Suchergebnisse

AbstractChina's approach to developing a world-class science system includes a vigorous set of programmes to attract back Chinese researchers who have overseas training and work experience. No analysis is available to show the performance of these mobile researchers. This article attempts to close part of this gap. Using a novel bibliometric approach, we estimate the stocks of overseas Chinese and returnees from the perspective of their publication activities, albeit with some limitations. We show that the share of overseas Chinese scientists in the USA is considerably larger than that in the European Union. We also show that Chinese returnees publish higher impact work and continue to publish more and at the international level than domestic counterparts. Returnees not only tend to publish more, but they are instrumental in linking China into the global network. Indeed, returnees actively co-publish with researchers in their former host system, showing the importance of scientific social capital. Future research will examine the impact of length of stay, among other factors, on such impact and integration.

The rapid rise of international collaboration over the past three decades, demonstrated in coauthorship of scientific articles, raises the question of whether countries benefit from cooperative science and how this might be measured. We develop and compare measures to ask this question. For all source publications in 2013, we obtained from Elsevier national-level full and fractional paper counts as well as accompanying field-weighted citation counts. Then we collected information from Elsevier on the percent of all internationally coauthored papers for each country, as well as Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) measures of the international mobility of the scientific workforce in 2013, and conducted a principle component analysis that produced an openness index. We added data from the OECD on government budget allocation on research and development (GBARD) for 2011 to tie in the public spending that contributed to the 2013 output. We found that openness among advanced science systems is strongly correlated with impact—the more internationally engaged a nation is in terms of coauthorships and researcher mobility, the higher the impact of scientific work. The results have important implications for policy making around investment, as well as the flows of students, researchers, and technical workers.

AbstractScholars have long hypothesized that democratic forms of government are more compatible with scientific advancement. However, empirical analysis testing the democracy–science compatibility hypothesis remains underdeveloped. This article explores the effect of democratic governance on scientific performance using panel data on 124 countries between 2007–2017. We find evidence supporting the democracy–science hypothesis. Further, using both internal and external measures of complexity, we estimate the effects of complexity as a moderating factor between the democracy–science connection. The results show differential main effects of economic complexity, globalization, and international collaboration on scientific performance, as well as significant interaction effects that moderate the effect of democracy on scientific performance. The findings show the significance of democratic governance and complex systems in national scientific performance.