Authors:Vicente Guerrero-Bote, Felipe Zapico-Alonso, María Espinosa-Calvo, Rocío Gómez-Crisóstomo and Félix de Moya-Anegón
The capacity to attract citations from other disciplines — or knowledge export — has always been taken into account in evaluating
the quality of scientific papers or journals. Some of the JCR’s (ISI’s Journal Citation Report) Subject Categories have a greater exporting character than others because they are less isolated. This influences the rank/JIF
(ISI’s Journal Impact Factor) distribution of the category. While all the categories fit a negative power law fairly well,
those with a greater External JIF give distributions with a more sharply defined peak and a longer tail — something like an
iceberg. One also observes a major relationship between the rates of export and import of knowledge.
The end of the Communist regime brought about great changes in the economies of Central and Eastern Europe; the restructuring of foreign trade was one of the biggest challenges for these countries. After the transition period, Hungary became a very open country, with its trade to GDP ratio around 1.5, while trading with more than 190 countries. The aim of this paper is to analyse the determinants of exports between 1993–2014, with an emphasis on the impact of factor endowments. According to our results, economic size, common border, and free trade agreements had a statistically significant positive effect on exports, while the coefficient of distance had the expected negative sign. We measured factor endowments with several approaches and our results show that exports change in line with the Linder hypothesis, i.e. Hungary tends to trade more with countries having similar factor endowments, and thus its trade is based on differentiated products.
exporthitelezés rendszere és a gazdasági felzárkózás [The system of export credits and economic catch-up]. Pénzügyi Szemle 2003/11.
Az exporthitelezés rendszere és a gazdasági felzárkózás [The system of export credits and economic catch
Authors:Narongrit Sombatsompop, T. Markpin, E. Wimolmala, P. Ratchatahirun, N. Premkamolnetr, B. Boonradsamee and W. Yochai
This article investigated contributions of natural rubber (NR) research through research articles and patents in Science Citation
Index Expanded (SCI-Expanded) and SCOPUS databases and related the results with productivity-export volumes during 2002–2006.
1,771 research papers and 5,686 patents on “natural rubber” were retrieved from the databases. The results revealed that the
top five countries produced the NR raw material by the order of productivity volumes were Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam
and China whereas those produced the synthetic rubber were the United States, China, Japan, Russia and Germany. Among the
top three countries for NR production, Malaysia became a NR producer for its own use, whereas Thailand and Indonesia still
had higher export volumes. Research articles and patents on natural rubber had contribution shares of about 20.9% and 47.5%
of all rubber publications, respectively. The patents on natural rubber were found to increase with time while the research
articles remained unchanged. Journal of Applied Polymer Science was the most preferable for publishing the research papers
on rubbers. Eight countries ranked in the top countries for contributing the research articles on natural rubber were the
United States, India, Malaysia, France, Germany, Thailand, Japan and China, similar country distributions being also found
for research articles on synthetic styrene-butadiene rubber except for Thailand and Malaysia. No linear relationship between
the productivity-export volume and research publication number was observed, but the results implied that the growth rate
for commercializing the rubber was greater than that for research and development of natural rubber. Most NR research works
focused on neat NR, which was contributed the most by USA while NR blend and NR composite papers were mainly published by
Publication and citation data for the thirty journals listed in the Dermatology & VenerealDiseases category of the 1996 edition of the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) on CDROM andseven dermatology journals not listed in the JCR-1996 were retrieved online from DIMDI andanalysed with respect to short- and long-term impact factors, ratios of cited to uncited papers, aswell as knowledge export and international visibility.The short-term impact factors (calculated according to the rules applied in the JCR) are verysimiliar to their JCR counterparts; thus there are only minor changes in the rankings according toJCR impact factors and those calculated on the basis of online data. The non-JCR journals rankwithin the upper (two titles) and the lower third of the 37 journals (one title being at the upper endof the last third and the other four titles being at the very end of the list). Ranking the journalsaccording to their long-term impact factors results in no major changes of a journal's position.Normalized mean citation rates which give a more direct impression of a journals's citedness inrelation to the average citedness of its subfield are also shown.Ratios of cited to uncited papers parallel in general the impact factors, i.e., journals withhigher (constructed) impact factors have a higher percentage of cited papers. For each journal, theGini concentration coefficient was calculated as a measure of unevenness of the citationdistribution. In general, journals with higher (constructed) impact factors have higher Ginicoefficients, i.e., the higher the impact factors the more uneven the citation distribution.Knowledge export and international visibility were measured by determination of the distinctcategories to which the citing journals have been assigned ("citing subfields") and of the distinctcountries to which the citing authors belong ("citing countries"), respectively. Each journalexhibits a characteristic profile of citing subfields and citing countries. Normalized rankingsbased on knowledge export and international visibility (relating the number of published papers tothe number of distinct subfields and distinct countries) are to a large extent different compared tothe impact factor rankings. It is concluded that the additional data given, especially the data onknowledge export and international visibility, are necessary ingredients of a comprehensivedescription of a journal's significance and its position within its subject category.