Macro-level indicators of the relations between research funding and research output

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 3, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 353-362

  Leydesdorff, Loet ^a   Wagner, Caroline ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b SRI INTERNATIONAL   (United States)

^c GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Efficiency; Nation; Output indicator; R D expenditure; S T policies

Indexed keywords

EID: 68649127846     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2009.05.005     Document Type: Article

References (93)

1. Abramowitz M. Resource and output trends in the United States since 1870. American Economic Review 46 (1956) 5-23
2. Archibugi D., and Coco A. Measuring technological capabilities at the country level: A survey and a menu for choice. Research Policy 34 2 (2005) 175-194
3. Barras R. Interactive innovation in financial and business services: The vanguard of the service revolution. Research Policy 19 (1990) 215-237
4. Boyack K.W., Klavans R., and Börner K. Mapping the backbone of science. Scientometrics 64 3 (2005) 351-374
5. Brécard D., Fougeyrollas A., Le Mouël P., Lemiale L., and Zagamé P. Macro-economic consequences of European research policy: Prospects of the Nemesis model in the year 2030. Research Policy 35 7 (2006) 910-924
6. Breschi S., Lissoni F., and Malerba F. Knowledge-relatedness in firm technological diversification. Research Policy 32 1 (2003) 69-87
7. Carlsson B. Internationalization of innovation systems: A survey of the Literature. Research Policy 35 1 (2006) 56-67
8. Chen, J. (2005). China Experience on Strengthen Capacity of Health Research System, Paper presented at the Global Forum for Health Issues, Mumbai, September 12-16, 2005; available at http://www.globalforumhealth.org/filesupld/forum9/CD%20Forum%209/papers/Chen%20J.pdf.
9. Coe, D. T., Helpman, E., & Hoffmaister, A. W. (2008). International R&D Spillovers and Institutions. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research; available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w14069.
10. De Moya-Anegón F., and Herrero-Solana V. Science in America Latina: A comparison of bibliometric and scientific-technical indicators. Scientometrics 46 2 (1999) 299-320
11. Denison E.F. Measuring the Contribution of education (and the Residual) to economic growth. The residual factor and economic growth (1964), OECD, Paris pp. 13-55
12. DiMaggio P.J., and Powell W.W. The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review 48 (1983) 147-160
13. Dolfsma, W., & Leydesdorff, L. (2009). Lock-in & break-out from technological trajectories: Modeling and policy implications. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2009.02.004.
14. Dosi G., Llerena P., and Labini M.S. The relationships between science, technologies and their industrial exploitation: An illustration through the myths and realities of the so-called 'European Paradox'. Research Policy 35 10 (2006) 1450-1464
15. Edgerton D. The charge of technology. Nature 455 7216 (2008) 1030-1031
16. Edquist C., and McKelvey M. High R&D intensity without high-tech products: A Swedish paradox?. In: Nielsen K., and Johnson B. (Eds). Institutions and economic change: New perspectives on markets, firms and technology (1998), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK 131-149
17. Elg L. Is there a Swedish "Paradox"? (2003), VINNOVA Innovation Systems, Stockholm 6 pp
18. Elkana Y., Lederberg J., Merton R.K., Thackray A., and Zuckerman H. Toward a metric of science: The advent of science indicators (1978), Wiley, New York, etc.
19. Engelsman E.C., and Van Raan A.F.J. International comparison of technological activities and specializations: A patent-based monitoring system. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 5 2 (1993) 113-136
20. Engelsman E.C., and Van Raan A.F.J. A patent-based cartography of technology. Research Policy 23 1 (1994) 1-26
21. European Commission (2000). Towards a European research area. Brussels, 18 January 2000; at http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/era/pdf/com2000-6-en.pdf.
22. European Commission (2005). Working together for growth and jobs. A new start for the Lisbon Strategy; at http://europa.eu.int/growthandjobs/pdf/COM2005_024_en.pdf.
23. Freeman C. Technology and economic performance: Lessons from Japan (1987), Pinter, London
24. Garfield E. Citation indexes for science. Science 122 3159 (1955) 108-111
25. Garfield E. Citation indexing: Its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities (1979), John Wiley, New York
26. In: Griliches Z. (Ed). R & D, patents, and productivity (1984), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL
27. Griliches Z. Productivity, R&D and the data constraint. American Economic Review 84 1 (1994) 1-23
28. Grupp H., Münt G., and Schmoch U. Assessing different types of patent data for describing high-technology export performance. Innovation, patents and technological strategies (1996), OECD, Paris pp. 271-287
29. Hall B.H., Jaffe A.B., and Trajtenberg M. The NBER patent-citations cata file: Lessons, insights, and methodological tools. In: Jaffe A.B., and Trajtenberg M. (Eds). Patents, citations, & innovations (2002), The MIT Press, Cambrigde, MA/London 403-459
30. ITG. The science of science policy: A federal research roadmap (2008), National Science and Technology Council and the Office of Science and Technology Policy, Washington, DC
31. Jaffe A.B., and Trajtenberg M. Patents, citations, and innovations: A window on the knowledge economy (2002), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA/London
32. Jorgenson D.W., and Stiroh K.J. Information technology and growth. The American Economic Review 89 2 (1999) 109-115
33. Kander A., and Ejermo O. The Swedish paradox. In: Karlsson C., Johansson B., and Stough R. (Eds). Entrepreneurship and innovation in functional regions (2008), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK
34. King D.A. The scientific impact of nations. Nature 430 July (2004) 311-316
35. Klavans R., and Boyack K. Towards a consensus map of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 60 3 (2009) 455-476
36. Leten, B., Belderbos, R., & Van Looy, B. (2007). Technological diversification, coherence and performance of firms (No. MSI 0706). Leuven/Eindhoven: KU Leuven: Department of Managerial Economics, Strategy and Innovation (MSI), 27; available at http://www.econ.kuleuven.be/fetew/pdf_publicaties/MSI_0706.pdf.
37. Leydesdorff L. The impact of EC science policies on the transnational publication system. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 4 (1992) 279-298
38. Leydesdorff L. Is the European union becoming a single publication system?. Scientometrics 47 2 (2000) 265-280
39. Leydesdorff, L. (2004). The university-industry knowledge relationship: Analyzing patents and the science base of technologies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 55(11), 991-1001.
40. Leydesdorff L. The knowledge-based economy: Modeled, measured, simulated (2006), Universal Publishers, Boca Raton, FL
41. Leydesdorff L. Caveats for the use of citation indicators in research and journal evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59 2 (2008) 278-287
42. Leydesdorff L., and Fritsch M. Measuring the knowledge base of regional innovation systems in Germany in terms of a triple helix dynamics. Research Policy 35 10 (2006) 1538-1553
43. Leydesdorff L., and Wagner C.S. International collaboration in science and the formation of a core group. Journal of Informetrics 2 4 (2008) 317-325
44. Leydesdorff L., and Wagner C.S. Is the United States losing ground in science? A global perspective on the world science system. Scientometrics 78 1 (2009) 23-36
45. Leydesdorff L., and Zhou P. Are the contributions of China and Korea upsetting the world system of science?. Scientometrics 63 3 (2005) 617-630
46. Linmans, J. (2008). Does 'hard' impact analysis work for the humanities after all? Paper presented at the Workshop on Research Evaluation, Metrics and Open Access in the Humanities, Trinity College, Dublin, 18-20 September 2008.
47. Lundvall B.-A. Innovation as an interactive process: From user-producer interaction to the national system of innovation. In: Dosi G., Freeman C., Nelson R., Silverberg G., and Soete L. (Eds). Technical change and economic theory (1988), Pinter, London 349-369
48. In: Lundvall B.-A. (Ed). National systems of innovation (1992), Pinter, London
49. Mansfield E. Contribution of R&D to economic growth in the United States. Science 175 4021 (1972) 477-486
50. Mansfield E. Academic research and industrial innovation. Research Policy 20 1 (1991) 1-12
51. Mansfield E. Academic research and industrial innovation: An update of empirical findings. Research Policy 26 7-8 (1998) 773-776
52. Marburger III J.H. Wanted: Better benchmarks. Science 308 May (2005) 1087-1087
53. Martin B., and Irvine J. Assessing basic research: Some partial indicators of scientific progress in radio astronomy. Research Policy 12 (1983) 61-90
54. Merton R.K. Science and technology in a democratic order. Journal of Legal and Political Sociology 1 (1942) 115-126
55. Moed H.F., Burger W.J.M., Frankfort J.G., and Raan A.F.J.V. The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance. Research Policy 14 (1985) 131-149
56. Mowery D.C., and Rosenberg N. The influence of market demand upon innovation: A critical reveiw of some empirical studies. Research Policy 8 (1979) 102-153
57. Narin F., Hamilton K.S., and Olivastro D. The increasing link between US technology and public science. Research Policy 26 3 (1997) 317-330
58. Narin F., and Olivastro D. Status report: Linkage between technology and science. Research Policy 21 (1992) 237-249
59. National Science Board. (2008). Science and engineering indicators. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation; available at http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind08/, 588.
60. In: Nelson R.R. (Ed). Government and technical progress: A cross-industry analysis (1982), Pergamon, New York
61. In: Nelson R.R. (Ed). National innovation systems: A comparative analysis (1993), Oxford University Press, New York
62. Nelson R.R., and Winter S.G. An evolutionary theory of economic change (1982), Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
63. OECD. The measurement of scientific and technical activities: "Frascati Manual" (1963), OECD, Paris
64. OECD. The residual factor and economic growth (1964), OECD, Paris
65. OECD. Frascati manual: Proposed standard practice for surveys on research and experimental development (2002), OECD, Paris
66. OECD. Science, technology and innovation indicators in a changing world: Responding to policy needs (2007), OECD, Paris
67. OECD. Main science and technology indicators Vol. 2008/2 (2009), OECD, Paris
68. Park H.W., Hong H.D., and Leydesdorff L. A comparison of the knowledge-based innovation systems in the economies of South Korea and the Netherlands using triple helix indicators. Scientometrics 65 1 (2005) 3-27
69. Pavitt K. Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a theory and a taxonomy. Research Policy 13 6 (1984) 343-373
70. Porter A.L., and Cunningham S.W. Tech mining: Exploiting new technologies for competitive advantage (2005), Wiley, Hoboken, NJ
71. Price D.d.S. Little science, big science (1963), Columbia University Press, New York
72. Rafols, I., & Leydesdorff, L. Content-based and algorithmic classifications of journals: Perspectives on the dynamics of scientific communication and indexer effects, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, doi:10.1002/asi.21086, in press.
73. Reikard G. Endogenous technical advance and the stochastic trend in output: A neoclassical approach. Research Policy 34 10 (2005) 1476-1490
74. Romer P.M. Increasing returns and long-run growth. The Journal of Political Economy 94 5 (1986) 1002-1037
75. Rosenberg N. Perspectives on technology (1976), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
76. Rosenberg N. Inside the black box: Technology and economics (1982), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, etc.
77. Sahal D. Patterns of technological innovation (1981), Addison Wesley, Reading, Mass
78. Sampat B.N. Patenting and US academic research in the 20th century: The world before and after Bayh-Dole. Research Policy 35 (2006) 772-789
79. Sapsalis E., Van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie B., and Navon R. Academic vs. industry patenting: An in-depth analysis of what determines patent value. Research Policy 35 10 (2006) 1631-1645
80. Shelton R.D. Relations between national research investment and publication output: Application to an American Paradox. Scientometrics 74 2 (2008) 191-205
81. Skolnikoff E.B. The elusive transformation: Science, technology and the evolution of international politics (1993), Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ
82. Solow R.M. Technical progress and the aggregate production function. Review of Economics and Statistics 39 (1957) 312-320
83. Sorenson O., and Fleming L. Science and the diffusion of knowledge. Research Policy 33 10 (2004) 1615-1634
84. Steele C., Butler L., and Kingsley D. The publishing imperative: The pervasive influence of publication metrics. Learned Publishing 19 4 (2006) 277-290
85. Steinmueller W.E. Knowledge-based economies and information and communication technologies. International Social Science Journal 54 171 (2002) 141-153
86. Trajtenberg M. A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations. The RAND Journal of Economics 21 1 (1990) 172-187
87. Verspagen B. University research, intellectual property rights and European innovation systems. Journal of Economic Surveys 20 4 (2006) 607-632
88. Vinkler P. Science indicators, economic development and the wealth of nations. Scientometrics 63 (2005) 417-419
89. Vinkler P. Correlation between the structure of scientific research, scientometric indicators and GDP in EU and non-EU countries. Scientometrics 74 2 (2008) 237-254
90. Von Hippel E. Open source shows the way: Innovation by and for users-no manufacturer required. Sloan Management Review 42 4 (2001) 82-86
91. Wagner C.S. The new invisible college (2008), Brookings Press, Washington, DC
92. Whitley R.D. The intellectual and social organization of the sciences (1984), Oxford University Press, Oxford
93. Zhou P., and Leydesdorff L. The emergence of China as a leading nation in science. Research Policy 35 1 (2006) 83-104