IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v23y1996i1p39-44.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Science policy for a highly collaborative science system

Author

Listed:
  • Diana Hicks
  • J Sylvan Katz

Abstract

The UK science system consists of institutions that produce scientific and technical knowledge and the collaborations between them. Collaboration between institutions, as measured using co-authored scientific papers, is increasing steadily. Collaboration between individuals, indicated by papers with more than one author, has been increasing for a long time. Collaboration between institutions in different countries has increased at a constant rate for over 20 years. By the turn of the century institutional collaboration will probably account for more than 50% of UK scientific output: it will become the rule not the exception, and science policy will need to accommodate this pervasive cooperation. We discuss how policy for science might have to adapt to a highly connected research system. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Diana Hicks & J Sylvan Katz, 1996. "Science policy for a highly collaborative science system," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 39-44, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:23:y:1996:i:1:p:39-44
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/spp/23.1.39
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hanna Hottenrott & Michael E. Rose & Cornelia Lawson, 2021. "The rise of multiple institutional affiliations in academia," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(8), pages 1039-1058, August.
    2. Paul A. David & Louise C. Keely, 2003. "The Economics of Scientific Research Coalitions: Collaborative Network Formation in the Presence of Multiple Funding Agencies," Chapters, in: Aldo Geuna & Ammon J. Salter & W. Edward Steinmueller (ed.), Science and Innovation, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Jonathan Adams & Jo Johnson & Jonathan Grant, 2022. "The rise of UK–China research collaboration: Trends, opportunities and challenges [The West Should Start Sending Its Scientists to China]," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(1), pages 132-147.
    4. Teemu Makkonen & Timo Mitze, 2016. "Scientific collaboration between ‘old’ and ‘new’ member states: Did joining the European Union make a difference?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(3), pages 1193-1215, March.
    5. Bo Jarneving, 2010. "Regional research and foreign collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(1), pages 295-320, April.
    6. Adams, James D. & Black, Grant C. & Clemmons, J. Roger & Stephan, Paula E., 2005. "Scientific teams and institutional collaborations: Evidence from U.S. universities, 1981-1999," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 259-285, April.
    7. J. Sylvan Katz & Guillermo Armando Ronda-Pupo, 2019. "Cooperation, scale-invariance and complex innovation systems: a generalization," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 1045-1065, November.
    8. Butler, Linda, 2003. "Explaining Australia's increased share of ISI publications--the effects of a funding formula based on publication counts," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 143-155, January.
    9. Yuan Chih Fu & Marcelo Marques & Yuen-Hsien Tseng & Justin J. W. Powell & David P. Baker, 2022. "An evolving international research collaboration network: spatial and thematic developments in co-authored higher education research, 1998–2018," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(3), pages 1403-1429, March.
    10. Donghun Yoon, 2017. "The information science policy for the public open data of the national research institute," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 1406321-140, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:23:y:1996:i:1:p:39-44. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.