View More View Less
  • 1 Department of Public Administration, Florida International University, Miami, FL, 33199, USA
  • | 2 Manchester Institute of Innovation Research, Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK, pshapira@mbs.ac.uk
  • | 3 School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 30332-0345, USA
Restricted access

Abstract

There is increasing interest in assessing how sponsored research funding influences the development and trajectory of science and technology. Traditionally, linkages between research funding and subsequent results are hard to track, often requiring access to separate funding or performance reports released by researchers or sponsors. Tracing research sponsorship and output linkages is even more challenging when researchers receive multiple funding awards and collaborate with a variety of differentially-sponsored research colleagues. This article presents a novel bibliometric approach to undertaking funding acknowledgement analysis which links research outputs with their funding sources. Using this approach in the context of nanotechnology research, the article probes the funding patterns of leading countries and agencies including patterns of cross-border research sponsorship. We identify more than 91,500 nanotechnology articles published worldwide during a 12-month period in 2008–2009. About 67% of these publications include funding acknowledgements information. We compare articles reporting funding with those that do not (for reasons that may include reliance on internal core-funding rather than external awards as well as omissions in reporting). While we find some country and field differences, we judge that the level of reporting of funding sources is sufficiently high to provide a basis for analysis. The funding acknowledgement data is used to compare nanotechnology funding policies and programs in selected countries and to examine their impacts on scientific output. We also examine the internationalization of research funding through the interplay of various funding sources at national and organizational levels. We find that while most nanotechnology funding is nationally-oriented, internationalization and knowledge exchange does occur as researchers collaborate across borders. Our method offers a new approach not only in identifying the funding sources of publications but also in feasibly undertaking large-scale analyses across scientific fields, institutions and countries.

  • Adams, J. D., & Griliches, Z. (1998). Research productivity in a system of universities. Annales d'Economie et de Statisque, 49/50, 127162.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Baird, D, Shew, A 2004 Probing the history of scanning tunneling microscopy D Baird A Nordmann J Schummer eds. Discovering the nanoscale IOS Press Amsterdam.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Baker, S., & Aston, A. (2005). The business of nanotech. Business Week. Feb 14, 6471.

  • Boyack, KW, Borner, K 2003 Indicator-assisted evaluation and funding of research: visualizing the influence of grants on the number of citation counts of research papers. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 54 5 447461 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Braun, D 1998 The role of funding agencies in the cognitive development of science. Research Policy 27 8 807821 .

  • Broadhead, RS, Rist, RC 1976 Gatekeepers and the social control of social research. Social Problems 23 3 325336 .

  • Butler, L 2001 Revisiting bibliometric issues using new empirical data. Research Evaluation 10 1 5965 .

  • Campbell, D, Picard-Aitken, M, Cote, G, Caruso, J, Valentim, R, Edmonds, S, Williams, GT, Macaluso, B, Robitaille, JP, Bastien, N, Laframboise, MC, Lebeau, LM, Mirabel, P, Lariviere, V, Archambault, E 2010 Bibliometrics as a performance measurement tool for research evaluation: The case of research funded by the National Cancer Institute of Canada. American Journal of Evaluation 31 1 6683 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cronin, B, Shaw, D 1999 Citation, funding acknowledgement and author nationality relationships in four information science journals. Journal of Documentation 55 4 402408 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Drexler, E 1986 Engines of creation: The coming era of nanotechnology Anchor Books New York.

  • European Commission 2004 Towards a European strategy for nanotechnology DG Research Brussels.

  • European Commission (2009). Nanosciences and nanotechnologies: An action plan for Europe 2005-2009, Second Implementation Report 2007-2009. Brussels: European Commission. Retrieved April 16, 2010 from http://ec.europa.eu/nanotechnology/index_en.html.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gaughan, M, Bozeman, B 2002 Using curriculum vitae to compare some impacts of NSF research grants with research center funding. Research Evaluation 11 1 1726 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Griliches, Z. (1985). Productivity, R&D, and basic research at the firm level in the 1970s. NBER Working Paper No. W1547. Boston, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Harter, SP, Hooten, PA 1992 Information science and scientists: JASIS, 1972–1990. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 43 9 583593 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Heinze, T, Shapira, P, Senker, J, Kuhlmann, S 2007 Identifying creative research accomplishments: Methodology and results for nanotechnology and human genetics. Scientometrics 70 1 125152 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hicks, D, Albert, M, Breitzman, T, Cheney, P 2002 Bibliometric analysis of core papers fundamental to tissue engineering CHI Research, Inc. Haddon Heights.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Huang, Z, Chen, H, Li, X, Roco, MC 2006 Connecting NSF funding to patent innovation in nanotechnology (2001–2004). Journal of Nanoparticle Research 8:859879 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Joint Economic Committee 2007 Nanotechnology: The future is coming sooner than you think US Congress Washington.

  • Kearnes, M., & Wienroth, M. (2009). ‘Arm's length’? Narratives of impact and autonomy in UK Research Councils. Working Paper. ESRC Project on Strategic Science: Research Intermediaries and the Governance of Innovation. UK: Department of Geography, Durham University.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • King, J 1987 A review of bibliometrics and other science indicators and their role in research evaluation. Journal of Information Science 13:261276 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lewison, G, Carding, P 2003 Evaluating UK research in speech and language therapy. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 38:4865 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lichtenberg, F. R. (1985). Assessing the impact of federal industrial r&d expenditures on private r&d activity. Papers commissioned for a workshop on the federal role in research and development. The National Academies Press, pp. 115150.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lux Research 2004 The nanotech report: investment overview and market research for nanotechnology Lux Research New York.

  • Lux Research 2006 The nanotech report (4th ed.): Investment overview and market research for nanotechnology Lux Research New York.

  • Lux Research 2007 Top nations in nanotech see their lead erode Lux Research New York.

  • Mansfield, E 1980 Basic research and productivity increase in manufacturing. American Economic Review 70 5 863873.

  • Mansfield, E 1981 How economists see R&D. Harvard Business Review 59 6 98106.

  • Martin, B., Salter, A., Hicks, D., Pavitt, K., Senker, J. Sharp, M., & von Tunzelmann, N. (1996). The relationship between publicly funded basic research and economic performance: A SPRU review. Report prepared for HM treasury. University of Sussex, Brighton.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • McAllister, P.R., Narin, F., & Corrigan, J.G. (1983). Programmatic evaluation and comparison based on standardized citation scores. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-30, 4.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • OMB 1993 Government Performance Results Act of 1993 Executive Office of the President of the United States, Office of Management and Budget Washington, DC.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • OTA 1986 Research funding as an investment: Can we measure the returns? A technical memorandum. OTA-TMSET-36 US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment Washington.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • OTA 1991 Federally funded research: Decisions for a decade. OTA-SET-490 US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment Washington.

  • Paasi, M 1998 Efficiency of innovation systems in the transition countries. Economic Systems 22 3 217234.

  • Pavitt, K 1991 What makes basic research economically useful?. Research Policy 20:109119 .

  • Payne, A. A., & Siow, A. (2003). Does federal research funding increase university research output? Advances in Economic Analysis & Policy, 3 (1), Article 1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • PCAST 2005 The national nanotechnology initiative at five years: Assessment and recommendations of the national nanotechnology advisory panel The President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) Washington.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Peterson, C. (1991). Nanotechnology race: MITI adopts ‘Bottom-Up’ strategy. Foresight Update 12, August 1. http://www.foresight.org/Updates/Update12/index.html.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Porter, AL, Youtie, J 2009 How interdisciplinary is nanotechnology?. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 11 5 10231041 .

  • Porter, AL, Youtie, J, Shapira, P, Schoeneck, DJ 2008 Refining search terms for nanotechnology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 10 5 715728 .

  • Rigby, J. (2011). Systematic grant and funding body acknowledgement data for publications: An examination of new dimensions and new controversies for bibliometrics. Manchester Business School, Working Paper, No. 611. Manchester, UK: University of Manchester.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Roco, MC 2007 National nanotechnology initiative—past, present, future WA Goddard D Brenner SE Lyshevski GJ Iafrate eds. Handbook on Nanoscience, Engineering and Technology 2 Taylor and Francis Boca Raton.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sandstrom, U 2009 Research quality and diversity of funding: A model for relating research money to output of research. Scientometrics 79 2 341349 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sarewitz, D 1997 Social change and science policy. Issues in Science and Technology XIII 4 2932.

  • Sargent, JF 2008 Nanotechnology and U.S: Competitiveness. Issues and Options. RL34493 Congressional Research Service Washington.

  • Science and Technology Committee 2004 Science and technology—fifth report House of Commons London.

  • Shapira, P., & Wang, J. (2007). R&D policy in the United States: The promotion of nanotechnology R&D. Monitoring and analysis of policies and public financing instruments conducive to higher levels of R&D investmentsThe “Policy Mix” Project. European Commission, DG Research (DG-RTD-2005-M-01-02). ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/nanotechnology/docs/pmcasestudy_us_nanotech11.pdf. Accessed 4 Nov 2010.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Shapira, P, Wang, J 2010 Follow the money: What was the impact of the nanotechnology funding boom of the past ten years?. Nature 468:627628 .

  • Solow, RM 1957 Technical change and the aggregate production function. The Review of Economics and Statistics 39 3 312320 .

  • Takemura, M 2005 Strategic promotion of nanotechnology R&D in Japan National Institute for Materials Science Tsukuba-City.

  • Terleckyj, NE 1974 Effects of R&D on the productivity growth of industries: An exploratory study National Planning Association Washington.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Terleckyj, N. E. (1985). Measuring economic effects of federal R&D expenditures: Recent history with special emphasis on federal R&D performed in industry. Papers commissioned for a workshop on the federal role in research and development. Washington: The National Academies Press, pp. 151172.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Thomson Reuters. (2010). Funding acknowledgements. http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/multidisciplinary/webofscience/fundingsearch. Accessed 2 May 2010.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Trochim, WM, Marcus, SE, Masse, LC, Mose, RP, Weld, PC 2008 The evaluation of large research initiatives: a participatory integrative mixed-methods approach. American Journal of Evaluation 29:828 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Uldrich, J, Newberry, D 2003 The next big thing is really small: How nanotechnology will change the future of your business Crown Business New York.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Woolgar, L. (2010). ERAWATCH research inventory report for JAPAN. European Commission: ERAWATCH. http://cordis.europa.eu/erawatch/index.cfm?fuseaction=ri.content&topicID=4&countryCode=JP. Accessed 15 Mar 2010.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Youtie, J, Shapira, P, Porter, A 2008 Nanotechnology publications and citations by leading countries and blocs. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 10:981986 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Manuscript submission: http://www.editorialmanager.com/scim/

  • Impact Factor (2019): 2.867
  • Scimago Journal Rank (2019): 1.210
  • SJR Hirsch-Index (2019): 106
  • SJR Quartile Score (2019): Q1 Computer Science Apllications
  • SJR Quartile Score (2019): Q1 Library and Information Sciences
  • SJR Quartile Score (2019): Q1 Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Impact Factor (2018): 2.770
  • Scimago Journal Rank (2018): 1.113
  • SJR Hirsch-Index (2018): 95
  • SJR Quartile Score (2018): Q1 Library and Information Sciences
  • SJR Quartile Score (2018): Q1 Social Sciences (miscellaneous)

For subscription options, please visit the website of Springer

Scientometrics
Language English
Size B5
Year of
Foundation
1978
Volumes
per Year
4
Issues
per Year
12
Founder Akadémiai Kiadó
Founder's
Address
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
Springer Nature Switzerland AG
Publisher's
Address
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
CH-6330 Cham, Switzerland Gewerbestrasse 11.
Responsible
Publisher
Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó
ISSN 0138-9130 (Print)
ISSN 1588-2861 (Online)