The world network of scientific collaborations between cities: domestic or international dynamics
1. The world network of scientific
collaborations between cities:
domestic or international
dynamics?
Marion Maisonobe*, Denis Eckert, Michel Grossetti, Laurent Jégou,
Béatrice Milard
*marion.maisonobe@univ-tlse2.fr,
UMR LISST-CIEU, CNRS, Toulouse (France)
Fédération INCREASE, CRIEF, Poitiers (France)
21st International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators
Valencia, Spain – September 14-16, 2016
2. Dataset : the SCI Expanded
More than a million publications per year between 1999
and 2010
Two step method
1. Geocode addresses of authors for each publication
2. Assign data at the urban area level
Analyze the spatial distribution of scientific activity and
exchanges between cities through co-authorship data
Dataset and method
3. Web visualization tool shared among all project participants to control the results
of automatic geocoding processes and delineate urban areas’ perimeters
(developed in 2010 with OpenLayers)
4. Counting method : the case of an article co-signed by 16 authors in Paris and Toulouse
An only link :
Paris-Toulouse
Value = 1
Publication weight :
Paris = 0,5
Toulouse = 0,5
Whole Normalised Counting (Gauffriau et al, 2008)
7. The growth of interurban
collaborations
The growth of interurban co-authored scientific publications between 2000 and 2007.
Source: SCI Expanded (articles, reviews, letters), 3-year moving average.
1999-2001 2006-2008 2009-2011
One city 68.1 64.1 61.5
Several cities in the same country 15.6 17.8 18.9
Several cities, several countries 16.0 17.8 19.4
Total number of publications 760720 1114379 1297369
Source: Science Citation Index Expanded (articles, reviews letters)
% of publications authored from :
Global share of publications (%)
8. Among the 35
most co-authoring
countries (2007*)
% of the country
in the whole
interurban co-
authorship
(2007*)
Domestic co-
authorship
evolution (2000-
2007) n-fold**
International co-
authorship evolution
(2000-2007) n-fold**
Czech-Republic 0.5 1.45 ↗↗ 0.85 ↘↘
Poland 1.0 1.38 ↗↗ 0.85 ↘↘
Portugal 0.6 1.36 ↗↗ 0.85 ↘↘
Greece 0.6 1.35 ↗↗ 0.83 ↘↘
Hungary 0.4 1.33 ↗↗ 0.90 ↘↘
Turkey 1.0 1.30 ↗↗ 0.63 ↘↘
Iran 0.5 1.28 ↗↗ 0.73 ↘↘
Brazil 2.0 1.25 ↗↗ 0.69 ↘↘
Russia 1.4 1.23 ↗↗ 0.90 ↘↘
Mexico 0.6 1.20 ↗↗ 0.89 ↘↘
Israel 0.7 1.18 ↗↗ 0.92 ↘↘
Belgium 1.1 1.14 ↗↗ 0.94 ↘↘
Taiwan 1.5 1.13 ↗↗ 0.74 ↘↘
India 1.7 1.12 ↗↗ 0.84 ↘↘
China 7.3 1.10 ↗↗ 0.82 ↘↘
Countries with growing domestic co-
authorship
9. Among the 35
most co-authoring
countries (2007*)
% of the country
in the whole
interurban co-
authorship
(2007*)
Domestic co-
authorship
evolution (2000-
2007) n-fold**
International co-
authorship
evolution (2000-
2007) n-fold**
Spain 2.6 1.08 ↗ 0.94 ↘
Argentina 0.4 1.07 ↗ 0.96 ↘
Denmark 0.8 1.07 ↗ 0.97 ↘
Austria 0.7 1.06 ↗ 0.99 ↘
Netherlands 2.1 1.04 ↗ 0.97 ↘
Australia 2.0 1.02 ↗ 0.99 ↘
South-Korea 2.1 1.02 ↗ 0.97 ↘
Finland 0.8 1.02 ↗ 0.98 ↘
Switzerland 1.4 1.01 - 1.00 -
Norway 0.6 1.01 - 0.99 -
Germany 6.8 1.01 - 0.99 -
Italy 4.0 1.01 - 0.99 -
Canada 3.3 1.00 - 1.00 -
France 5.0 1.00 - 1.00 -
Countries with slightly stable
interurban collaboration pattern
10. Among the 35
most co-
authoring
countries (2007*)
% of the country
in the whole
interurban co-
authorship
(2007*)
Domestic co-
authorship
evolution (2000-
2007) n-fold**
International co-
authorship
evolution (2000-
2007) n-fold**
United-States 26.7 0.99 ↘ 1.03 ↗
Japan 6.5 0.98 ↘ 1.06 ↗
Sweden 1.4 0.97 ↘ 1.02 ↗
United-Kingdom 6.1 0.90 ↘ 1.10 ↗↗
South-Africa 0.4 0.89 ↘↘ 1.07 ↗↗
New-Zealand 0.4 0.86 ↘↘ 1.08 ↗↗
Total of the 35
countries
95.0 1.03 ↗ 0.97 ↘
World total 100 1.02 ↗ 0.97 ↘
A few internationalising countries
*Normalized counting (WNC), 3-years moving average. Source: SCIExp
(articles, reviews, letters)
** % co-authorship 2007 / % co-authorship 2000
11. The top publishing
cities in 2007*
Dynamic of the
domestic co-
authorship (2000-
2007) n-fold *
Dynamic of the
international co-
authorship (2000-
2007) n-fold*
Moscow 1.27 ↗↗ 0.92 ↘
Taipei 1.21 ↗↗ 0.76 ↘
Hong Kong 1.20 ↗↗ 0.81 ↘
Beijing 1.14 ↗↗ 0.81 ↘
Melbourne 1.11 ↗↗ 0.94 ↘
Madrid 1.11 ↗↗ 0.94 ↘
Munich 1.07 ↗ 0.95 ↘
Barcelona 1.07 ↗ 0.97 ↘
Shanghai 1.05 ↗ 0.93 ↘
Montreal 1.04 ↗ 0.98 ↘
Roma 1.03 ↗ 0.97 ↘
Toronto 1.02 ↗ 0.99 ↘
Cities with growing domestic co-
authorship
12. The top publishing
cities in 2007*
Dynamic of the
domestic co-
authorship (2000-
2007) n-fold *
Dynamic of the
international co-
authorship (2000-
2007) n-fold*
Seoul 1.01 - 0.99 -
Paris 1.01 - 1.00 -
San Francisco Bay 1.00 - 1.01 -
Berlin 0.99 - 1.00 -
Washington-
Bethesda 0.99 - 1.01 -
Durham Research
Triangle 0.99 - 1.02 -
Philadelphia 0.99 - 1.02 -
Kyoto-Osaka 0.99 - 1.02 -
Chicago 0.99 - 1.02 -
Milan-Pavia 0.99 - 1.01 -
New York 0.98 ↘ 1.03 ↗
Tokyo 0.98 ↘ 1.04 ↗
Sydney 0.98 ↘ 1.01 ↗
Los Angeles 0.98 ↘ 1.04 ↗
Baltimore 0.98 ↘ 1.06 ↗
Boston 0.95 ↘ 1.08 ↗
London 0.86 ↘↘ 1.09 ↗↗
Key: The % of domestic
interurban co-authorship of
Moscow have been
multiplied by 1.27 between
2000 and 2007
A few inter-
nationalising
world
cities…
13.
14.
15. A more diversified (less concentrated) spatial
distribution of the world scientific enterprise
An increasing integration of emerging national
systems of research
The growing embeddedness of “world cities” into
their national space
Conclusion
16. Thank you for listening !
marion.maisonobe@univ-tlse2.fr
marion.maisonobe@yahoo.fr
@GeoMaisonobe
17. For countries where
there is a growing
dispersion of scientific
activities,
the growth of interurban
collaborations is more
pronounced within
national boundaries
than between them.
Growing autonomy and
polycentrism for
developing countries !
