IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v93y2012i1d10.1007_s11192-012-0651-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

China and India: The two new players in the nanotechnology race

Author

Listed:
  • Sujit Bhattacharya

    (National Institute of Science Technology and Development Studies)

  • Shilpa

    (National Institute of Science Technology and Development Studies)

  • Madhulika Bhati

    (National Institute of Science Technology and Development Studies)

Abstract

Nanotechnology is promising to be the ‘transformative’ technology of the 21st century with its boundless potential to revolutionize a wide range of industries. Stakes are high as projected estimate of market value and economic and social benefits are immense for countries that can attain competency in this technology. This has stimulated OECD countries as well as emerging economies to channel huge resources for developing core capabilities in this technology. Unlike, other key technologies, recent influential reports highlight China in particular and to some extent India, Brazil and other emerging economies competing with advanced OECD countries in ‘nanotechnology’. The present paper investigates through bibliometric and innovation indicators to what extent China and India have been able to assert their position in the global stage. The paper also underscores the importance of capturing indications from standards and products/processes along with publications and patents to capture more accurately the latent variable ‘performance’. Study shows that China’s progress is remarkable; it has already attained leading position in publications and standard development. India is making its presence more visible particularly in publications. China’s research is more sophisticated and addresses nano-materials and its applications whereas India’s research shows healthy trend towards addressing developmental problems.

Suggested Citation

  • Sujit Bhattacharya & Shilpa & Madhulika Bhati, 2012. "China and India: The two new players in the nanotechnology race," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(1), pages 59-87, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:93:y:2012:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0651-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0651-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-012-0651-7
    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/s11192-012-0651-7?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. Altenburg, Tilman & Schmitz, Hubert & Stamm, Andreas, 2008. "Breakthrough China's and India's Transition from Production to Innovation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 325-344, February.
    2. Sujit Bhattacharya & Hildrun Kretschmer & Martin Meyer, 2003. "Characterizing intellectual spaces between science and technology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(2), pages 369-390, October.
    3. Martin Meyer, 2007. "What do we know about innovation in nanotechnology? Some propositions about an emerging field between hype and path-dependency," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 779-810, March.
    4. Huang, Can & Wu, Yilin, 2010. "Sure bet or scientometric mirage? An assessment of Chinese progress in nanotechnology," MERIT Working Papers 2010-028, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    5. Sujit Bhattacharya & Madhulika Bhati, 2011. "China’s Emergence as a Global Nanotech Player: Lessons for Countries in Transition," China Report, , vol. 47(4), pages 243-262, November.
    6. 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. Vivek Kumar Singh & Ashraf Uddin & David Pinto, 2015. "Computer science research: the top 100 institutions in India and in the world," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(2), pages 529-553, August.
    2. 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.
    3. Alexander I. Terekhov, 2017. "Bibliometric spectroscopy of Russia’s nanotechnology: 2000–2014," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(3), pages 1217-1242, March.
    4. Ashraf Uddin & Vivek Kumar Singh & David Pinto & Ivan Olmos, 2015. "Scientometric mapping of computer science research in Mexico," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 97-114, October.
    5. Sujit Bhattacharya & Shilpa & Arshia Kaul, 2015. "Emerging countries assertion in the global publication landscape of science: a case study of India," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(2), pages 387-411, May.
    6. Weishu Liu & Mengdi Gu & Guangyuan Hu & Chao Li & Huchang Liao & Li Tang & Philip Shapira, 2014. "Profile of developments in biomass-based bioenergy research: a 20-year perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(2), pages 507-521, May.
    7. Manjari Manisha & G. Mahesh, 2014. "Bibliometric characteristics of champion works of China and India," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1101-1111, February.
    8. Suneel Kunamaneni, 2019. "CHALLENGES IN MOVING FROM INCREMENTAL TO RADICAL LOW-COST INNOVATION IN EMERGING AND TRANSITION COUNTRIES: Institutional Perspectives Based on Rechargeable Battery Innovation in China and Point-of-Use," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(03), pages 1-36, April.
    9. Siluo Yang & Xin Xing & Dietmar Wolfram, 2018. "Difference in the impact of open-access papers published by China and the USA," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 1017-1037, May.
    10. Sujit Bhattacharya & Arshia Kaul & Shilpa & Praveen Sharma, 2015. "Role of bilateral institution in influencing collaboration: case study of CEFIPRA—a bilateral S&T institution established by India and France," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 169-194, January.
    11. Jia Zheng & Zhi-yun Zhao & Xu Zhang & Dar-zen Chen & Mu-hsuan Huang, 2014. "International collaboration development in nanotechnology: a perspective of patent network analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 683-702, January.
    12. Guiyang Zhang & Chaoying Tang, 2018. "How R&D partner diversity influences innovation performance: an empirical study in the nano-biopharmaceutical field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1487-1512, September.

    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. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    2. Maria Karaulova & Abdullah Gök & Oliver Shackleton & Philip Shapira, 2016. "Science system path-dependencies and their influences: nanotechnology research in Russia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 645-670, May.
    3. Yutao Sun & Cong Cao, 2020. "The dynamics of the studies of China’s science, technology and innovation (STI): a bibliometric analysis of an emerging field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1335-1365, August.
    4. Qingjun Zhao & Jiancheng Guan, 2013. "Love dynamics between science and technology: some evidences in nanoscience and nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 113-132, January.
    5. 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.
    6. Giuliani, Elisa & Martinelli, Arianna & Rabellotti, Roberta, 2016. "Is Co-Invention Expediting Technological Catch Up? A Study of Collaboration between Emerging Country Firms and EU Inventors," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 192-205.
    7. Gandenberger, Carsten, 2018. "China's trajectory from production to innovation: Insights from the photovoltaics sector," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S03/2018, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    8. de Oliveira, Thaiane Moreira & de Albuquerque, Sofia & Toth, Janderson Pereira & Bello, Debora Zava, 2018. "International cooperation networks of the BRICS bloc," SocArXiv b6x43, Center for Open Science.
    9. 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.
    10. Jana M. Kleibert & Laura Mann, 2020. "Capturing Value amidst Constant Global Restructuring? Information-Technology-Enabled Services in India, the Philippines and Kenya," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 32(4), pages 1057-1079, September.
    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. Cusmano, Lucia & Morrison, Andrea & Rabellotti, Roberta, 2010. "Catching up Trajectories in the Wine Sector: A Comparative Study of Chile, Italy, and South Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 1588-1602, November.
    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. Mahmut Yaşar & Catherine Paul, 2012. "Firm performance and knowledge spillovers from academic, industrial and foreign linkages: the case of China," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 237-253, December.
    15. William Latham & Christian Le Bas & Dmitry Volodin, 2012. "Mobility, Productivity and Patent Value for Asian Prolific Inventors : China, Japan, Korea and Taiwan, 1975 - 2010," Working Papers halshs-00734980, HAL.
    16. Jiancheng Guan & Ying He, 2007. "Patent-bibliometric analysis on the Chinese science — technology linkages," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(3), pages 403-425, September.
    17. Pietrobelli, Carlo & Rabellotti, Roberta, 2011. "Global Value Chains Meet Innovation Systems: Are There Learning Opportunities for Developing Countries?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 1261-1269, July.
    18. Tong Zhao & Zhijie Song & Tianjiao Li, 2018. "Effect of innovation capacity, production capacity and vertical specialization on innovation performance in China's electronic manufacturing: Analysis from the supply and demand sides," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-23, July.
    19. Sargent, John & Matthews, Linda, 2009. "China versus Mexico in the Global EPZ Industry: Maquiladoras, FDI Quality, and Plant Mortality," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1069-1082, June.
    20. Ingo Liefner & Stefan Hennemann, 2011. "Structural Holes and New Dimensions of Distance: The Spatial Configuration of the Scientific Knowledge Network of China's Optical Technology Sector," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 43(4), pages 810-829, April.

    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:93:y:2012:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0651-7. 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.