The role of public funding in nanotechnology scientific production: Where Canada stands in comparison to the United States

Abstract

Document publié chez l'éditeur commercial AbstractThis paper presents cross-country comparisons between Canada and the United States in terms of the impact of public grants and scientific collaborations on subsequent nanotechnology-related publications.In this study we present the varying involvement of academic researchers and government funding to capture the influence of funded research in order to help government agencies evaluate their efficiency in financing nanotechnology research. We analyze the measures of quantity and quality of research output using time-related econometric models and compare the results between nanotechnology scientists in Canada and the United States. The results reveal that both research grants and the position of researchers in co-publication networks have a positive influence on scientific output. Our findings demonstrate that research funding yields a significantly positive linear impact in Canada and a positive non-linear impact in the United States on the number of papers and in terms of the number of citations we observe a positive impact only in the US. Our research shows that the position of scientists in past scientific networks plays an important role in the quantity and quality of papers published by nanotechnology scientists.

How to Combine Research Guarantor and Collaboration Patterns to Measure Scientific Performance of Countries in Scientific Fields: Nanoscience and Nanotechnology as a Case Study

“…To further understand how government research funding and scientific networks influence research publications in NST, a cross-country comparison between Canada and the USA was carried out (Tahmooresnejad et al, 2015). To explore the impact of funding on scientific papers and to reflect how NST research grants influence researchers' productivity, the authors used econometric methods.…”

“…The third notion deserving special mention is leadership related to the collaborative partnership and the position of scientists/institutions/countries in scientific networks as determinant for the quantity and quality of papers (Ni et al, 2011;Tahmooresnejad et al, 2015). We use the term "leadership" as defined by the Committee of Medical Journal Editors (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, 2012).…”

Who funds the production of globally visible research in the Global South?

“…1 The studies on research funding within the research on research literature investigate funding allocation/peer review; research assessment; funding priorities and agenda setting; changing landscape of research funding; policy, practical or academic relevance/ effectiveness of funding; productivity and funding; research collaborations. Such literature often focuses either on the funding for specific field of studies (Grant & Buxton, 2018;Tahmooresnejad et al, 2015) and/or a specific national context (Haake & Silander, 2021;Meroka & Ojwang, 2018). There are also studies which take a broader multi-country/ worldwide view (Curry et al, 2020;Thomas et al, 2020;Whitley et al, 2018).…”

The Nexus between Funding and Research Output: A Case Study in Universiti Teknologi MARA

“…[10] performed an econometric study focused on 68 universities and observed no significant relation between funding and research quality. However, [11] who performed a cross country analysis between the US and Canada observed a positive impact of funding on the quality of nanotechnology publications. Following this, [12] conducted an extension study of both previous study and reported that there is significant positive impact of funding on the productivity of the researchers.…”