Trends in Russian research output indexed in Scopus and Web of Science

Trends are analysed in the annual number of documents published by Russian institutions and indexed in Scopus and Web of Science, giving special attention to the time period starting in the year 2013 in which the Project 5-100 was launched by the Russian Government. Numbers are broken down by document type, publication language, type of source, research discipline, country and source. It is concluded that Russian publication counts strongly depend upon the database used, and upon changes in database coverage, and that one should be cautious when using indicators derived from WoS, and especially from Scopus, as tools in the measurement of research performance and international orientation of the Russian science system.Comment: Author copy of a manuscript accepted for publication in the journal Scientometrics, May 201

Национальный фракционный счёт и оценка научной результативности организаций

Russian science policy in 2012–2018 appeared to be efficient which is proved by increased number of Russian publications indexed by Web of Science and Scopus. Dubious publication practices on and out of the fringes of science ethics is the other side of the coin. One cannot deny the scale of these practices while it is hard to be estimated. This scientometric challenge may be met through the transfer from integer calculation to fractional one. The authors introduce the term “national fractional calculation” which enables to estimate objectively organizations’ and researchers’ contributions into national science while not to demotivate participation in international collaborations. Based on the example of three groups, i. e. research organizations, Project 5-100 universities and other universities, the integer and fractional calculations are compared in detail for the 2018 as well as in the dynamics for the period 2000–2018 and for different disciplines. The authors show that, moving forward, fractional calculations increasingly differ from the integer ones. The largest differences are characteristic for the group of leading universities of Project 5-100 group being “scientometrically pressurized” within the framework of the national science policy.Российская научная политика в 2012–2018 гг. оказалась весьма эффективной с точки зрения увеличения количества российских публикаций, индексируемых в Web of Science и Scopus. Обратной стороной этой медали стали сомнительные практики публикационной активности, находящиеся на грани норм научной этики и даже за ней, масштабность применения которых непросто оценить и невозможно отрицать. Один из возможных ответов на этот вызов наукометрической научной политике – переход от целочисленного к фракционному счёту публикаций. В статье вводится понятие национального фракционного счёта, который позволяет более объективно оценивать вклад организаций и отдельных исследователей в научный продукт страны и при этом не демотивирует участие в международных коллаборациях. На примере трёх групп – научные организации, университеты Проекта 5-100 и другие вузы – проведено детальное сравнение целочисленного и национального фракционного счёта в 2018 г., а также в динамике за период 2000–2018 гг. и по областям наук. Показано, что со временем результаты фракционного счёта всё больше отличаются от результатов целочисленного. Наибольшие различия фиксируются в группе ведущих университетов – участников Проекта 5-100, испытывавших самое сильное «наукометрическое давление» в рамках государственной научной политики

Comparative analysis of Russian and industrialized countries performance on Energy and Fuels, WoS, 2008–2017

The selection of basic research priorities plays an important role in efficient science policy. After the economic crisis in 2008 many countries turned its attention to R&D of energy resources. Effective development of R&D could contribute to efficiency of oil and gas processing and improve Russian prosperity. The goal of our study is to examine trends in Russian research performance (RP) and compare them with other leading industrialized countries. More detailed analysis was focused on tracing evolution in the research area (by WoS classification) as Energy&Fuel (E&F), which is invaluable for the Russian economy. Sources of data were Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-E) that is the part of Web of Science (WoS), analytical tool InCites and the national database Russian Science Citation Index—Clarivate. World dataset demonstrated the growth rate in total research performance (RP) by 140% (2,006,082 records) in 2017 compared to 2008 (1,416,233 records). Russian RP growth rate was the same as in world dataset in 2008–2017. Our analysis revealed that two of each RA Science Technology and Other Topics, and Energy & Fuels (E&F) demonstrated striking growth rate (in three-fold) comparing with growth rate 140% in the world dataset during 2008–2017. Total amount of Russian RP on E&F consisted of 4237 records indexed in SCI-E and 6300 records indexed in RSCI-C for 10 years. During the last 10 years, Russia significantly improved various citations indicators of RP on E&F. The share of publications in top 1% and top 10% journals increased. Russian RP growth rate on E&F was about 200%. Despite the growth its impact is low compared to leading industrial countries. A significant disparity was revealed in RP distribution by leading organizations in SCI-E and RSCI-C. Powerful Russian oil and gas companies are practically absent among organizations indexed in SCI-E. Contrarily, the national Russian database RSCI-C revealed a network of regional branches of the famous private oil company named “Lukoil”. Russian international collaboration (IC) on E&F is significantly less (about 8–10%) than in total Russian RP. The negative factor is low number of IC on E&F with each of traditional Russian partners as Germany and USA. Value of Jaccard index of almost all countries collaborating with Russia (besides Kazakhstan’s 0.46) is no higher than 0.2. This indicates significant difference in direction of research. Our data could be useful as a source for effective decision-making. © 2020, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary.Russian Foundation for Basic Research, RFBR: 17-02-00157, 17-02-00078Authors express the gratitude to the Russian Foundation for Basic Research for financial support (Grants 17-02-00157 and 17-02-00078) and to Clarivate Analytics for the opportunity to use the data

Risks of 5-100 Project: Perceptions of Academic Staff of Different Ages

The implementation of the 5-100 Project in Russian universities, aimed at improving their competitiveness through adaptation to world standards and inclusion in the international educational environment has produced some quantitative and qualitative results. Despite the undoubted achievements of the universities participating in the Project, the mechanisms of its implementation have revealed some problematic areas that in the end can primarily affect the young generations of scholars. Therefore, assessing the perception of the 5-100 Project by scholars of different ages is important. The purpose of this article is to analyze, through the lens of a generational approach, the risks associated with the two aspects of universities’ activities. First, the principles of funding under the 5-100 Project and second, the approaches applied for assessment of academic performance. The analysis is based on the results of semi-structured interviews with scientific and pedagogical staff at five universities that participated in the 5-100 Project (108 respondents). We analyzed the answers of respondents in three age groups: young scientists, middle-aged and older scholars. The study showed that there are areas where representatives of all generations are unanimous and areas where the young academics have perceptions different from other generations. There is unanimity in the attitudes to principles of financing practiced in the universities. The younger generation turned to be the most sensitive to insufficient spending on research equipment. In terms of performance evaluation indicators, the younger generation demonstrated the greatest adaptability to the system of formal quantitative assessment, while noting its dysfunctional effects. They have also revealed that it is easier for them to change jobs than for other generations of scholars

How 'inter-national' is international research collaboration?

In the context of the increasing global connectivity in science, this paper investigates the internal heterogeneity of international research collaborations (IRCs). We focus on the prevalence of shared heritage collaborations and the rise of multiple institutional affiliations as a collaboration mechanism. An analytical typology of IRCs based on the characteristics of collaborating researchers' location and heritage is developed and empirically tested on the dataset of Russia's publications in 2015. We found that shared heritage IRC and IRC via multiple affiliations are the cornerstones of internationalisation. Significant structural differences are revealed between conventional IRC and these non-conventional IRCs across fields of science, locations, visibility of international partners, and the sources of funding. These results contribute towards a better understanding of IRC as a complex, heterogeneous phenomenon, which encompasses a variety of arrangements for knowledge creation across borders. A more nuanced understanding of IRC is needed for smarter university strategy, metric development, and policymaking