IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdp/texdis/td362.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The scientific and technological trajectories of four Latin American countries: Mexico, Costa Rica, Argentina, and Brazil

Author

Listed:
  • Leonardo Costa Ribeiro

    (Cedeplar-UFMG)

  • Isabel de Azeredo Moura

    (Cedeplar-UFMG)

  • Luiza Teixeira de Melo Franco

    (Cedeplar-UFMG)

  • Márcia Siqueira Rapini

    (Cedeplar-UFMG)

  • Eduardo da Motta e Albuquerque

    (Cedeplar-UFMG)

Abstract

This paper introduces the differences and similarities of interactions between science and technology (S&T) among four Latin American countries: Argentina, Brazil, Costa Rica and Mexico. Through the analysis of articles and patents data as well as the elaboration of global matrices and national three-dimensional matrices, it was possible to observe the recent trajectory of the scientific and technological production of countries. The results indicate that the Latin American countries have a similar pattern regarding their scientific and technological structure and they are part of a regime characterized by immature National Systems of Innovation (NSI).

Suggested Citation

  • Leonardo Costa Ribeiro & Isabel de Azeredo Moura & Luiza Teixeira de Melo Franco & Márcia Siqueira Rapini & Eduardo da Motta e Albuquerque, 2009. "The scientific and technological trajectories of four Latin American countries: Mexico, Costa Rica, Argentina, and Brazil," Textos para Discussão Cedeplar-UFMG td362, Cedeplar, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdp:texdis:td362
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cedeplar.ufmg.br/pesquisas/td/TD%20362.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leonardo Costa Ribeiro & Ricardo Machado Ruiz & Américo Tristão Bernardes & Eduardo Motta Albuquerque, 2010. "Matrices of science and technology interactions and patterns of structured growth: implications for development," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(1), pages 55-75, April.
    2. Bernardes, Americo Tristao & Albuquerque, Eduardo da Motta e, 2003. "Cross-over, thresholds, and interactions between science and technology: lessons for less-developed countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 865-885, 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. Carlos Bianchi & Pablo Galaso & Sergio Palomeque, 2020. "Invention and Collaboration Networks in Latin America: Evidence from Patent Data," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 20-04, Instituto de Economía - IECON.

    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. Kim, Jinhee & Lee, Keun, 2022. "Local–global interface as a key factor in the catching up of regional innovation systems: Fast versus slow catching up among Taipei, Shenzhen, and Penang in Asia," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    2. Leonardo Costa Ribeiro & Glenda Kruss & Gustavo Britto & Américo Tristão Bernardes & Eduardo Motta e Albuquerque, 2014. "A methodology for unveiling global innovation networks: patent citations as clues to cross border knowledge flows," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 61-83, October.
    3. Cătălin Emilian Boja & Claudiu Herţeliu & Marian Dârdală & Bogdan Vasile Ileanu, 2018. "Day of the week submission effect for accepted papers in Physica A, PLOS ONE, Nature and Cell," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 887-918, November.
    4. Ulisses Pereira dos Santos, 2017. "Regional distribution of the National System of Innovation actors and economic development: an international comparison," Brazilian Journal of Political Economy, Center of Political Economy, vol. 37(4), pages 850-869.
    5. Wang, Jean J. & Ye, Fred Y., 2021. "Probing into the interactions between papers and patents of new CRISPR/CAS9 technology: A citation comparison," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    6. Helena Barnard & Robin Cowan & Moritz Müller, 2016. "On the value of foreign PhDs in the developing world: Training versus selection effects," Working Papers of BETA 2016-04, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    7. Qingjun Zhao & Jiancheng Guan, 2012. "Modeling the dynamic relation between science and technology in nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(2), pages 561-579, February.
    8. Yu-Wei Chang, 2014. "Exploring scientific articles contributed by industries in Taiwan," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(2), pages 599-613, May.
    9. Slavo Radosevic & Esin Yoruk, 2014. "Are there global shifts in the world science base? Analysing the catching up and falling behind of world regions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(3), pages 1897-1924, December.
    10. Mu-Hsuan Huang & Ssu-Han Chen & Chia-Ying Lin & Dar-Zen Chen, 2014. "Exploring temporal relationships between scientific and technical fronts: a case of biotechnology field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1085-1100, February.
    11. Jaimin Goh & Jaehong Lee & Wonchang Hur & Yunchang Ju, 2019. "Do Analysts Fully Reflect Information in Patents about Future Earnings?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-17, May.
    12. Guijie Zhang & Yuqiang Feng & Guang Yu & Luning Liu & Yanqiqi Hao, 2017. "Analyzing the time delay between scientific research and technology patents based on the citation distribution model," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1287-1306, June.
    13. Jae-Yong Choung & Hye-Ran Hwang, 2013. "The evolutionary patterns of knowledge production in Korea," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(2), pages 629-650, February.
    14. Leonardo Costa Ribeiro & Ricardo Machado Ruiz & Américo Tristão Bernardes & Eduardo da Motta e Albuquerque, 2008. "Matrices of science and technology interactions: implications for development," Textos para Discussão Cedeplar-UFMG td333, Cedeplar, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais.
    15. Robert J. W. Tijssen, 2007. "Africa’s contribution to the worldwide research literature: New analytical perspectives, trends, and performance indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 71(2), pages 303-327, May.
    16. Ming-Sin Choong & Ying-Che Hsieh & Chan-Yuan Wong, 2024. "Resilient or Resistant: Pandemic Crisis and Early Observations of Different Preventive Capabilities from Cumulativeness of Scientific Research Points of View," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(3), pages 11976-12005, September.
    17. Barnard, H. & Cowan, R. & Müller, M., 2012. "Global excellence at the expense of local diffusion, or a bridge between two worlds? Research in science and technology in the developing world," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 756-769.
    18. Chaves, Catari Vilela & Carvalho, Soraia Schultz Martins & Silva, Leandro Alves & Teixeira, Tânia Cristina & Bernardes, Patrícia, 2012. "The point of view of firms in Minas Gerais about the contribution of universities and research institutes to R&D activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1683-1695.
    19. Helena Barnard & John Cantwell, 2006. "Knowledge in the Theory of the Firm and MNC: Asset or Action? A Commentary on Foss N. “Knowledge and Organisation in the Theory of the MNC”," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 10(1), pages 21-27, March.
    20. Yuzhe Miao & Jaeyong Song & Keun Lee & Chuyue Jin, 2018. "Technological catch-up by east Asian firms: Trends, issues, and future research agenda," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 639-669, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Latin American countries; science and technology interaction; national systems of innovation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth
    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cdp:texdis:td362. 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: Gustavo Britto (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/pufmgbr.html .

    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.