IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jintdv/v19y2007i7p982-996.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scientific collaboration and the Kerala model: does the internet make a difference?

Author

Listed:
  • Radhamany Sooryamoorthy

    (University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa)

  • Ricardo B. Duque

    (Louisiana State University, USA)

  • Marcus Antonius Ynalvez

    (Texas A&M International University, USA)

  • Wesley Shrum

    (Louisiana State University, USA)

Abstract

Information and communication technologies (ICTs) have become the panacea for development for many developing countries in the modern, knowledge-based world. Kerala, a state in India known for its model of development, has not only joined this bandwagon but has also selected ICTs as a means to pull the state out of its present crisis. The paper examines the institutions of knowledge production in Kerala (academic and scientific sectors), which are generally the forerunner of other sectors in terms of their use of ICTs. We examine the extent to which ICTs have affected research communication and collaboration, the processes, which are crucial in developing a knowledge-based economy. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Radhamany Sooryamoorthy & Ricardo B. Duque & Marcus Antonius Ynalvez & Wesley Shrum, 2007. "Scientific collaboration and the Kerala model: does the internet make a difference?," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(7), pages 982-996.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jintdv:v:19:y:2007:i:7:p:982-996
    DOI: 10.1002/jid.1376
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/jid.1376
    File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/jid.1376?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Katz, J. Sylvan & Martin, Ben R., 1997. "What is research collaboration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, March.
    2. Shoba Arun & Thankom Arun, 2002. "ICTs, gender and development: women in software production in Kerala," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(1), pages 39-50.
    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. Gloor, Peter A. & Fronzetti Colladon, Andrea & Grippa, Francesca, 2020. "The digital footprint of innovators: Using email to detect the most creative people in your organization," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 254-264.
    2. Radhamany Sooryamoorthy, 2009. "Do types of collaboration change citation? Collaboration and citation patterns of South African science publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(1), pages 177-193, October.
    3. Radhamany Sooryamoorthy, 2009. "Collaboration and publication: How collaborative are scientists in South Africa?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(2), pages 419-439, August.
    4. Ricardo B. Duque & Wesley M. Shrum & Omar Barriga & Guillermo Henríquez, 2009. "Internet practice and professional networks in Chilean science: Dependency or progress?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(1), pages 239-263, October.

    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. Manning, Stephan, 2017. "The rise of project network organizations: Building core teams and flexible partner pools for interorganizational projects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1399-1415.
    2. Hayashi, Takayuki, 2003. "Effect of R&D programmes on the formation of university-industry-government networks: comparative analysis of Japanese R&D programmes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1421-1442, September.
    3. Marian-Gabriel Hâncean & Matjaž Perc & Jürgen Lerner, 2021. "The coauthorship networks of the most productive European researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 201-224, January.
    4. Duk Hee Lee & Il Won Seo & Ho Chull Choe & Hee Dae Kim, 2012. "Collaboration network patterns and research performance: the case of Korean public research institutions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 925-942, June.
    5. Eustache Mêgnigbêto, 2018. "Correlation Between Transmission Power and Some Indicators Used to Measure the Knowledge-Based Economy: Case of Six OECD Countries," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 9(4), pages 1168-1183, December.
    6. Belén Álvarez-Bornstein & Adrián A. Díaz-Faes & María Bordons, 2019. "What characterises funded biomedical research? Evidence from a basic and a clinical domain," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 805-825, May.
    7. Per O. Seglen & Dag W. Aksnes, 2000. "Scientific Productivity and Group Size: A Bibliometric Analysis of Norwegian Microbiological Research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 49(1), pages 125-143, August.
    8. Craig Boardman & Barry Bozeman, 2006. "Implementing a 'bottom-up,' multi-sector research collaboration: The case of the Texas air quality study," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 51-69.
    9. Hoekman, Jarno & Rake, Bastian, 2024. "Geography of authorship: How geography shapes authorship attribution in big team science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(2).
    10. Corsini, Alberto & Pezzoni, Michele, 2023. "Does grant funding foster research impact? Evidence from France," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4).
    11. Mohammadi, Ali & Broström, Anders & Franzoni, Chiara, 2015. "Work Force Composition and Innovation: How Diversity in Employees’ Ethnical and Disciplinary Backgrounds Facilitates Knowledge Re-combination," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 413, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    12. Carillo, Maria Rosaria & Papagni, Erasmo & Sapio, Alessandro, 2013. "Do collaborations enhance the high-quality output of scientific institutions? Evidence from the Italian Research Assessment Exercise," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 25-36.
    13. Laurent R. Bergé, 2017. "Network proximity in the geography of research collaboration," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 96(4), pages 785-815, November.
    14. Lemarchand, Guillermo A., 2012. "The long-term dynamics of co-authorship scientific networks: Iberoamerican countries (1973–2010)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 291-305.
    15. Jan Resenga Maluleka & Omwoyo Bosire Onyancha & Isola Ajiferuke, 2016. "Factors influencing research collaboration in LIS schools in South Africa," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 337-355, May.
    16. Ernest Miguélez & Rosina Moreno, 2013. "Do Labour Mobility and Technological Collaborations Foster Geographical Knowledge Diffusion? The Case of European Regions," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 321-354, June.
    17. Andrej Kastrin & Jelena Klisara & Borut Lužar & Janez Povh, 2017. "Analysis of Slovenian research community through bibliographic networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 791-813, February.
    18. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jae Young Choi, 2012. "The taxonomy of research collaboration in science and technology: evidence from mechanical research through probabilistic clustering analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 719-735, June.
    19. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2012. "Identifying interdisciplinarity through the disciplinary classification of coauthors of scientific publications," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(11), pages 2206-2222, November.
    20. Önder, Ali Sina & Schweitzer, Sascha & Yilmazkuday, Hakan, 2021. "Specialization, field distance, and quality in economists’ collaborations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).

    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:wly:jintdv:v:19:y:2007:i:7:p:982-996. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/5102/home .

    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.