Scientific Collaboration of Turkey with the EU Member States: The Case of Nanotechnology

Yıl 2017, Sayı: 1, 70 - 94, 20.06.2017

Zeynep Kaplan

Öz

As an emerging technology field, there is an on-going mo-tivation for analysing the trend of research networks of nanotechnol-ogy. This paper attempts to present the evolution of Turkey in nano-technology research by taking into account the academic publications to indicate the overall trend and the leading actors and subject catego-ries in the systems of nanotechnology innovation. The purpose of this paper is twofold: (i) to present the trend of nanotechnology research and (ii) to highlight Turkey’s collaboration patterns in the relevant re-search sub-fields with the EU member states. In this framework, the study aims to show whether Turkey has the capability to collaborate with the advanced group of countries such as the EU in nanotechnol-ogy and to identify the sub-fields of common interests. Finally, the re-sults of collaboration among two parties will be correlated with the Web of Science subject categories. The findings are expected to be useful for developing the future areas of research in nanotechnology domain in collaboration with the EU. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Nanotechnology, Turkey-EU Scientific Collaboration, Bibliometric analysis

Kaynakça

• Adams, J., C. King, D. Pendlebury, D. Hook and J. Wilsdon (2011), “Global Research Report Middle East: Exploring the Changing Land-scape of Arabian, Persian, and Turkish Research”, Thompson Reuters.
• Arora, S. K., A. L. Porter, J. Youtie and P. Shapira (2013), “Capturing New Developments in an Emerging Technology: an Updated Search Strategy for Identifying Nanotechnology Research Outputs”, Scien-tometrics, 95 (1): 351-370.
• Bresnahan, T. F. and M. Tajtenberg (1995), “General Purpose Technolo- gies: Engines of Growth”, Journal of Econometrics, 65: 83-108.
• Braun, T. A. and S. Z. Schubert (1997), “Nanoscience and Nanotechnol- ogy on the Balance”, Scientometrics, 38 (2): 321–325.
• Duda, N.A. and I. Sener (2010), “Entry Barriers to the Nanotechnology Industry in Turkey”, Nanotechnology and Microelectronics: Global Dif-fusion, Economics and Policy, 167-173.
• Dumanlı, A. G. and Y. Yürüm (2007), “Nanoetchnology in Turkey”, http://digital.sabanciuniv.edu/elitfulltext/3011800000123.pdf
• Edquist, C. (1997), Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organizations (Science, Technology and the International Political Economy Series), London: Pinter.
• European Commission (2012), Turkey National Policy and European Research Area: Research Infrastructures, ERAWATCH: Platform on Research and Innovation Policies and Systems.
• Huang, C., A. Notten and N. Rasters (2010), “Nanoscience and Technol- ogy Publications and Patents: a Review of Social Science Studies and Search Strategies”, Journal of Technology Transfer, 36 (2): 145–172.
• Hullman, A. (2006), The Economic Development of Nanotechnology: Indicators Based Analysis, European Commission, DG Research, Unit “Nano S&T - Convergent Science and Technologies
• Kay, L. and P. Shapira (2009), “Developing Nanotechnology in Latin America”, Journal of Nanoparticle Research, (11): 259-278.
• Kostoff, R. N., R. G. Koytcheff and C. G. Y. Lau (2007), “Global Nano-technology Research Metrics”, Scientometrics, 70 (3): 565-601.
• Luukkonen, T., R. J. W. Tijssen, O. Persson and G. Sivertsen (1993), “The Measurement of International Scientific Collaboration”, Scien- tometrics, 28 (1): 15-36.
• Malerba, F. (2006), Innovation, Industrial Dynamics and Industry Evolu- tion: Progress and the Research Agendas, Revue OFCE.
• Mogoutov, A., and B. Kahane (2007), “Data Search Strategy for Science and Technology Emergence: a Scalable and Evolutionary Query for Nanotechnology Tracking”, Research Policy, 36 (6): 893-903.
• Maghrebi, M., A. Abbasi and S. Amiri (2011), “A Collective and Abridged Lexical Query for Delineation of Nanotechnology Publica- tions”, Scientometrics, 86: 15-25.
• Ovalle-Perandones, M. A., J. Gorraiz, M. Wieland, C. Gumpenberger and C. Olmeda-Gomez (2013), “The Influence of European Framework Programmes on Scientific Collaboration in Nanotechnology”, Scientometrics.
• Porter, A. L., J. Youtie, P. Shapira and D. Schoeneck (2008), “Refining Search Terms for Nanotechnology”, Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 10 (5): 715-728.
• Porter, A. L. and J. Youtie (2009), “How Interdisciplinary is Nanotechnology”, Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 11 (5): 1023-1041.
• Palmberg, C. and H. M. Dernis (2009), “Nanotechnology: An Overview Based on Indicators and Statistics”, STI Working Paper 2009/7, OECD: Statistical, Analysis of Science, Technology and Industry,
• Pendlebury, D. A. (2008), White Paper Using Bibliometrics in Evaluating Research, Thomson Reuters, Research Department, Philadelphia, USA
• Shapira, P., J. Youtie and A. L. Porter (2010), “The Emergence of Social Science Research on Nanotechnology”, Scientometrics, 85: 595-611.
• Statnano (2013), International Collaborative Situation in Nanoscience Publications, Nano Statistics Nano Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard.
• TERI (2010), Nanotechnology Development in India: Building Capability and Governing the Technology, The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) Briefing Paper.
• Thomson Reuters (2008), Whitepaper Using Bibliometrics: A Guide to Evaluating Research Performance with Citation Data, Philadelphia.
• TUBITAK (2004a), National Science and Technology Policies: 2003-2023 Strategy Document, Version 19, November, Ankara (in Turkish)
• TUBITAK (2004b), Nanoscience and Nanotechnology Strategies, Vision 2023 Project Nanotechnology Strategy Group, August, Ankara
• Yoon, B. and Y. Park (2003), “A Text-mining-Based Patent Network: Analytical Tool for High Technology Trend”, Journal of High Tech- nology Management Research, 15 (1): 37-50.
• Youtie, J., P., Shapira and A.L. Porter (2008), “Nanotechnology Publications and Citations by Leading Countries and Blocs”, Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 10 (6): 981-986.