Tracking the Current Rise of Chinese Pharmaceutical Bionanotechnology

Background: The Context and Purpose of the Study Over the last decade China has emerged as a major producer of scientific publications, currently ranking second behind the US. During that time Chinese strategic policy initiatives have placed indigenous innovation at the heart of its economy while focusing internal R&D investments and the attraction of foreign investment in nanotechnology as one of their four top areas. China’s scientific research publication and nanotechnology research publication production has reached a rank of second in the world, behind only the US. Despite these impressive gains, some scholars argue that the quality of Chinese nanotech research is inferior to US research quality due to lower overall times cited rates, suggesting that the US is still the world leader. We combine citation analysis, text mining, mapping, and data visualization to gauge the development and application of nanotechnology in China, particularly in biopharmananotechnology, and to measure the impact of Chinese policy on nanotechnology research production. Results, the main findings Our text mining-based methods provide results that counter existing claims about Chinese nanotechnology research quality. Due in large part to its strategic innovation policy, China’s output of nanotechnology publications is on pace to surpass US production in or around 2012.A closer look at Chinese nanotechnology research literature reveals a large increase in research activity in China’s biopharmananotechnology research since the implementation in January, 2006 of China’s Medium & Long Term Scientific and Technological Development Plan Guidelines for the period 2006-2020 (“MLP”). Conclusions Since the implementation of the MLP, China has enjoyed a great deal of success producing bionano research findings while attracting a great deal of foreign investment from pharmaceutical corporations setting up advanced drug discovery operations. Given the combination of current scientific production growth as well as economic growth, a relatively low scientific capacity, and the ability of its policy to enhance such trends, China is in some sense already the new world leader in nanotechnology. Further, the Chinese national innovation system may be the new standard by which other national S&T policies should be measured

Higher education, high-impact research, and world university rankings: A case of India and comparison with China

AbstractTo date, this paper is probably the first to compare Indian and Chinese universities on educational performance metrics such as high-impact research and world university rankings. The study, therefore, examines the current state of higher education, high-impact research metrics, and world university rankings in an emerging market of India. First, we present an overview of the higher education system, government schemes for academic research, and related educational statistics. Second, we compare India and China on various academic-research metrics (citable documents, number of citations, cites per document, and H-index in three categories), and world university rankings. Special attention is devoted to revealing the progress of management research metrics, business school accreditations and rankings, and abstracting and indexing of publishing journals. Last, we discuss several challenges in university education and recommend policy guidelines pertaining to research funding, collaborative research projects, and research assessment council for imparting quality academic practices and standards in a higher education environment. Our exploratory analysis indicates that for citable documents in the ‘all subjects’ category, the United States is ranked first, followed by China in second, the United Kingdom in third, and India in ninth. Overall, world university rankings and research metrics of Indian universities are found to be far behind those of Chinese universities

Congress UPV Proceedings of the 21ST International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators

This is the book of proceedings of the 21st Science and Technology Indicators Conference that took place in València (Spain) from 14th to 16th of September 2016. The conference theme for this year, ‘Peripheries, frontiers and beyond’ aimed to study the development and use of Science, Technology and Innovation indicators in spaces that have not been the focus of current indicator development, for example, in the Global South, or the Social Sciences and Humanities. The exploration to the margins and beyond proposed by the theme has brought to the STI Conference an interesting array of new contributors from a variety of fields and geographies. This year’s conference had a record 382 registered participants from 40 different countries, including 23 European, 9 American, 4 Asia-Pacific, 4 Africa and Near East. About 26% of participants came from outside of Europe. There were also many participants (17%) from organisations outside academia including governments (8%), businesses (5%), foundations (2%) and international organisations (2%). This is particularly important in a field that is practice-oriented. The chapters of the proceedings attest to the breadth of issues discussed. Infrastructure, benchmarking and use of innovation indicators, societal impact and mission oriented-research, mobility and careers, social sciences and the humanities, participation and culture, gender, and altmetrics, among others. We hope that the diversity of this Conference has fostered productive dialogues and synergistic ideas and made a contribution, small as it may be, to the development and use of indicators that, being more inclusive, will foster a more inclusive and fair world

Bibliometrics and scientometrics in India: An overview of studies during 1995-2014Part II: Contents of the articles in terms of disciplines and their bibliometric aspects

This part of the study highlights the contents of the published articles in terms of various disciplines or sub-disciplines and the bibliometric aspects discussed in these articles. The analysis of 902 papers published by Indian scholars during1995-2014 indicates that the main focus of bibliometrics/scientometrics is on assessment of science and technology in India in different sub-disciplines including contributions by Indian states and other individual countries followed by bibliometric analysis of individual journals. Papers dealing with bibliometric laws received a low priority as compared to other subdisciplines of bibliometrics/scientometrics. The analysis of data indicates that the share of theoretical studies using mathematical and statistical techniques which were missing in the earlier period (1970-1994) has increased during 1995-2014. The field of medicine as a discipline received the highest attention as compared to other disciplines

A study of early indication citation metrics

Research outputs are growing in number and frequency, assisted by a greater number of publication mediums and platforms via which material can be disseminated. At the same time, the requirement to find acceptable, timely, objective measurements of research "quality" has become more important. Historically, citations have been used as an independent indication of the significance of scholarly material. However, citations are very slow to accrue since they can only be made by subsequently published material. This enforces a delay of a number of years before the citation impact of a publication can be accurately judged. By contrast, each new citation establishes a large number of co-citation relationships between that publication and older material whose citation impact is already well established. By taking advantage of this co-citation property, this thesis investigates the possibility of developing a metric that can provide an earlier indicator of a publication's citation impact. This thesis proposes a new family of cocitation based impact measures, describes a system to evaluate their effectiveness against a large citation database, and justifies the results of this evaluation against an analysis of a diverse range of research metric

Does it take an expert to lead experts?: professionals versus managers in universities

This is an empirical study of leaders and how they affect organizational performance. Its context is the research university as a knowledge intensive organization. It appears to be the first of its kind. The thesis explores whether the characteristics of a leader in position today can tell us about the future success of their institution. It asks the question: Should research universities be led by top scholars? One reason why universities are an interesting case is that, unusually for knowledge-intensive organizations, their leaders' technical expertise can arguably be measured reasonably objectively. Using cross-sectional analysis, the first approach adopted in this thesis is to identify whether accomplished scholars are currently leading the world's top universities and business schools. It demonstrates -- using a variety of data sets, and in a variety of settings, including a check on the role of outliers -- that better universities and business schools are led by presidents and deans with systematically higher numbers of life-time scholarly citations. Next the dissertation attempts to go beyond simple cross-sectional patterns to address the question of causality. It does so in a longitudinal study that follows the performance of a panel of 55 universities over a nine-year period from 1992 to 2001. Using regression analysis, this thesis uncovers some evidence that is consistent with the existence of a causal relationship between the research ability of a leader and the future achievement of their institution. The results suggest that a university tends to improve in the UK Research Assessment Exercise if its leader has been a successful scholar. Qualitative evidence in the form of interviews with university leaders then motivates a theory of strategic leadership that might explain the statistical patterns. It is argued in the thesis that scholars may make effective leaders for reasons that are both internal and external to the individual. A scholar-leader, it is suggested, influences performance because of an inherent knowledge of the core business of a research university, and also through the extension of powers acquired by being viewed as credible by followers. Finally, the thesis concludes by asking whether university governing bodies appoint the right people. The central argument being made in this thesis is that where expert knowledge is the key factor that characterises an organization it is expert knowledge that should also be key in the selection of its leader