific catching-up process.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
References
Barabási, A.-L. (2014), “Network Science”, available at: http://barabasilab.neu.edu/networksciencebook/downlPDF.html (4/28/2016)
Beaver, D. (2004), “Does collaborative research have greater epistemic authority?”,Scientometrics, vol. 60., no. 3., pp. 399-408.
Beaver, D., Rosen, R. (1978), “Studies in scientific collaboration”, Scientometrics, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 65-84.
Choi, S. (2012), “Core-periphery, new clusters, or rising stars? International scientific collaboration among advanced’ countries in the era of globalization”, Scientometrics, vol. 90, no. 1, pp. 25-41.
Coupé, T. (2004), “What Do We Know About Ourselves? On the Economics of Economics”, Kyklos, vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 197–216.
European Commission (2014), “Horizon2020 in brief”, available at: https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/sites/horizon2020/files/H2020_inBrief_EN_FinalBAT.pdf (4/28/2016)
Glänzel, W. (2001), “National Characteristics in International Scientific Co-authorship”,Scientometrics, Vol. 51., No. 1., pp. 69–115.
Gossart, C., Özman, M. (2009), “Co-authorship networks in social sciences: The case of Turkey”, Scientometrics, vol. 78, no. 2, pp. 323-345.
Kumar, S., Rohani, V. A., Ratnavelu, K. (2014), “International research collaborations of ASEAN Nations in economics, 1979-2010”, Scientometrics, vol. 101., no. 1., pp. 847-867.
Kumar, S., Jan, J. M. (2013), “Mapping research collaborations in the business and management field in Malaysia, 1980–2010”, Scientometrics, vol. 97., no. 3., pp. 491–517.
Laudel, G. (2002), “What do we measure by co-authorship?”, Research Evaluation, vol. 11., no. 1., pp. 3-15.
Lundberg, J., Tomson, G., Lundkvist, I., Skår, J., Brommels, M. (2006), “Collaboration uncovered: Exploring the adequacy of measuring university-industry collaboration through co-authorship and funding”, Scientometrics, vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 575-589.
Radosevic, S., Yoruk, E. (2014), “Are there global shifts in the world science base? Analysing the catching up and falling behind of world regions”, Scientometrics, vol. 101, no. 3, pp. 1897-1924.
Sarwar, R., Hassan, S-U. (2015), “A bibliometric assessment of scientific productivity and international collaboration of the Islamic World in science and technology (S&T) areas”, Scientometrics, vol. 105, no. 2, pp. 1059-1077.
Schubert, A., Braun, T. (1990), “International collaboration in the sciences 1981-1985”, Scientometrics, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 3-10.
Wang, L., Thijs, B., Glänzel, W. (2015), “Characteristics of international collaboration in sport sciences publications and its influence on citation impact”, Scientometrics, vol. 105, no. 2, pp. 843-862.
Zhou, P., Lv, X. (2015), “Academic publishing and collaboration between China and Germany in physics”, Scientometrics, vol. 105, no. 3, pp. 1875-1887.
