Knowledge production and nanotechnology: Characterizing American dissertation research, 1999-2009

Technology in Society

Volumn 34, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 127-137

  Walsh, James P ^a   Ridge, Claron ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Bibliometrics; Higher education; Innovation; Knowledge production; Nanotechnology; Research capacity

Indexed keywords

BIBLIOMETRIC; BIBLIOMETRICS; ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS; ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT; FEDERAL FUNDINGS; HIGHER EDUCATION; KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTION; METROPOLITAN AREA; POLICY MAKERS; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT; RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURE; RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES; SOCIAL SCIENTISTS;

COMPETITION; EDUCATION; INNOVATION; NANOTECHNOLOGY; WEBSITES;

RESEARCH;

CLUSTER ANALYSIS; COMPETITIVENESS; ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT; HIGH TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY; HIGHER EDUCATION; INNOVATION; METROPOLITAN AREA; NANOTECHNOLOGY; POLICY MAKING;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 84860881216     PISSN: 0160791X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2012.02.001     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Acs Z., Anselin L., Varga A. Patents and innovation counts as measures of regional production of new knowledge. Research Policy 2002, 31:1069-1085.
2. Anselin L., Varga A., Acs Z. Local geographic spillovers between university research and high technology innovations. Journal of Urban Economics 1997, 42:422-448.
3. Appelbaum R.P., Parker R.A. China's bid to become a global nanotech leader: advancing nanotechnology through state-led programs and international collaborations. Science and Public Policy 2008, 35(5):319-334.
4. Appelbaum R.P., Parker R.A., Cao C., Gereffi G. China's (not so hidden) developmental State: becoming a leading nanotechnology innovator in the twenty-first century. State of innovation: the U.S. Government's role in technology development 2011, Paradigm, Boulder. F. Block, M.R. Keller (Eds.).
5. Bernard C., Billand P., Frachisse D., Massard N. Social distance versus spatial distance in R&D cooperation: empirical evidence from European collaboration choices in micro and nanotechnologies. Papers in Regional Science 2007, 86(3):495-519.
6. Brown P., Green A., Lauder H. High skills: globalization, competitiveness and skill formation 2001, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
7. Castells M. The rise of the network society 1996, Blackwell, Oxford.
8. Daim T.U., Rueda G., Martin H., Gerdsri P. Forecasting emerging technologies: use of bibliometrics and patent analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 2006, 73:31.
9. Dicken P. Global shift: mapping the changing contours of the global economy 2007, Gulliford, London.
10. Enders J., de Weert E. Science, training and career: changing modes of knowledge production and labour Marketsî. Higher Education Policy 2004, 17:135-152.
11. Guan J., Ma M. China's emerging presence in nanoscience and nanotechnology: a comparative bibliometric study of several nanoscience 'Giants'. Research Policy 2007, 36(6):880-886.
12. Heinze T. Nanoscience and nanotechnology in Europe: analysis of publications and patent applications including comparisons with the United States. Nanotechnology Law and Business 2004, 1(4):427-447.
13. Hullman A., Meyer M. Publications and patents in nanotechnology. Scientometrics 2003, 58(3):507-527.
14. Igami M, Okazaki T. Capturing nanotechnology's current state of development via analysis of patents. OECD science, technology and industry working papers 2007; pp. 4.
15. Kostoff R.N., Koytcheff R.G., Lau C.G.Y. Global nanotechnology research literature overview. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 2007, 74(9):1733-1747.
16. Leonard D., Sensiper S. The role of tacit knowledge in group innovation. California Management Review 1998, 40(3):112-132.
17. Mangematin V. Emergence of science districts and divergent technology: the case of nanotechnologies. Paper presented at workshop on mapping the emergence of nanotechnologies and understanding the engine of growth and development 2006, Grenoble, France.
18. Mangematin V., Robin S. The two faces of PhD students: management of early careers of French PhDs in life sciences. Science and Public Policy 2003, 30(6):405-414.
19. McCormack E. Number of foreign students bounces back to near record high. Chronicle of Higher Education 2007, 54(12):A1.
20. Michelson E.S. Globalization at the nano frontier: the future of nanotechnology policy in the United States, China, and India. Technology in Society 2008, 30(3-4):405-410.
21. Miyazaki K., Islam N. Nanotechnology systems of innovation - an analysis of industry and academia research activities. Technovation 2007, 27(11):661-675.
22. National Science Foundation Characteristics of doctoral scientists and engineers in the United States 2009, NSF, Arlington, Va.
23. National Science and Technology Council The national nanotechnology initiative: supplement to the President's FY 2011 budget 2010, NSTC, Washington D.C.
24. Nicolaisen Jeppe Bibliometrics and citation analysis: from the science citation index to cybermetrics. JASIST 2010, 61(1):205-207.
25. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Science, technology and industry outlook 2010, OECD, Paris.
26. Porter A., Youtie J., Shapira P., Schoeneck D. Refining search terms of nanotechnology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 2008, 10(5):715-728.
27. Robinson D.K.R., Rip A., Mangematin V. Technological agglomeration and the emergence of clusters and networks in nanotechnology. Research Policy 2007, 36(6):871-879.
28. Roco M.C. Broader societal issues of nanotechnology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 2002, 5(4):181-189.
29. Roco M.C. International strategy for nanotechnology research. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 2002, 3(6):353-360.
30. Sassen S. The global city 2001, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
31. Saxenian A.L. Regional advantage: culture and competition in Silicon Valley and route 128 1996, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
32. Schummer J. The global institutionalization of nanotechnology research: a bibliometric approach to the assessment of science policy. Scientometrics 2007, 70(3):669-692.
33. Shapira P., Youtie J. Emergence of nanodistricts in the United States: path dependency or new opportunities?. Economic Development Quarterly 2008, 22(3):187-199.
34. Stephan P., Black G.C., Chang T. The small size of the small scale market: the early-stage labor market for highly skilled nanotechnology workers. Research Policy 2007, 36(6):887-892.
35. Stephan P, Black G, Gurmu S. The Knowledge Production Function for University Patenting. Andrew Young School of Policy Studies Research Paper 2006; Series 07-06.
36. Youtie J., Maurizio I., Graham S. Assessing the nature of nanotechnology: can we uncover an emerging general purpose technology?. Journal of Technology Transfer 2008, 33(3):315-329.
37. Youtie J., Shapira P. Mapping the nanotechnology enterprise: a multi-indicator analysis of emerging nanodistricts in the US South. Journal of Technology Transfer 2008, 33(2):209-223.
38. Youtie J., Shapira P., Porter A. Nanotechnology publications and citations by leading countries and blocs. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 2008, 10:981-986.
39. Zucker L.G., Darby M.R. Socio-economic impact of nanoscale science: initial results and nanobank 2005, [Working Paper No. 11181], National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
40. Zucker L.G., Darby M.R., Liu R., Ma H. Minerva unbound: knowledge stocks, knowledge flows and new knowledge production. Research Policy 2007, 36:850-863.