1. Collaboration in a
Network Research Landscape
September 23rd, 2011
Accelerate Research Excellence Forum @ New Delhi, India
Goki Ishikawa
Director of Product Marketing, SciVal
Elsevier, Science and Technology
g.ishikawa@elsevier.com

2. Global trends we see today in research
Trends Implications
• Funding Pressures • C
Competition and C
Collaboration
• Evaluation of Research
Activities
• Efficiency and Effectiveness
• Mobility of Resources
y
• Advancement in Technology
• Accountability
y
• Internationalization
2

3. Competition …
Investment in R&D at a National Level
400,000,000
350,000,000
R&D Budget per Nation (PP USD)
300,000,000
PP
250,000,000
200,000,000
200 000 000
150,000,000
100,000,000
50,000,000
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Year
Note: China is total of “China”, “China, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region” and “China, Macao Special Administrative Region”. Data
for the following years/nations are estimated data; 2008 India, 2003/2005/2007 Australia.
Source: UNESCO, Institute of Statistics 3

4. Competition …
Rapid Growth of Research Papers
p p
500,000
450,000
450 000
400,000
on
350,000
350 000
Number of Publicatio
300,000
250,000
250 000
200,000
150,000
150 000
N
100,000
50,000
50 000
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Year
Source: SCImago (Based on SciVerse Scopus data) 4

5. Collaboration: Proportion of the world’s papers
p
produced with more than one international author
%
40
Percentage of Papers with int’l author
35
s
30
P e
25
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Source: Knowledge, Networks and Nations: Global scientific collaboration in the 21st century, The Royal Society, 2011 5

6. Collaboration: Global trend of increasing
collaboration in research activities
2008
ernational Collaborat Papers
ted s
1996
mber of Inte
Num
Rate of International Publication
Source: Knowledge, Networks and Nations: Global scientific collaboration in the 21st century, The Royal Society, 2011 6

7. Why do researchers collaborate?
… some Motivations
• Changing patterns of funding
• To increase scientific popularity, visibility and recognition
• Demands for the rationalization of scientific manpower
• Requirements of complex and large-scale instrumentation
• Increasing specialization in science
• Demands for more k
D d f knowledge in order to make significant
l d i d t k i ifi t
advances
• Growing professionalization of science
gp
• Need to gain experience or to train apprentice researchers in the
most effective way possible
• Desire t bt i
D i to obtain cross-fertilization across di i li
f tili ti disciplines
• Need to work in close physical proximity with others
Source: J. Sylvan Katz, Ben R. Martin (1997) 7

8. What triggers collaboration?
… some Factors
• “… spatial proximity seems to encourage collaboration since it
tends t
t d to generate more informal communication”
t i f l i ti ”
• “… social distance between individuals is also apparently a factor
influencing whether collaborations develop … collaboration between
peers (i.e., scientists of similar standing) is more likely than
collaboration between individuals of unequal rank …”
• “Collaboration frequently occurs between teachers and students.”
q y
• “… in cases where the potential collaboration involves a clear division
of l b
f labour, scientists may be more concerned with seeking the most
i ti t b d ith ki th t
appropriate expert partners, even if they have to travel some
distance to find them.”
Source: J. Sylvan Katz, Ben R. Martin (1997) 8

9. How can we monitor collaboration? What are the
implications?
p
• “… despite the limitations of
p
co-authorship measures, many
studies have used this technique
to investigate ”
investigate.
• “ … some would argue that
bibliometric studies are unintrusive
and indeed non-reactive--that is,
the measurement does not affect
the collaboration process. This
may be true in terms of an
immediate effect, but others have
effect
suggested that the results from a
bibliometric investigation may
influence collaboration
practices over the longer term.”
Source: J. Sylvan Katz, Ben R. Martin (1997), MD Anderson SciVal Experts http://www.experts.scival.com/mdanderson/ 9

10. Implications from data
Some Examples
p
A
• Who are our researchers co-authoring g
papers with? Collaboration for
• Which countries/institutions do those Internal Planning
researchers belong to?
B
• Who else outside of my current network,
y ,
can I work together with? Support
New
• Who has expertise in this topic within and
Collaborations
outside of my university?
C
• How much impact will the collaboration have Measuring
M i
to our research organization? Are there any expected
quantitative metrics we can consider, in Impact of
addition to the qualitative factors?
dditi t th lit ti f t ? Collaborations
10

11. A Collaboration for Internal Planning:
Taking an Indian Institution for an example
g p
Example: An Indian Institution (Based on 2006-10 Publication)
2000
1800
ns
Number of Publication
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
N
200
0
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
High growth in publication (CAGR 5%)
g g p ( )
Source: Scopus data, Analysis 11

12. A Many publications from Engineering, Physics,
Material Sciences and Chemistry
y
Example: An Indian Institution (Based on 2006-10 Publication)
Engineering (16.6%)
Others
Physics and Astronomy (15.2%)
Mathematics (5.2%)
Biochemistry, Genetics and
Molecular Biology (7.9%)
Material Science (12.7%)
Computer Sciences (8.4%)
Chemistry (11.2%)
Source: Scopus data, Analysis 12

13. A 84 Global strength areas in Computer Sciences,
Chemistry, Engineering and Biotechnology
y, g g gy
Example: An Indian Institution (Based on 2006-10 Publication)
Computer S i
C t Science Physics/Math
/
Chemistry
Chemistr
Social Science
Brain Research Engineering
Competencies with
p
multiple colored lines
are multi-disciplinary
Health Science research areas
Earth Science
Biology
Medical Specialties
p
Biotechnology
Bi t h l
Source: SciVal Spotlight 2010 Map
Infectious Disease 13

14. A Who are our researchers co-authoring papers with?
Which countries/institutions do they belong to?
y g
Example: An Indian Institution (Based on 2006-10 Publication)
Many papers co-authors with researchers belonging to
institutions in US, India, Western Europe and Japan
Source: SciVal Spotlight 2010 Map 14

15. A Collaborations within your 84 research
competencies?
p
Example: An Indian Institution (Based on 2006-10 Publication)
Within areas of strengths co-authorship happening
strengths,
mostly with researchers from institutions in US and India
Source: SciVal Spotlight 2010 Map 15

16. A Drill down into more details:
Example of collaboration with Japanese institutions
p p
Example: An Indian Institution (Based on 2006-10 Publication)
Source: SciVal Spotlight 2010 Map 16

17. A Identify opportunities for collaboration to further
strengthen your competencies
g y p
Example: An Indian Institution (Based on 2006-10 Publication)
Source: SciVal Spotlight 2010 Map 17

18. A Key Takeaways – Collaboration for strategic
p
planning at an institutional level
g
• With the increasing number of papers being published today,
it is extremely challenging to understand the overall activities of
researchers at your institution
• Understanding the overall co-authorship situation is crucial for
building future research strategy at an institutional level
• Data can help to:
(a) visually get an understanding of the overall collaboration
situation, and
(b) detailed information for each of the potential opportunities
18

19. B Supporting individual researchers find
collaborators more effectively: MD Anderson
y
• VP of Global Academic Programs
at The University of Texas MD
Anderson Cancer Center wanted
to create a network among
researchers at MD Anderson
and its 23 sister institutions
around the world to help
achieve its mission
“Making Cancer History”
• The challenge – enabling
researchers and administrators
to easily identify experts across
institutions and facilitate
opportunities to collaborate
19

20. B Individual researcher will get their own profile,
visible to the international research community y
Can h
C showcase their lists of publications,
th i li t f bli ti
awarded grants, trend of past research et al.
Source: MD Anderson SciVal Experts Website http://www.experts.scival.com/mdanderson/default.asp 20

21. B Enable both internal and external researchers to
identify researchers with specific expertise
y p p
Source: MD Anderson SciVal Experts Website http://www.experts.scival.com/mdanderson/default.asp 21

22. B Researchers can also analyze their own research
network with up-to-date information
p
Can identify h they have not worked together with,
C id tif who th h t k dt th ith
within their research community
Source: MD Anderson SciVal Experts Website http://www.experts.scival.com/mdanderson/default.asp 22

23. B Looking from a research management point of view …
Example of MD Anderson
p
• Currently includes researcher data from the
y
German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ),
one of its sister institutions Expanding the
community
• Hopes to expand to the rest of 22 sister
institutions globally
• Extract data from SciVal Experts to conduct
analysis on size and activity level of specific
Insight into
research area
strategic planning
• Identify gaps in certain areas and strategically
allocation resource to strengthen the field
“SciVal Experts has made it easier to find the right expert
at MD Anderson, and so has lowered the barrier for
potential collaborators to make a good connection."
Source: Vice President of Global Academic Programs, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center 23

24. B
National Networks being developed in US
Source: http://www.vivoweb.org/ 24

25. B Key Takeaways
– Supporting new collaborations
pp g
• We see increasing demand from researchers to seek new
collaborators, to develop future breakthrough in science and
interdisciplinary research
• However, it is challenging for both external researchers and
internal researchers/administrators to identify such collaborators
beyond th i existing network
b d their i ti t k
• As initial step to facilitate collaboration showcasing individual
collaboration,
researcher’s activity to the global research community can help
• Elsevier is working closely with global research institutions to
provides these infrastructure, which can also be linked to national
network initiatives being developed
g p
25

26. C
Measuring expected impact of collaborations
Example: An Indian Institution (Based on 2006-10 Publication)
Indian Institution
Researcher A
Researcher B
Source: SciVal Spotlight 2010 Map 26

27. C
Average Citation per Paper
Your Researchers +
Potential collaborator from Japan
Your Researchers +
Potential collaborator from USA
Averag Citation per Paper
Result from top four researchers
at this institution
ge
Publication Year
Source: SciVal Strata 27

28. C
Future Funding Opportunities
Example: Top results for the US researcher mentioned previously
Identify funding opportunities from
Id tif f di t iti f
+25,000 opportunities worth > $24.4B
Source: SciVal Funding 28

29. C Backup: Awarded grants and future opportunities
identified from 4,200+ funding bodies globally
, g g y
Expanding database through
E di d t b th h
including funding data from other nations
Source: SciVal Funding 29

30. C Key Takeaways
– Measuring expected impact from collaboration
g p p
• Both qualitative and quantitative factors should be considered to
analyze impact of collaboration. For quantitative factors,
“Average citation per paper” and “Funding” might be something
we can look into
• By looking into the trends of individual researcher’s past
research output, we can gain insight i t h
h t t i i i ht into how th collaboration
the ll b ti
might impact Average citation per paper
• In addition, by looking into past awarded grants and future
funding opportunities, we can estimate how much external grants
the collaboration might be able to attract
30

31. What is your challenge …
Understanding
Collaboration
Situation
Identifying
Opportunities
for Future
Collaborations
Measuring
expected Impact
of collaboration
31

32. Elsevier’s SciVerse Scopus …
Used in various national level research exercises
“ … the four UK Higher Education Funding Bodies (representing
England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales) will use
Elsevier s
Elsevier's SciVerse Scopus database as the sole bibliometric
provider for the 2014 Research Excellence Framework (REF).
The Framework was developed to assess the quality of research
in UK higher education institutions …”
(September 19th, 2011)
“ … the Australian Research Council has selected SciVerse
Scopus, the world's largest abstract and citation database, for the
third time as the sole citation provider for the Excellence in
Research for Australia (ERA) assessment for 2012 …”
(September 12th, 2011)
Source: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ 32

33. SciVal is based on SCOPUS
Source
Data
Client Data
Customized Solutions based
on individual needs
33

34. Summary
• Collaboration is a global trend
g
• Data can help to get an understanding of the current
collaborations taking place and insight into opportunities
for future collaborations
• By showcasing each individual researcher’s activities,
we can support both internal and external researchers
to find new collaborators outside of their current network
• Elsevier can provide various solutions to support these
needs
34

35. For further contacts
• Padma Muralidharan
Senior Customer Development Manager – India
p.muralidharan@elsevier.com
• Goki Ishikawa
Director of Product Marketing, SciVal – Global
g.ishikawa@elsevier.com
35