IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01522764.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is there a first mover advantage in science? Pioneering behavior and scientific production in nanotechnology

Author

Listed:
  • Mareva Sabatier

    (IREGE - Institut de Recherche en Gestion et en Economie - USMB [Université de Savoie] [Université de Chambéry] - Université Savoie Mont Blanc)

  • Barthelemy Chollet

    (EESC-GEM Grenoble Ecole de Management, IREGE - Institut de Recherche en Gestion et en Economie - USMB [Université de Savoie] [Université de Chambéry] - Université Savoie Mont Blanc)

Abstract

This article investigates whether pioneers in a research field have a sustainable first mover advantage in publications. Combining bibliometric (publications, citations, co-authorship) with survey data on 495 nanotechnology researchers, we analyzed career attributes, professional context and production overtime. Our econometric estimates highlight two main results. First, pioneering behavior is not exogenous: it is more probable among scientists who are already established in their " mother-discipline " (before entering nanotechnology), have a strong collaboration network, and have easy access to field-specific resources. Second, even after controlling for the endogeneity of entry timing, we find a strong first mover advantage: pioneers in the emerging field exhibit significantly higher scientific production in that field in the long run.

Suggested Citation

  • Mareva Sabatier & Barthelemy Chollet, 2017. "Is there a first mover advantage in science? Pioneering behavior and scientific production in nanotechnology," Post-Print hal-01522764, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01522764
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2017.01.003
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-01522764v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-01522764v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2017.01.003?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christopher F Baum & Mark E. Schaffer & Steven Stillman, 2003. "Instrumental variables and GMM: Estimation and testing," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 3(1), pages 1-31, March.
    2. Robinson, Douglas K.R. & Rip, Arie & Mangematin, Vincent, 2007. "Technological agglomeration and the emergence of clusters and networks in nanotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 871-879, July.
    3. Paula E. Stephan & Sharon G. Levin, 1997. "The Critical Importance of Careers in Collaborative Scientific Research," Revue d'Économie Industrielle, Programme National Persée, vol. 79(1), pages 45-61.
    4. William Boulding & Markus Christen, 2008. "Disentangling Pioneering Cost Advantages and Disadvantages," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 699-716, 07-08.
    5. Barry Bozeman & Philippe Larédo & Vincent Mangematin, 2007. "Understanding the emergence and deployment of “nano” S&T," Post-Print hal-00424523, HAL.
    6. Beaudry, Catherine & Allaoui, Sedki, 2012. "Impact of public and private research funding on scientific production: The case of nanotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1589-1606.
    7. Hausman, Jerry A & Taylor, William E, 1981. "Panel Data and Unobservable Individual Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(6), pages 1377-1398, November.
    8. Gal-Or, Esther, 1985. "First Mover and Second Mover Advantages," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 26(3), pages 649-653, October.
    9. Marvin B. Lieberman & David B. Montgomery, 1988. "First‐mover advantages," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(S1), pages 41-58, June.
    10. 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.
    11. Richard Jensen, 2003. "Innovative leadership: First-mover advantages in new product adoption," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 21(1), pages 97-116, January.
    12. Avenel, E. & Favier, A.V. & Ma, S. & Mangematin, V. & Rieu, C., 2007. "Diversification and hybridization in firm knowledge bases in nanotechnologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 864-870, July.
    13. Pezzoni, Michele & Sterzi, Valerio & Lissoni, Francesco, 2012. "Career progress in centralized academic systems: Social capital and institutions in France and Italy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 704-719.
    14. Claudia A. Perry & Ronald E. Rice, 1998. "Scholarly communication in developmental dyslexia: Influence of network structure on change in a hybrid problem area," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 49(2), pages 151-168, February.
    15. Michael L. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2010. "Grilichesian Breakthroughs: Inventions of Methods of Inventing and Firm Entry in Nanotechnology," NBER Chapters, in: Contributions in Memory of Zvi Griliches, pages 143-164, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Carole J. Lee & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Guo Zhang & Blaise Cronin, 2013. "Bias in peer review," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(1), pages 2-17, January.
    17. Jue Wang & Philip Shapira, 2011. "Funding acknowledgement analysis: an enhanced tool to investigate research sponsorship impacts: the case of nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 563-586, June.
    18. Bozeman, Barry & Laredo, Philippe & Mangematin, Vincent, 2007. "Understanding the emergence and deployment of "nano" S&T," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 807-812, July.
    19. Jerry W. Kim & Brayden G King, 2014. "Seeing Stars: Matthew Effects and Status Bias in Major League Baseball Umpiring," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(11), pages 2619-2644, November.
    20. Stephan, Paula E., 2010. "The Economics of Science," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 217-273, Elsevier.
    21. Mogoutov, Andrei & Kahane, Bernard, 2007. "Data search strategy for science and technology emergence: A scalable and evolutionary query for nanotechnology tracking," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 893-903, July.
    22. García-Villaverde, Pedro M. & Ruiz-Ortega, María J. & Parra-Requena, Gloria, 2012. "Towards a comprehensive model of entry timing in the ICT industry: Direct and indirect effects," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 297-310.
    23. Gwendolyn K. Lee, 2008. "Relevance of organizational capabilities and its dynamics: what to learn from entrants' product portfolios about the determinants of entry timing," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(12), pages 1257-1280, December.
    24. repec:adr:anecst:y:2005:i:79-80:p:06 is not listed on IDEAS
    25. Sanjay K. Arora & Alan L. Porter & Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira, 2013. "Capturing new developments in an emerging technology: an updated search strategy for identifying nanotechnology research outputs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(1), pages 351-370, April.
    26. Douglas K. R. Robinson & Arie Rip & Vincent Mangematin, 2007. "Technological agglomeration and the emergence of clusters and networks in nanotechnology," Post-Print hal-00424519, HAL.
    27. Joshua S. Gans & George B. Shepherd, 1994. "How Are the Mighty Fallen: Rejected Classic Articles by Leading Economists," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 165-179, Winter.
    28. Amemiya, Takeshi & MaCurdy, Thomas E, 1986. "Instrumental-Variable Estimation of an Error-Components Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(4), pages 869-880, July.
    29. Zucker, Lynne G. & Darby, Michael R. & Furner, Jonathan & Liu, Robert C. & Ma, Hongyan, 2007. "Minerva unbound: Knowledge stocks, knowledge flows and new knowledge production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 850-863, July.
    30. Terttu Luukkonen, 2012. "Conservatism and risk-taking in peer review: Emerging ERC practices," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 48-60, February.
    31. Christopher Palmberg & Hélène Dernis & Claire Miguet, 2009. "Nanotechnology: An Overview Based on Indicators and Statistics," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2009/7, OECD Publishing.
    32. Philip Shapira & Jue Wang, 2010. "Follow the money," Nature, Nature, vol. 468(7324), pages 627-628, December.
    33. Gary L. Lilien & Eunsang Yoon, 1990. "The Timing of Competitive Market Entry: An Exploratory Study of New Industrial Products," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(5), pages 568-585, May.
    34. Anthony F. J. van Raan, 2004. "Sleeping Beauties in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 59(3), pages 467-472, March.
    35. Guan, Jiancheng & Ma, Nan, 2007. "China's emerging presence in nanoscience and nanotechnology: A comparative bibliometric study of several nanoscience `giants'," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 880-886, July.
    36. Joachim Schummer, 2004. "Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 59(3), pages 425-465, March.
    37. Whitley, Richard, 2003. "Competition and pluralism in the public sciences: the impact of institutional frameworks on the organisation of academic science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1015-1029, June.
    38. 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.
    39. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Cinzia Daraio, 2003. "Age effects in scientific productivity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(1), pages 49-90, September.
    40. Higgins, Matthew J. & Stephan, Paula E. & Thursby, Jerry G., 2011. "Conveying quality and value in emerging industries: Star scientists and the role of signals in biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 605-617, May.
    41. Van Gelderen, Marco & Kautonen, Teemu & Fink, Matthias, 2015. "From entrepreneurial intentions to actions: Self-control and action-related doubt, fear, and aversion," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 655-673.
    42. Grit Laudel, 2002. "What do we measure by co-authorships?," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 3-15, April.
    43. M. Ann McFadyen & Matthew Semadeni & Albert A. Cannella, 2009. "Value of Strong Ties to Disconnected Others: Examining Knowledge Creation in Biomedicine," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 552-564, June.
    44. Stefan Wally & Cher-Min Fong, 2000. "Effects Of Firm Performance, Organizational Slack, And Debt On Entry Timing: A Study Of Ten Emerging Product Markets In Usa," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 169-183.
    45. Carole J. Lee & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Guo Zhang & Blaise Cronin, 2013. "Bias in peer review," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(1), pages 2-17, January.
    46. April M. Franco & MB Sarkar & Rajshree Agarwal & Raj Echambadi, 2009. "Swift and Smart: The Moderating Effects of Technological Capabilities on the Market Pioneering-Firm Survival Relationship," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(11), pages 1842-1860, November.
    47. Esther Gal-Or, 1987. "First Mover Disadvantages with Private Information," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 54(2), pages 279-292.
    48. Debackere, Koenraad & Rappa, Michael A., 1994. "Institutional variations in problem choice and persistence among scientists in an emerging field," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 425-441, July.
    49. Rost, Katja, 2011. "The strength of strong ties in the creation of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 588-604, 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. Zharova, Alona & Härdle, Wolfgang Karl & Lessmann, Stefan, 2023. "Data-driven support for policy and decision-making in university research management: A case study from Germany," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 308(1), pages 353-368.
    2. Juan Xie & Kaile Gong & Jiang Li & Qing Ke & Hyonchol Kang & Ying Cheng, 2019. "A probe into 66 factors which are possibly associated with the number of citations an article received," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(3), pages 1429-1454, June.
    3. Ozdenoren, Emre & Hoppe-Wewetzer, Heidrun C. & Katsenos, Georgios, 2019. "Experimentation, Learning, and Preemption," CEPR Discussion Papers 13483, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Milan Frederik Klus & Alexander Dilger, 2020. "Success factors of academic journals in the digital age," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(3), pages 1115-1143, November.
    5. Umer Hussain & Bo Yu, 2021. "Repelolicer: A Reality or Snake Oil," South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases, , vol. 10(2), pages 167-179, August.
    6. Ciro D. Esposito & Balazs Szatmari & Jonathan M. C. Sitruk & Nachoem M. Wijnberg, 2024. "Getting off to a good start: emerging academic fields and early-stage equity financing," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 62(4), pages 1591-1613, April.
    7. Young-Sun Jang & Young Joo Ko, 2019. "How latecomers catch up to leaders in high-energy physics as Big Science: transition from national system to international collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 437-480, April.
    8. Hoppe-Wewetzer, Heidrun & Katsenos, Georgios & Ozdenoren, Emre, 2023. "The effects of rivalry on scientific progress under public vs private learning," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    9. Koppman, Sharon & Leahey, Erin, 2019. "Who moves to the methodological edge? Factors that encourage scientists to use unconventional methods," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.

    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. Bozeman, Barry & Laredo, Philippe & Mangematin, Vincent, 2007. "Understanding the emergence and deployment of "nano" S&T," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 807-812, July.
    2. Dovev Lavie & Israel Drori, 2012. "Collaborating for Knowledge Creation and Application: The Case of Nanotechnology Research Programs," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 704-724, June.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    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. 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.
    7. Philippe Larédo & Carole Rieu & Lionel Villard & Bernard Kahane & Aurélie Delemarle & Corine Genet & Vincent Mangematin, 2009. "Emergence des nanotechnologies : Vers un nouveau "modèle industriel "?," Post-Print hal-00424261, HAL.
    8. Muñoz-Écija, Teresa & Vargas-Quesada, Benjamín & Chinchilla Rodríguez, Zaida, 2019. "Coping with methods for delineating emerging fields: Nanoscience and nanotechnology as a case study," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).
    9. Philippe Larédo & Carole Rieu & Lionel Villard & Bernard Kahane & Aurélie Delemarle & Corine Genet & Vincent Mangematin, 2009. "Emergence des nanotechnologies : Vers un nouveau "modèle industriel "?," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-00424261, HAL.
    10. Beaudry, Catherine & Allaoui, Sedki, 2012. "Impact of public and private research funding on scientific production: The case of nanotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1589-1606.
    11. Goio Etxebarria & Mikel Gomez-Uranga & Jon Barrutia, 2012. "Tendencies in scientific output on carbon nanotubes and graphene in global centers of excellence for nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(1), pages 253-268, April.
    12. Coccia, Mario & Wang, Lili, 2015. "Path-breaking directions of nanotechnology-based chemotherapy and molecular cancer therapy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 155-169.
    13. 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.
    14. Berna Beyhan & M. Teoman Pamukçu, 2011. "Nanotechnology research in Turkey: A university-driven achievement," STPS Working Papers 1107, STPS - Science and Technology Policy Studies Center, Middle East Technical University, revised Jul 2011.
    15. Na Liu & Philip Shapira & Xiaoxu Yue, 2021. "Tracking developments in artificial intelligence research: constructing and applying a new search strategy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 3153-3192, April.
    16. 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.
    17. Chollet, Barthélemy & Revet, Karine, 2023. "Digging deep or scratching the surface? Contingent innovation outcomes of seeking advice from geographically distant ties," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    18. Ugo Finardi, 2013. "The technological paradigm of Nanosciences and Technologies: a study of science-technology time and space relations," Economía: teoría y práctica, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, México, vol. 39(2), pages 11-29, Julio-Dic.
    19. Vestal, Alex & Danneels, Erwin, 2018. "Knowledge exchange in clusters: The contingent role of regional inventive concentration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(10), pages 1887-1903.
    20. Chen, Chia-Hui & Ishida, Junichiro & Mukherjee, Arijit, 2023. "Pioneer, early follower or late entrant: Entry dynamics with learning and market competition," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    first mover advantage; scientific production; pioneering behavior; nanotechnology;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L31 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Nonprofit Institutions; NGOs; Social Entrepreneurship
    • C31 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models; Quantile Regressions; Social Interaction Models

    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:hal:journl:hal-01522764. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.