IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v86y2011i1d10.1007_s11192-010-0235-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Agrifood research in Europe: a global perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Balázs Borsi

    (GKI Economic Research Co.
    Eszterházy Károly College)

  • András Schubert

    (Hungarian Academy of Sciences)

Abstract

The paper has the general aim of assessing the worldwide research activity in agricultural and food science and technology as it is reflected by the mainstream journal literature. The specific research questions were as follows: (1) What is the position of the European Research Area (ERA) represented by 33 countries in this study, on the world map of agrifood science publications? (2) Which countries are influential and what is their position? (3) Are there any specific European strengths and weaknesses by subfields of agrifood science? Overall, assessed by the total number of publications, the European Research Area (ERA), represented by 33 countries in this study, is in a dominant position on the world map of agrifood science. However, agrifood publications from the United States are more influential (judged by the average citation rates per paper). Correlation has been found between economic power and agrifood science publications: this is true not only for the total number of papers, but also for influence (measured by, again, the citation rates). Within Europe, the UK, Germany, France, Spain and the Netherlands dominate the agrifood research fields also in terms of citations. The Scandinavian countries, the Benelux states and Switzerland manage to produce influential papers across several fields of agrifood science. The EU’s New Member States—a populous area—together have less than 10% share in Europe’s agrifood publications and in citations they account for a 3–4% portion only. It seems that deepening of the integration of the national research systems in the European Research Area is desirable to have more impact of European agrifood research viewed from a global perspective.

Suggested Citation

  • Balázs Borsi & András Schubert, 2011. "Agrifood research in Europe: a global perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(1), pages 133-154, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:86:y:2011:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-010-0235-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-010-0235-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-010-0235-3
    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/s11192-010-0235-3?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. Hashem Farahat, 2002. "Authorship patterns in agricultural sciences in Egypt," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 55(2), pages 157-170, August.
    2. Geetha Seetharam & I. K. Ravichandra Rao, 1999. "Growth of food science and technology literature: A comparison of CFTRI, India and the world," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 44(1), pages 59-79, January.
    3. K. C. Garg & Suresh Kumar & Kashmiri Lal, 2006. "Scientometric profile of Indian agricultural research as seen through Science Citation Index Expanded," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 68(1), pages 151-166, July.
    4. P. H. Alfaraz & Amalia Mirta Calviño, 2004. "Bibliometric study on food science and technology: Scientific production in Iberian-American countries (1991-2000)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 61(1), pages 89-102, September.
    5. van Raan, A. F. J. & van Leeuwen, Th. N., 2002. "Assessment of the scientific basis of interdisciplinary, applied research: Application of bibliometric methods in Nutrition and Food Research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 611-632, May.
    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. Matteo Lascialfari & Marie-Benoît Magrini & Guillaume Cabanac, 2022. "Unpacking research lock-in through a diachronic analysis of topic cluster trajectories in scholarly publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(11), pages 6165-6189, November.
    2. Tomaz Bartol & Gordana Budimir & Primoz Juznic & Karmen Stopar, 2016. "Mapping and classification of agriculture in Web of Science: other subject categories and research fields may benefit," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 979-996, November.
    3. Zhigang Hu & Gege Lin & Taian Sun & Xianwen Wang, 2018. "An EU without the UK: mapping the UK’s changing roles in the EU scientific research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1185-1198, June.
    4. I. Jarić & J. Gessner, 2012. "Analysis of publications on sturgeon research between 1996 and 2010," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(2), pages 715-735, February.
    5. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Esther Ferrándiz & M. Dolores León & Pedro J. Moreno, 2017. "The geography of university scientific production in Europe: an exploration in the field of Food Science and Technology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 215-240, July.

    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. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Hessels, Laurens K., 2011. "Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 463-472, April.
    2. Jiang Tan & Hui-Zhen Fu & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2014. "A bibliometric analysis of research on proteomics in Science Citation Index Expanded," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1473-1490, February.
    3. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    4. K. C. Garg & S. Kumar, 2014. "Scientometric profile of Indian scientific output in life sciences with a focus on the contributions of women scientists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(3), pages 1771-1783, March.
    5. Thed N. Van Leeuwen & Martijn S. Visser & Henk F. Moed & Ton J. Nederhof & Anthony F. J. Van Raan, 2003. "The Holy Grail of science policy: Exploring and combining bibliometric tools in search of scientific excellence," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 57(2), pages 257-280, June.
    6. Choong-Han Song, 2003. "Interdisciplinarity and knowledge inflow/outflow structure among science and engineering research in Korea," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(1), pages 129-141, September.
    7. Ismael Rafols & Martin Meyer, 2010. "Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: case studies in bionanoscience," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(2), pages 263-287, February.
    8. Ismael Rafols & Alan Porter & Loet Leydesdorff, 2009. "Overlay Maps of Science: a New Tool for Research Policy," SPRU Working Paper Series 179, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    9. Rafael Ball & Bernhard Mittermaier & Dirk Tunger, 2009. "Creation of journal-based publication profiles of scientific institutions — A methodology for the interdisciplinary comparison of scientific research based on the J-factor," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(2), pages 381-392, November.
    10. Lubango, Louis Mitondo & Pouris, Anastassios, 2010. "Is patenting of technical inventions in university sectors impeding the flow of scientific knowledge to the public? a case study of South Africa," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 241-248.
    11. Tianwei He, 2009. "International scientific collaboration of China with the G7 countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(3), pages 571-582, September.
    12. Hakyeon Lee, 2015. "Uncovering the multidisciplinary nature of technology management: journal citation network analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 51-75, January.
    13. Chiara Carusi & Giuseppe Bianchi, 2020. "A look at interdisciplinarity using bipartite scholar/journal networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 867-894, February.
    14. Hsu-Hao Tsai, 2011. "Research trends analysis by comparing data mining and customer relationship management through bibliometric methodology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 425-450, June.
    15. Lili Yuan & Yanni Hao & Minglu Li & Chunbing Bao & Jianping Li & Dengsheng Wu, 2018. "Who are the international research collaboration partners for China? A novel data perspective based on NSFC grants," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 401-422, July.
    16. H. Martinez & A. Jaime & J. Camacho, 2012. "Relative absorptive capacity: a research profiling," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(3), pages 657-674, September.
    17. Rodrigo Costas & Thed N. Leeuwen & María Bordons, 2012. "Referencing patterns of individual researchers: Do top scientists rely on more extensive information sources?," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(12), pages 2433-2450, December.
    18. P. H. Alfaraz & Amalia Mirta Calviño, 2004. "Bibliometric study on food science and technology: Scientific production in Iberian-American countries (1991-2000)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 61(1), pages 89-102, September.
    19. Radhamany Sooryamoorthy, 2010. "Medical research in South Africa: a scientometric analysis of trends, patterns, productivity and partnership," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(3), pages 863-885, September.
    20. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2017. "Specialization versus diversification in research activities: the extent, intensity and relatedness of field diversification by individual scientists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1403-1418, September.

    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:86:y:2011:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-010-0235-3. 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.