IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v49y2022i1p132-147..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The rise of UK–China research collaboration: Trends, opportunities and challenges
[The West Should Start Sending Its Scientists to China]

Author

Listed:
  • Jonathan Adams
  • Jo Johnson
  • Jonathan Grant

Abstract

China has become an impactful science superpower, but it is asserted that its influence provides it with disproportionate benefits that some national research policies have not thus far appreciated. To create context, Web of Science data are used to analyse research collaborations between the UK and China: trends in volume of output between 1981 and 2019; citation impact; and comparative performance across research fields. UK–China collaboration increased from fewer than 100 co-authored papers before 1990, to 750 per year in 2000, 3,324 in 2010, and 16,267 papers (10.9 per cent of UK output) in 2019. UK–China collaboration is concentrated in technology-based fields: in some (e.g. telecommunication), over 30 per cent of UK papers are in collaboration with Chinese-based researchers. The paper discusses the policy consequences to the UK of this indicative dependency, arguing that exiting from such collaborations is ill advised, provided the risks, perceived or real, are mapped, managed, and mitigated.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:49:y:2022:i:1:p:132-147.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scab069
    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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jonathan Adams & Karen Gurney & Stuart Marshall, 2007. "Profiling citation impact: A new methodology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(2), pages 325-344, August.
    2. Smriti Mallapaty, 2020. "China bans cash rewards for publishing papers," Nature, Nature, vol. 579(7797), pages 18-18, March.
    3. 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.
    4. Potter, Ross W.K. & Szomszor, Martin & Adams, Jonathan, 2020. "Interpreting CNCIs on a country-scale: The effect of domestic and international collaboration type," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4).
    5. Hoekman, Jarno & Frenken, Koen & Tijssen, Robert J.W., 2010. "Research collaboration at a distance: Changing spatial patterns of scientific collaboration within Europe," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 662-673, June.
    6. Loet Leydesdorff & Ping Zhou, 2005. "Are the contributions of China and Korea upsetting the world system of science?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 63(3), pages 617-630, June.
    7. Leydesdorff, Loet & Wagner, Caroline S., 2008. "International collaboration in science and the formation of a core group," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 317-325.
    8. Gordon Rogers & Martin Szomszor & Jonathan Adams, 2020. "Sample size in bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 777-794, October.
    9. Jakob Edler, 2008. "Creative internationalization: widening the perspectives on analysis and policy regarding international R&D activities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 337-352, August.
    10. Jennifer Dusdal & Justin J W Powell, 2021. "Benefits, Motivations, and Challenges of International Collaborative Research: A Sociology of Science Case Study," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 48(2), pages 235-245.
    11. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nataliya Matveeva & Ivan Sterligov & Andrey Lovakov, 2022. "International scientific collaboration of post-Soviet countries: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(3), pages 1583-1607, March.
    2. Elizabeth S. Vieira, 2023. "The influence of research collaboration on citation impact: the countries in the European Innovation Scoreboard," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3555-3579, June.
    3. A. Velez-Estevez & P. García-Sánchez & J. A. Moral-Munoz & M. J. Cobo, 2022. "Why do papers from international collaborations get more citations? A bibliometric analysis of Library and Information Science papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7517-7555, December.
    4. Graf, Holger & Kalthaus, Martin, 2018. "International research networks: Determinants of country embeddedness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1198-1214.
    5. Jyoti Dua & Hiran H. Lathabai & Vivek Kumar Singh, 2023. "Measuring and characterizing research collaboration in SAARC countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(2), pages 1265-1294, February.
    6. Kadri Ukrainski & Jaan Masso & Hanna Kanep, 2014. "Cooperation patterns in science within Europe: the standpoint of small countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(3), pages 845-863, June.
    7. Danielle H. Lee, 2019. "Predictive power of conference-related factors on citation rates of conference papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 281-304, January.
    8. Gordon Rogers & Martin Szomszor & Jonathan Adams, 2020. "Sample size in bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 777-794, October.
    9. Concepta McManus & Abilio Afonso Baeta Neves & Andrea Queiroz Maranhão & Antonio Gomes Souza Filho & Jaime Martins Santana, 2020. "International collaboration in Brazilian science: financing and impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2745-2772, December.
    10. Frenken, Koen & Hardeman, Sjoerd & Hoekman, Jarno, 2009. "Spatial scientometrics: Towards a cumulative research program," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 222-232.
    11. Tolga Yuret, 2016. "International trade in ideas," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(3), pages 899-916, June.
    12. Zsolt Kohus & Márton Demeter & Gyula Péter Szigeti & László Kun & Eszter Lukács & Katalin Czakó, 2022. "The Influence of International Collaboration on the Scientific Impact in V4 Countries," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-13, September.
    13. Brito, Ricardo & Rodríguez-Navarro, Alonso, 2018. "Research assessment by percentile-based double rank analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 315-329.
    14. Lili Wang & Xianwen Wang & Niels J. Philipsen, 2017. "Network structure of scientific collaborations between China and the EU member states," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 765-781, November.
    15. Eli Rudinow Saetnan & Richard Philip Kipling, 2016. "Evaluating a European knowledge hub on climate change in agriculture: Are we building a better connected community?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 1057-1074, November.
    16. Jiang, Ling (Alice) & Zhu, Nibing & Yang, Zhilin & Xu, Shen & Jun, Minjoon, 2018. "The relationships between distance factors and international collaborative research outcomes: A bibliometric examination," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 618-630.
    17. 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.
    18. Potter, Ross W.K. & Szomszor, Martin & Adams, Jonathan, 2020. "Interpreting CNCIs on a country-scale: The effect of domestic and international collaboration type," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4).
    19. Hamid Bouabid & Adèle Paul-Hus & Vincent Larivière, 2016. "Scientific collaboration and high-technology exchanges among BRICS and G-7 countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(3), pages 873-899, March.
    20. Hu, Guangyuan & Ni, Rong & Tang, Li, 2022. "Do international nonstop flights foster influential research? Evidence from Sino-US scientific collaboration," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).

    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:49:y:2022:i:1:p:132-147.. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.