Authors:Ling-Chu Lee, Pin-Hua Lin, Yun-Wen Chuang, and Yi-Yang Lee
, South Korea and Taiwan have increased their research output at a particularly high rate over the last 10 years; Chuang et al. ( 2010 ) find that the research areas in which these three countries have the most significant achievements tend to be related
Authors:Saeed-Ul Hassan, Peter Haddawy, Pratikshya Kuinkel, Alexander Degelsegger, and Cosima Blasy
to identify areas of alignment of research strength. Next the performance of ASEAN is benchmarked against China, Japan, South Korea and Australia. This helps to understand the standing of ASEAN as a whole in the Asia–Pacific region. Finally, the
Authors:Nobuyuki Shirakawa, Takao Furukawa, Minoru Nomura, and Kumi Okuwada
twelve disciplines in Brazil, Taiwan, Korea and Turkey as well as the EU, the United States, Japan and China. Leydesdorff and Wagner ( 2009 ) analysed temporal trends observed in international benchmarks focusing on nanotechnology, on the basis of the
Summary Composite science and technology (S&T) indices are essential to overall understanding and evaluation of national S&T status, and to formulation of S&T policy. However, only a few studies on making these indices have been conducted so far since a number of complications and uncertainties are involved in the work. Therefore, this study proposes a new approach to employ fuzzy set theory and to make composite S&T indices, and applies it. The approach appears to successfully integrate various S&T indicators into three indices: R&D input, R&D output, and economic output. We also compare Korea’s S&T indices with those of five developed countries (France, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States) to obtain some implications of the results for Korea’s S&T.
relation between knowledge diffusion and internalization of innovation capability by using patent citation data; some of them by comparing the evolving trajectories of technological development of Korea and Taiwan at either country or industry level and