The roles of geographic distance and socioeconomic factors on international collaboration among ecologists

Parreira, Micael Rosa; Machado, Karine Borges; Logares, Ramiro; Diniz‐Filho, José Alexandre Felizola; Nabout, João Carlos

doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2502-z

Cited by 43 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our analysis suggests a complex mix of these are at play in the fisheries science network. In line with work in other fields (Hoekman et al, ; Katz, ; Leahey, ; Parreira, Machado, Logares, Diniz‐Filho, & Nabout, ), even if collaboration has become increasingly internationalised, spatial proximity remains an important feature of the collaborative entanglements within the field, and this is seen across the cross‐border institutional patterns, as well as the country clusters and communities of authors within the network.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

“…This is not to argue that, for instance, linguistic ties are not an important driver of collaboration, but rather to highlight that research collaboration does have a spatial character that goes beyond this, and this in itself is reflective of an array of complex overlapping factors. Amongst these are regional political groupings, for example trade blocs (Parreira et al, ), funding mechanisms or opportunities that remain at the national and regional levels (Hoekman et al, ) and colonial ties (Adams et al, ; Boshoff, ; Nagtegaal & de Bruin, ). With respect to our immediate interests here, no doubt overlapping fishing interests—proximate and distant—matter too in shaping collaboration.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, collaborative proximity may be due to environmental similarities amongst countries. It may, therefore, make sense that researchers focused on similar geographical areas or biomes would work together (Parreira et al, ). As regards fisheries, this seems reasonable given that many countries share closely overlapping fishing grounds and thus proximate fisheries interests, across shared ecoregions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Mapping the global network of fisheries science collaboration

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As socio‐environmental problems have proliferated over the past decades, one narrative which has captured the attention of policymakers and scientists has been the need for collaborative research that spans traditional boundaries. Collaboration, it is argued, is imperative for solving these problems. Understanding how collaboration is occurring in practice is important, however, and may help explain the idea space across a field. In an effort to make sense of the shape of fisheries science, here we construct a co‐authorship network of the field, from a data set comprising 73,240 scientific articles, drawn from 50 journals and published between 2000 and 2017. Using a combination of social network analysis and machine learning, the work first maps the global structure of scientific collaboration amongst fisheries scientists at the author, country and institutional levels. Second, it uncovers the hidden subgroups—here country clusters and communities of authors—within the network, detailing also the topical focus, publication outlets and relative impact of the largest fisheries science communities. We find that whilst the fisheries science network is becoming more geographically extensive, it is simultaneously becoming more intensive. The uncovered network exhibits characteristics suggestive of a thin style of collaboration, and groupings that are more regional than they are global. Although likely shaped by an array of overlapping micro‐ and macro‐level factors, the analysis reveals a number of political–economic patterns that merit reflection by both fisheries scientists and policymakers.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mapping the global network of fisheries science collaboration

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The model has been applied to a variety of fields. In particular, because the gravity model can capture the joint effect of both the mass (e.g., the number of publications) and distance/ proximity (e.g., physical distance) of entities, it has been extensively applied to modeling research collaborations (Acosta et al, 2011;Parreira et al, 2017). In this article we integrate the five measures of proximity to measure their impact on RL flows using a gravity model.…”

Section: Impact Measures Using the Gravity Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The distance between the latitudinal and longitudinal centroid of each country It measures the research collaboration at the country level (Parreira et al, 2017).…”

Section: Geographical Distance the Distance Between The Capitals Of Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research leadership flow determinants and the role of proximity in research collaborations

Qingpeng

2019

Asso for Info Science & Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Characterizing the leadership in research is important to revealing the interaction pattern and organizational structure through research collaboration. This research defines the leadership role based on the corresponding author's affiliation, and presents the first quantitative research on the factors and evolution of 5 proximity dimensions (geographical, cognitive, institutional, social, and economic) of research leadership. The data to capture research leadership consist of a set of multi-institution articles in the fields of "Life Sciences & Biomedicine," "Technology," "Physical Sciences," "Social Sciences," and "Humanities & Arts" during 2013-2017 from the Web of Science Core Citation Database. A Tobit regression-based gravity model indicates that the mass of research leadership of both the leading and participating institutions and the geographical, cognitive, institutional, social, and economic proximities are important factors for the flow of research leadership among Chinese institutions. In general, the effect of these proximities for research leadership flow has been declining recently. The outcome of this research sheds light on the leadership evolution and flow among Chinese institutions, and thus can provide evidence and support for grant allocation policies to facilitate scientific research and collaborations.

show abstract

Which international co‐authorships produce higher quality journal articles?

Thelwall,

Kousha,

Abdoli

et al. 2024

Asso for Info Science & Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International collaboration is sometimes encouraged in the belief that it generates higher quality research or is more capable of addressing societal problems. Nevertheless, while there is evidence that the journal articles of international teams tend to be more cited than average, perhaps from increased international audiences, there is no science‐wide direct academic evidence of a connection between international collaboration and research quality. This article empirically investigates the connection between international collaboration and research quality for the first time, with 148,977 UK‐based journal articles with post publication expert review scores from the 2021 Research Excellence Framework (REF). Using an ordinal regression model controlling for collaboration, international partners increased the odds of higher quality scores in 27 out of 34 Units of Assessment (UoAs) and all Main Panels. The results therefore give the first large scale evidence of the fields in which international co‐authorship for articles is usually apparently beneficial. At the country level, the results suggests that UK collaboration with other high research‐expenditure economies generates higher quality research, even when the countries produce lower citation impact journal articles than the United Kingdom. Worryingly, collaborations with lower research‐expenditure economies tend to be judged lower quality, possibly through misunderstanding Global South research goals.

show abstract

The roles of geographic distance and socioeconomic factors on international collaboration among ecologists

Cited by 43 publications

References 37 publications

Mapping the global network of fisheries science collaboration

Mapping the global network of fisheries science collaboration

Research leadership flow determinants and the role of proximity in research collaborations

Which international co‐authorships produce higher quality journal articles?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About