Purpose： This study aims at identifying potential industry-university-research collaboration（IURC） partners effectively and analyzes the conditions and dynamics in the IURC process based on innovation chain theory....Purpose： This study aims at identifying potential industry-university-research collaboration（IURC） partners effectively and analyzes the conditions and dynamics in the IURC process based on innovation chain theory.Design/methodology/approach： The method utilizes multisource data, combining bibliometric and econometrics analyses to capture the core network of the existing collaboration networks and institution competitiveness in the innovation chain. Furthermore, a new identification method is constructed that takes into account the law of scientific research cooperation and economic factors.Findings： Empirical analysis of the genetic engineering vaccine field shows that through the distribution characteristics of creative technologies from different institutions, the analysis based on the innovation chain can identify the more complementary capacities among organizations.Research limitations： In this study, the overall approach is shaped by the theoretical concept of an innovation chain, a linear innovation model with specific types or stages of innovation activities in each phase of the chain, and may, thus, overlook important feedback mechanisms in the innovation process.Practical implications： Industry-university-research institution collaborations are extremely important in promoting the dissemination of innovative knowledge, enhancing the quality of innovation products, and facilitating the transformation of scientific achievements.Originality/value： Compared to previous studies, this study emulates the real conditions of IURC. Thus, the rule of technological innovation can be better revealed, the potential partners of IURC can be identified more readily, and the conclusion has more value.展开更多
Purpose： This study analyzes the current status of institutional cooperation in economics and management （EM） and library and information science （LIS） in China.Design/methodology/approach： Based on the Chinese ...Purpose： This study analyzes the current status of institutional cooperation in economics and management （EM） and library and information science （LIS） in China.Design/methodology/approach： Based on the Chinese Social Science Citation Index （CSSCI） database, we constructed institutional collaboration networks in EM and LIS, and analyzed the collaboration characteristics through social network analysis.Findings： In the development and evolution of the collaboration network of institutions in humanities and social sciences, EM is always at the center. It has extensive cooperation relationships with other fields. The position of LIS has also become centralized, and its interdisciplinary cooperation has increased. For both EM and LIS, we observed ＂small-world＂ and ＂scale-free＂ networks, indicating full communication and mature development in both disciplines. Based on a comparison of two institutions in the two fields, we confirmed the comprehensive development in EM and the extensive information exchange in LIS.Research limitations： We collected data only from humanities and social sciences, but did not consider the connection between EM and natural sciences, or between LIS and natural sciences. In addition, the paper lacks analysis of institutional collaboration at the micro level.Practical implications： The paper provides insights into the institutional cooperation characteristics in EM and LIS in China.Originality/value： The paper offers a new perspective on the characteristics of institutional collaboration in China.展开更多
目的分析全球药物合成生物学领域的科研合作态势。方法在Web of Science数据库中检索药物合成生物学相关论文,检索时间为2023年6月29日,分析全球及各国该领域发文量变化趋势;构建全球合作网络并采用优劣解距离(TOPSIS)法评估各国和各机...目的分析全球药物合成生物学领域的科研合作态势。方法在Web of Science数据库中检索药物合成生物学相关论文,检索时间为2023年6月29日,分析全球及各国该领域发文量变化趋势;构建全球合作网络并采用优劣解距离(TOPSIS)法评估各国和各机构在全球合作中的重要性;评估不同机构的合作偏好;根据通信作者发文量识别领先研究团队。结果共检索到全球范围内药物合成生物学领域科技论文1968篇,其中2013年及以后有1777篇(90.29%)。美国发文量最多(624篇),且合作对象(40个)和合作次数(283次)也最多,TOPSIS评分居全球首位。中国发文量(527篇)略低于美国,但近10年复合增长率远超美国(31.80%比6.24%),TOPSIS评分居全球第4位。丹麦技术大学、中国科学院、加州大学伯克利分校、哈佛大学、麻省理工学院的合作对象数量(≥10个)和合作次数(>20次)均较多,TOPSIS评分全球排名前5,其中前2个机构聚类系数较低(0.24,0.23)而中介中心性较高(0.23,0.15),后3个机构聚类系数低(0.38,0.30,0.18)而中介中心性相对中等(0.10,0.10,0.09)。全球共23名通信作者(团队)在此领域的论文数量≥5篇,其中美国最多(8人),中国次之(5人)。结论药物合成生物学领域在过去10年间快速发展,美国和中国在此研究领域较活跃。美国是全球合作网络的中心,中国、英国和德国也是国际合作的重要参与者。中国科学院和丹麦技术大学是连接国内外研究机构的重要桥梁,麻省理工学院、哈佛大学、加州大学伯克利分校等机构则是各自小范围研究领域的中心。展开更多
以ISI Web of Knowledge检索平台电子信息学科2006-2011年不同机构间的作者合作论文为研究对象,运用社会网络分析方法和工具对机构合作网络从网络密度和中心性角度进行分析,并从我国电子信息学科领域机构间的合作呈现的特点进行分析,有...以ISI Web of Knowledge检索平台电子信息学科2006-2011年不同机构间的作者合作论文为研究对象,运用社会网络分析方法和工具对机构合作网络从网络密度和中心性角度进行分析,并从我国电子信息学科领域机构间的合作呈现的特点进行分析,有助于了解现阶段电子信息学科领域机构间合作的整体现状和特征。展开更多
基金funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 71704170)the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation funded project (Grant No. 2016M590124)the Youth Innovation Promotion Association, CAS (Grant No. 2016159)
文摘Purpose： This study aims at identifying potential industry-university-research collaboration（IURC） partners effectively and analyzes the conditions and dynamics in the IURC process based on innovation chain theory.Design/methodology/approach： The method utilizes multisource data, combining bibliometric and econometrics analyses to capture the core network of the existing collaboration networks and institution competitiveness in the innovation chain. Furthermore, a new identification method is constructed that takes into account the law of scientific research cooperation and economic factors.Findings： Empirical analysis of the genetic engineering vaccine field shows that through the distribution characteristics of creative technologies from different institutions, the analysis based on the innovation chain can identify the more complementary capacities among organizations.Research limitations： In this study, the overall approach is shaped by the theoretical concept of an innovation chain, a linear innovation model with specific types or stages of innovation activities in each phase of the chain, and may, thus, overlook important feedback mechanisms in the innovation process.Practical implications： Industry-university-research institution collaborations are extremely important in promoting the dissemination of innovative knowledge, enhancing the quality of innovation products, and facilitating the transformation of scientific achievements.Originality/value： Compared to previous studies, this study emulates the real conditions of IURC. Thus, the rule of technological innovation can be better revealed, the potential partners of IURC can be identified more readily, and the conclusion has more value.
基金supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(Grant No.:71173249)
文摘Purpose： This study analyzes the current status of institutional cooperation in economics and management （EM） and library and information science （LIS） in China.Design/methodology/approach： Based on the Chinese Social Science Citation Index （CSSCI） database, we constructed institutional collaboration networks in EM and LIS, and analyzed the collaboration characteristics through social network analysis.Findings： In the development and evolution of the collaboration network of institutions in humanities and social sciences, EM is always at the center. It has extensive cooperation relationships with other fields. The position of LIS has also become centralized, and its interdisciplinary cooperation has increased. For both EM and LIS, we observed ＂small-world＂ and ＂scale-free＂ networks, indicating full communication and mature development in both disciplines. Based on a comparison of two institutions in the two fields, we confirmed the comprehensive development in EM and the extensive information exchange in LIS.Research limitations： We collected data only from humanities and social sciences, but did not consider the connection between EM and natural sciences, or between LIS and natural sciences. In addition, the paper lacks analysis of institutional collaboration at the micro level.Practical implications： The paper provides insights into the institutional cooperation characteristics in EM and LIS in China.Originality/value： The paper offers a new perspective on the characteristics of institutional collaboration in China.
文摘目的分析全球药物合成生物学领域的科研合作态势。方法在Web of Science数据库中检索药物合成生物学相关论文,检索时间为2023年6月29日,分析全球及各国该领域发文量变化趋势;构建全球合作网络并采用优劣解距离(TOPSIS)法评估各国和各机构在全球合作中的重要性;评估不同机构的合作偏好;根据通信作者发文量识别领先研究团队。结果共检索到全球范围内药物合成生物学领域科技论文1968篇,其中2013年及以后有1777篇(90.29%)。美国发文量最多(624篇),且合作对象(40个)和合作次数(283次)也最多,TOPSIS评分居全球首位。中国发文量(527篇)略低于美国,但近10年复合增长率远超美国(31.80%比6.24%),TOPSIS评分居全球第4位。丹麦技术大学、中国科学院、加州大学伯克利分校、哈佛大学、麻省理工学院的合作对象数量(≥10个)和合作次数(>20次)均较多,TOPSIS评分全球排名前5,其中前2个机构聚类系数较低(0.24,0.23)而中介中心性较高(0.23,0.15),后3个机构聚类系数低(0.38,0.30,0.18)而中介中心性相对中等(0.10,0.10,0.09)。全球共23名通信作者(团队)在此领域的论文数量≥5篇,其中美国最多(8人),中国次之(5人)。结论药物合成生物学领域在过去10年间快速发展,美国和中国在此研究领域较活跃。美国是全球合作网络的中心,中国、英国和德国也是国际合作的重要参与者。中国科学院和丹麦技术大学是连接国内外研究机构的重要桥梁,麻省理工学院、哈佛大学、加州大学伯克利分校等机构则是各自小范围研究领域的中心。
文摘以ISI Web of Knowledge检索平台电子信息学科2006-2011年不同机构间的作者合作论文为研究对象,运用社会网络分析方法和工具对机构合作网络从网络密度和中心性角度进行分析,并从我国电子信息学科领域机构间的合作呈现的特点进行分析,有助于了解现阶段电子信息学科领域机构间合作的整体现状和特征。
