IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v76y2008i1d10.1007_s11192-007-1889-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The delineation of nanoscience and nanotechnology in terms of journals and patents: A most recent update

Author

Listed:
  • Loet Leydesdorff

    (University of Amsterdam)

Abstract

The journal set which provides a representation of nanoscience and nanotechnology at the interfaces among applied physics, chemistry, and the life sciences is developing rapidly because of the introduction of new journals. The relevant contributions of nations can be expected to change according to the representations of the relevant interfaces among journal sets. In the 2005 set the position of the USA decreased more than in the 2004-set, while the EU-27 gained in terms of its percentage of world share of citations. The tag “Y01N” which was newly added to the EU classification system for patents, allows for the visualization of national profiles of nanotechnology in terms of relevant patents and patent classes.

Suggested Citation

  • Loet Leydesdorff, 2008. "The delineation of nanoscience and nanotechnology in terms of journals and patents: A most recent update," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 76(1), pages 159-167, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:76:y:2008:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-007-1889-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-007-1889-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-007-1889-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-007-1889-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Scheu, M. & Veefkind, V. & Verbandt, Y. & Galan, E. Molina & Absalom, R. & Förster, W., 2006. "Mapping nanotechnology patents: The EPO approach," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 204-211, September.
    2. Robert D. Shelton, 2008. "Relations between national research investment and publication output: Application to an American Paradox," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(2), pages 191-205, February.
    3. Tibor Braun & Sándor Zsindely & Ildikó Dióspatonyi & Erika Zádor, 2007. "Gatekeeping patterns in nano-titled journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 651-667, March.
    4. Ronald N. Kostoff & Raymond G. Koytcheff & Clifford G. Y. Lau, 2007. "Global nanotechnology research metrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 565-601, March.
    5. 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.
    6. Loet Leydesdorff & Ping Zhou, 2007. "Nanotechnology as a field of science: Its delineation in terms of journals and patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 693-713, March.
    7. Robert D. Shelton & Geoffrey M. Holdridge, 2004. "The US-EU race for leadership of science and technology: Qualitative and quantitative indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 60(3), pages 353-363, August.
    8. Zhou, Ping & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2006. "The emergence of China as a leading nation in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 83-104, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. R. Karpagam & S. Gopalakrishnan & M. Natarajan & B. Ramesh Babu, 2011. "Mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology research in India: a scientometric analysis, 1990–2009," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(2), pages 501-522, November.
    2. Pedro Cosme Vieira & Aurora A. C. Teixeira, 2010. "Are finance, management, and marketing autonomous fields of scientific research? An analysis based on journal citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(3), pages 627-646, December.
    3. Shahid Yusuf, 2012. "From Technological Catch-up to Innovation : The Future of China’s GDP Growth," World Bank Publications - Reports 12781, The World Bank Group.
    4. Mario Coccia, 2011. "Evolutionary dynamics and scientific flows of nanotechnology research across geo-economic areas," CERIS Working Paper 201101, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
    5. Alessandra Colombelli & Jackie Krafft & Francesco Quatraro, 2012. "The emergence of new technology-based sectors at the regional level: a proximity-based analysis of nanotechnology," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1211, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jun 2012.
    6. Raul Gouvea & Jonathan Linton & Manuel Montoya & Steven Walsh, 2012. "Emerging Technologies and Ethics: A Race-to-the-Bottom or the Top?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(4), pages 553-567, September.
    7. Yoscelina Iraida Hernandez-García & Mónica Anzaldo Montoya, 2021. "Flow of ideas in the study of communication channels and references in publications on nanotechnology applied to food and agriculture in Mexico," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 995-1017, February.
    8. Mario Coccia & Ugo Finardi & Diego Margon, 2010. "Research trends in nanotechnology studies across geo-economic areas," CERIS Working Paper 201005, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
    9. Sabatier, Mareva & Chollet, Barthélemy, 2017. "Is there a first mover advantage in science? Pioneering behavior and scientific production in nanotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 522-533.
    10. Aurora A. C. Teixeira, 2011. "Mapping the (in)visible college(s) in the field of entrepreneurship," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 1-36, October.
    11. Ehsan Mohammadi, 2012. "Knowledge mapping of the Iranian nanoscience and technology: a text mining approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(3), pages 593-608, September.
    12. T. Gorjiara & C. Baldock, 2014. "Nanoscience and nanotechnology research publications: a comparison between Australia and the rest of the world," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(1), pages 121-148, July.
    13. Elena M. Tur & Evangelos Bourelos & Maureen McKelvey, 2022. "The case of sleeping beauties in nanotechnology: a study of potential breakthrough inventions in emerging technologies," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 69(3), pages 683-708, December.
    14. Karmen Stopar & Damjana Drobne & Klemen Eler & Tomaz Bartol, 2016. "Citation analysis and mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology: identifying the scope and interdisciplinarity of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(2), pages 563-581, February.
    15. María-Antonia Ovalle-Perandones & Juan Gorraiz & Martin Wieland & Christian Gumpenberger & Carlos Olmeda-Gómez, 2013. "The influence of European Framework Programmes on scientific collaboration in nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(1), pages 59-74, October.
    16. Colombelli, Alessandra & Krafft, Jackie & Quatraro, Francesco, 2014. "The emergence of new technology-based sectors in European regions: A proximity-based analysis of nanotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(10), pages 1681-1696.

    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. Loet Leydesdorff & Caroline Wagner, 2009. "Is the United States losing ground in science? A global perspective on the world science system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 78(1), pages 23-36, January.
    2. Lu, Kun & Wolfram, Dietmar, 2010. "Geographic characteristics of the growth of informetrics literature 1987–2008," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 591-601.
    3. Wolfgang Glänzel & Koenraad Debackere & Martin Meyer, 2008. "‘Triad’ or ‘tetrad’? On global changes in a dynamic world," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(1), pages 71-88, January.
    4. Jiancheng Guan & Gangbo Wang, 2010. "A comparative study of research performance in nanotechnology for China’s inventor–authors and their non-inventing peers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 331-343, August.
    5. Li Tang & Philip Shapira, 2011. "Regional development and interregional collaboration in the growth of nanotechnology research in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(2), pages 299-315, February.
    6. Can Huang & Ad Notten & Nico Rasters, 2011. "Nanoscience and technology publications and patents: a review of social science studies and search strategies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 145-172, April.
    7. Xiaojun Hu & Ronald Rousseau, 2009. "A comparative study of the difference in research performance in biomedical fields among selected Western and Asian countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(2), pages 475-491, November.
    8. Leydesdorff, Loet & Wagner, Caroline, 2009. "Macro-level indicators of the relations between research funding and research output," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 353-362.
    9. Patrick Herron & Aashish Mehta & Cong Cao & Timothy Lenoir, 2016. "Research diversification and impact: the case of national nanoscience development," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 629-659, November.
    10. Yves Gingras & Mahdi Khelfaoui, 2018. "Assessing the effect of the United States’ “citation advantage” on other countries’ scientific impact as measured in the Web of Science (WoS) database," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 517-532, February.
    11. Jo Royle & Louisa Coles & Dorothy Williams & Paul Evans, 2007. "Publishing in international journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 71(1), pages 59-86, April.
    12. Antonio Fernández-Cano & Manuel Torralbo & Mónica Vallejo, 2012. "Time series of scientific growth in Spanish doctoral theses (1848–2009)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(1), pages 15-36, April.
    13. Gregory J Hather & Winston Haynes & Roger Higdon & Natali Kolker & Elizabeth A Stewart & Peter Arzberger & Patrick Chain & Dawn Field & B Robert Franza & Biaoyang Lin & Folker Meyer & Vural Ozdemir & , 2010. "The United States of America and Scientific Research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(8), pages 1-9, August.
    14. Wolfgang Glänzel & Lin Zhang, 2018. "Scientometric research assessment in the developing world: A tribute to Michael J. Moravcsik from the perspective of the twenty-first century," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1517-1532, June.
    15. Dag W. Aksnes & Thed N. Leeuwen & Gunnar Sivertsen, 2014. "The effect of booming countries on changes in the relative specialization index (RSI) on country level," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(2), pages 1391-1401, November.
    16. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    17. Aashish Mehta & Patrick Herron & Yasuyuki Motoyama & Richard Appelbaum & Timothy Lenoir, 2012. "Globalization and de-globalization in nanotechnology research: the role of China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(2), pages 439-458, November.
    18. Ping Zhou & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2010. "In-depth analysis on China’s international cooperation in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(3), pages 597-612, March.
    19. Kostoff, Ronald N., 2008. "Comparison of China/USA science and technology performance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 354-363.
    20. Wong, Chan-Yuan & Goh, Kim-Leng, 2010. "Growth behavior of publications and patents: A comparative study on selected Asian economies," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 460-474.

    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:spr:scient:v:76:y:2008:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-007-1889-3. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.