Using data from co-authorships at the international level in all fields of science in 1990 and 2000, and within six case studies at the sub-field level in 2000, different explanations for the growth of international collaboration in science and technology are explored. We find that few of the explanations within the literature can be supported by a detailed review of the data. To enable further exploration of the role of recognition and rewards as ordering mechanisms within the system, we apply new tools emerging from network science. These enquiries shows that the growth of international co-authorships can be attributed to self-organizing phenomenon based on preferential attachment (searching for recognition and reward) within networks of co-authors. The co-authorship links can be considered as a complex network with sub-dynamics involving features of both competition and cooperation. The analysis suggests that the growth of international collaboration is more likely to emerge from dynamics at the sub-field level operating in all fields of science, albeit under institutional constraints. Implications for the management of global scientific collaborations are explored.Version 24 June 04 to domestic collaborations. Narin et al. (1991) has shown that internationally coauthored articles are more highly cited than other articles. Despite this body of evidence, the question of why this class of research is growing so quickly or why it has a relatively high impact needs more discussion. A theoretically satisfying explanation of the phenomenon has yet to be offered. (Katz & Hicks 1987;Wagner-Döbler 2001) This article continues these inquiries along two lines. Drawing upon data (published elsewhere) for 1990 and 2000, different explanations offered within the literature for the increase in international collaboration are discussed. We find that existing explanations are incapable of fully explaining the emerging structure of ICS. In seeking other explanations, we turn to recent literature from the network sciences. Physicists needing large datasets for the study of network dynamics have used scientific co-authorships as a subject. In the process, they have revealed fascinating dynamics about collaborative networks, including the mechanism of preferential attachment as a structuring factor.Using the tools developed by Barabási & Albert (1999) and Newman (2001) we investigate whether these mechanisms also apply at the international level. Our findings reveal the emerging structure of linkages within the international system at the sub-field level, and perhaps move science studies closer towards a theoretically satisfying explanation for the rise of international collaboration. A brief review of the literature examining the rise of international collaborationOver the past 25 years, a number of reasons have been suggested to explain the growth of ICS. One group considers the environment within which science operates: the environmental factors can be divided into internal and external factors. A second group considers the con...

No abstract

International collaboration as measured by co-authorship relations on refereed papers grew linearly

Global collaboration continues to grow as a share of all scientific cooperation, measured as coauthorships of peer-reviewed, published papers. The percent of all scientific papers that are internationally coauthored has more than doubled in 20 years, and they account for all the growth in output among the scientifically advanced countries. Emerging countries, particularly China, have increased their participation in global science, in part by doubling their spending on R&D; they are increasingly likely to appear as partners on internationally coauthored scientific papers. Given the growth of connections at the international level, it is helpful to examine the phenomenon as a communications network and to consider the network as a new organization on the world stage that adds to and complements national systems. When examined as interconnections across the globe over two decades, a global network has grown denser but not more clustered, meaning there are many more connections but they are not grouping into exclusive ‘cliques’. This suggests that power relationships are not reproducing those of the political system. The network has features an open system, attracting productive scientists to participate in international projects. National governments could gain efficiencies and influence by developing policies and strategies designed to maximize network benefits—a model different from those designed for national systems.