Você está na página 1de 11

The International Research Strategies of South Africa, Japan and the United States of America

Vuyani Lingela and Mapule Degama


Department of Science and Technology; Postal Address: Private Bag X894, Pretoria 0001, South Africa; Tel: +27 12 843 6517; Fax: +27 86 681 0051; Email: Vuyani.Lingela@dst.gov.za

29 November 2012

The International Research Strategies of South Africa, Japan and the United States of America

Abstract The purpose of this paper is to examine the international research strategies of South Africa, Japan and the United States of America (USA) in order to develop an evidence-based plan for South Africa-Japan and South Africa-USA international research and technology transfer programme, which is informed by the strategies of the three countries. The method used to examine the international research strategies was to analyse the research outputs and the intensity of the international research partnerships between the three countries. In order to do that, data on the total number of publications produced by each country and the number of co-authored publications were examined both at national and institutional levels. The results presented in this paper suggest that in different subject areas, different countries or companies and research organisations within countries follow a combination of the four activities in their international research strategy, namely: advanced research, national strategic research, science diplomacy, and research capacity development. A description of the international research strategy is presented in the paper. Overall, it can be concluded that South Africas international research strategy for the USA focuses more on national strategic research. South Africas international research strategy for Japan focuses largely on national strategic research and science diplomacy. On the other hand, Japans international research strategy for South Africa focuses less on national strategic research and science diplomacy. Similarly, the USAs international research strategy for South Africa focuses less on national strategic research, science diplomacy and advanced research. Introduction The purpose of this paper is to examine the international research strategies of South Africa, Japan and the United States of America (USA) in order to develop an evidence-based plan for South Africa-Japan and South Africa-USA international research and technology transfer programme, which is informed by the strategies of the three countries. The method used to examine the international research strategies of South Africa, Japan and the USA was to analyse the research outputs and the intensity of the international research partnerships between the three countries. In order to do that, data on the number of publications produced by researchers from the three countries were obtained from InCites1. The total number of publications produced by each country and the number of coauthored publications were examined both at national and institutional levels. Japanese and American institutions were ranked by the total number of their publications and the top institutions that accounted for at least 65% of all publications each country produced were identified. Out of those institutions, institutions that have co-authored at least one publication with South Africa were selected. The international research partnership between South Africa and Japan The results presented in Figure 1 show the percentage of scientific publications produced between South African researchers and their international partners per subject area, as well as Japanese researchers and their international partners between 1981 and 2011. Japan is performing well in international research partnerships in space science, where 52% (9 206) of publications in space science are generated with international co-authors. Space science is followed by geosciences, economics and business and environment/ecology, where 38% (12 194), 30% (1 816) and 29% (5 547) of publications, respectively, are generated with international co-authors. Japan demonstrates less reliance on international research partnerships in subject areas such as pharmacology and toxicology, agricultural sciences, and engineering, where only 12% (6 191), 12% (4 252) and 15% (22 577) of publications, respectively, are generated with international co-authors.

29 November 2012

2 of 11

The International Research Strategies of South Africa, Japan and the United States of America

JAPAN

SOUTH AFRICA

Multidisciplinary Immunology Economics & Business Space Science Plant & Animal Science Physics Clinical Medicine

Molecular Biology &

Psychiatry/Psychology

Neuroscience &

Social Sciences, general

Microbiology

Chemistry

Mathematics

Engineering

Geosciences Biology & Biochemistry Agricultural Sciences Materials Science Pharmacology & Environment/Ecology

Computer Science

Figure 1. Percentage of total scientific publications produced with international research partnerships per subject area

JAPAN

SOUTH AFRICA

Multidisciplinary Clinical Medicine Neuroscience & Plant & Animal Science Computer Science Chemistry Molecular Biology &

Social Sciences, general

Pharmacology &

Environment/Ecology

Immunology

Geosciences

Economics & Business

Engineering

Microbiology

Physics Biology & Biochemistry Materials Science Mathematics Space Science Psychiatry/Psychology

Agricultural Sciences

Figure 2. Percentage of total scientific publications produced per subject area It is also interesting to note that in space science, geosciences and environment/ecology, where Japan relies heavily on international partnerships (see Figure 1), the total number of Japanese publications is small (see Figure 2). The total number of publications produced

29 November 2012

3 of 11

The International Research Strategies of South Africa, Japan and the United States of America

with international co-authors in these subject areas ranges between 29% and 53%. This might be because the strategy of Japan is to promote international partnerships in these areas (i.e. space science, geosciences, and environment/ecology). On the other hand, it relies heavily on its national research workforce in areas such as clinical medicine (81% = 301 690), chemistry (84% = 262 315), engineering (92% = 129 195), physics (86% = 201 052) biology and biochemistry (91% = 128 998), and materials science (94% = 90 401), which might be core to its economic development strategy. South Africa's strategy appears to be different. In South Africa, where there is a high number of international co-authored publications in subject areas such as immunology (70% = 1 179), space science (67% = 1 881), physics (53% = 3134) and molecular biology and genetics (52% = 808), the total number of South African publications in these subject areas is small (see Figure 2). In clinical medicine, and plant and animal science, where most publications (79% and 82%, respectively) are generated by the national research workforce, the total number of South African publications is very high (see Figure 2). A possible reason could be that these areas (i.e. clinical medicine, and plant and animal science) are core to South Africa's development strategy.

250

Publications co-authored with SA

Univ Tokyo

200
Kyoto Univ

150
Nagoya Univ Univ Tsukuba Osaka Univ Hiroshima Univ

100
Waseda Univ

Tokyo Inst Technol Tohoku Univ

50

Okayama Univ Hokkaido Univ Kobe Univ Riken Kyushu Univ Osaka City Chiba Univ Univ Keio Univ AIST

20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 Number of publications per institution

Figure 3. Total number of publications and publications co-authored with South Africa Institutions that accounted for 65% of all publications produced in Japan and have coauthored publications with South Africa are presented in Figure 3. The results indicate that between 1981 and 2011, the University of Tokyo, Kyoto University, Osaka University, the University of Tsukuba and Nagoya University have co-authored the highest number of publications with South Africa. The National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), National Institute for Materials Science, Nihon University and Japan Atomic Energy Agency have co-authored the lowest number of publications with South Africa. Although AIST produced more publications (50 824) than the University of Tsukuba (38 524), the University of Tsukuba has co-authored more publications (134) with South Africa than AIST (1). Tohoku University, which produced more publications (91 163) than Nagoya University (63 963), has co-authored fewer publications (81) with South Africa than

29 November 2012

4 of 11

The International Research Strategies of South Africa, Japan and the United States of America

Nagoya (131). It is evident that international research partnerships between South African institutions and the University of Tokyo, Kyoto University, the University of Tsukuba, Osaka University and Nagoya University have generated the most research outputs compared to partnerships with other Japanese institutions (Figure 3). The international research partnership between South Africa and the USA The results presented in Figure 4 show the percentage of scientific publications produced between South African researchers and their international partners per subject area, as well as American researchers and their international partners between 1981 and 2011. The USA is performing well in international research partnerships in space science, where 46% (60 876) of publications are generated with international co-authors. Space science is followed by physics, mathematics and geosciences, where 31% (179 461), 30% (54 441) and 30% (67 300) of publications, respectively, are generated with international co-authors. The USA demonstrates less reliance on international research partnerships in subject areas such as social sciences (general) and psychiatry/psychology, where only 11% (36 446) and 7% (38 806) of publications, respectively, are generated with international co-authors.

USA

SOUTH AFRICA

Multidisciplinary Immunology Economics & Business Space Science Plant & Animal Science Physics Clinical Medicine

Molecular Biology &

Psychiatry/Psychology

Neuroscience &

Social Sciences, general

Microbiology

Chemistry

Mathematics

Engineering

Geosciences Biology & Biochemistry Agricultural Sciences Materials Science Pharmacology & Environment/Ecology

Computer Science

Figure 4. Percentage of total scientific publications produced with international research partnerships per subject area It is also interesting to note that in space science, mathematics and geosciences, where the USA relies heavily on international partnerships (see Figure 4), the total number of US publications is small (see Figure 5). The total number of publications produced with international co-authors in these subject areas ranges between 30% and 46%. This might be because the strategy of the USA is to promote international partnerships in these areas (i.e. space science, mathematics and geosciences). On the other hand, it relies heavily on its national research workforce in areas such as clinical medicine (77% = 1 534 093), chemistry (92% = 486 487), social sciences (general) (93% = 516 792), engineering (93% = 443 525) and biology and biochemistry (93% = 461 382), which might be core to its economic development strategy. Physics seems to be one of the few subject areas in the USA in which

29 November 2012

5 of 11

The International Research Strategies of South Africa, Japan and the United States of America

there are high numbers of publications produced with international co-authors (31% = 179 461), and the overall number of publications in this area is also high (see Figure 5).

USA

SOUTH AFRICA

Multidisciplinary Clinical Medicine Neuroscience & Plant & Animal Science Computer Science Chemistry Molecular Biology &

Social Sciences, general

Pharmacology &

Environment/Ecology

Immunology

Geosciences

Economics & Business

Engineering

Microbiology

Physics Biology & Biochemistry Materials Science Mathematics Space Science Psychiatry/Psychology

Agricultural Sciences

Figure 5. Percentage of total scientific publications produced per subject area

900

Publications co-authored with SA

Harvard Univ

800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000
Columbia Univ

Univ Washington John Hopkins Univ Univ Calif Berkeley Univ Arizona Univ Chicago Purdue Univ Northwestern Univ Univ Michigan Univ Calif Los Angeles Cornell Univ

Number of publications per institution


Figure 6. Total number of publications and publications co-authored with South Africa Institutions that accounted for 65% of all publications produced in the USA and that have coauthored publications with South Africa are presented in Figure 6. The results indicate that

29 November 2012

6 of 11

The International Research Strategies of South Africa, Japan and the United States of America

between 1981 and 2011 Harvard University, Columbia University, the University of Washington, Johns Hopkins University and the University of California (Berkeley) coauthored the highest number of publications with South Africa. On the other hand, the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, the University of Texas (Austin), the University of Southern California and Northwestern University have co-authored the lowest number of publications with South Africa. Although the University of Washington, John Hopkins University and the University of California (Berkeley) produced more publications (132 155, 128 743 and 128 375, respectively) than Columbia University (106 882), Columbia University has co-authored more publications (601) with South Africa than the University of Washington (484), John Hopkins University (401) and the University of California (Berkeley) (398). The University of Wisconsin-Madison, which produced more publications (116 667) than the University of Chicago (71 528) and the University of Arizona (74 101), has co-authored fewer publications (5) with South Africa than the University of Chicago (198) and the University of Arizona (282). It is evident that international research partnerships between South African institutions and Harvard University, Columbia University, the University of Washington, Johns Hopkins University and the University of California (Berkeley) have generated more research outputs than partnerships with other USA institutions (see Figure 6). The international research partnership with South Africa per subject area The percentages of the total number of publications co-authored by South Africa and Japan as well as by South Africa and the USA are presented in Figure 7. The totals are expressed in percentages because South Africa and the USA produce on average 18 times more joint publications per subject area compared to joint publications produced with Japan.
Japan 30.0% USA

Total number of publications (%)

25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0%

Figure 7. Total number of publications co-authored with South Africa per subject area

29 November 2012

Arts & Humanities Computer Science Economics & Business Multidisciplinary Materials Science Neuroscience & Behavior Agricultural Sciences Pharmacology & Psychiatry/Psychology Mathematics Molecular Biology & Chemistry Microbiology Physics Environment/Ecology Space Science Engineering Geosciences Biology & Biochemistry Immunology Social Sciences, general Plant & Animal Science Clinical Medicine
7 of 11

0.0%

The International Research Strategies of South Africa, Japan and the United States of America

As illustrated in Figure 7, the top three subject areas in which most co-authored publications have been produced between South Africa and Japan are clinical medicine (14.2% = 225), space science (13.0% = 207) and physics (12.1% = 193). The top three subject areas in which most co-authored publications have been produced between South Africa and the USA are clinical medicine (25.3% = 5 181), plant and animal science (9.6% = 1 961) and social sciences (8.2% = 1690). It is important to note that these international research partnerships focus on two of the USAs subject areas (i.e., clinical medicine and social sciences) and two of Japans subject areas (i.e., clinical medicine and physics) in which the two countries rely heavily on their national research workforce and less on international partnerships, probably because they are core to their national economic development. The International Research Strategy The results presented above suggest that in different subject areas, different countries or companies and research organisations within countries follow a combination of the four activities in their international research strategy, which is outlined in Figure 8, namely: advanced research, national strategic research, science diplomacy, and research capacity development. A description of the international research strategy is presented below.

International Research
High Low

National Research

High

Advanced Research

National Strategic Research

Low

Science Diplomacy

Research Capacity Development

Figure 8. International research strategy a) Advanced research could be pursued by companies or research organisations that are recognised national or global leaders in a specific subject area. Advanced research could involve companies or organisations that have developed a very large portfolio of intellectual property, including hundreds or thousands of publications (knowledge), patents (technologies), and researchers and engineers (research workforce), which they could deploy in a specific international research partnership programme that would advance their strategic objectives. Examples of advanced research partnerships could include international research on mobile computing between Apple (USA) and Samsung (Korea), or aerospace and defence-related research between the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company, the parent company of Airbus, and the British BAE Systems.

29 November 2012

8 of 11

The International Research Strategies of South Africa, Japan and the United States of America

In the USA, physics seems to fall under advanced research. This is because it is one of the few subject areas in the USA in which there are high numbers of publications produced with international co-authors, and the overall number of publications in this area is also high (see Figures 4 and 5). It is also interesting to note that 49% (96) of the Nobel Prize Laureates in Physics, out of 194 Laureates between 1901 and 2012, were affiliated to institutions in the USA at the time of the award, even though some of them might be naturalised American citizens (see www.nobelprize.org). b) National strategic research could be pursued by countries that have prioritised specific subject areas and have made large amounts of funding available to researchers in companies or research organisations working on those specific subject areas. That support could be provided for priority subject areas without regard to international research trends or levels of support by international partners. As a consequence, a country could develop a large portfolio of intellectual property (i.e. knowledge, technologies and research workforce) in a specific subject area of national strategic importance with very little cooperation or support from international research partners. In South Africa, clinical medicine, and plant and animal science seem to fall under national strategic research. This is because a large percentage of publications in clinical medicine, and plant and animal science (79% and 82%, respectively) are produced by the national research workforce and small percentage with international co-authors. The South African Health Minister, Dr Aaron Motsoaledi, has said that African countries need to invest more in clinical trials so that they can have a greater influence over research into diseases affecting their people2. He also explained that, while South Africa received donor funding for its HIV treatment programmes, it had drawn more than 80% of the required budget from the fiscus2 (i.e. national budget). Clinical medicine, chemistry, engineering, material science, biology and biochemistry, and physics seem to be national strategic research areas in Japan, where the Japanese alone are responsible for between 81% and 94% of research outputs. Clinical medicine, chemistry, social sciences (general), engineering, and biology and biochemistry seem to be national strategic research areas in the USA, where the USA alone is responsible for between 77% and 93% of research outputs. c) Science diplomacy could be pursued by countries as a means to enhance friendly relations between the people, institutions and governments of other countries that they regard as their partners in the global economic community. In this context, countries could promote and facilitate the exchange of students, researchers and engineers (research workforce) between companies or research organisations by providing scholarships and research funding to enable research cooperation. Although the development of new knowledge and technologies and the research workforce is an important measure of success, the existence of international research partnerships among the countries involved becomes a primary measure of success. As a result, countries tend to pursue science diplomacy in subject areas that have global significance but limited national strategic importance. Although the overall contribution of international researchers to knowledge generation in a specific subject area supported in the context of science diplomacy might be very high, the overall number publications produced in that specific subject area tends to be very low. Japan for example, seems to advance science diplomacy through space science, geosciences and environment/ecology, where there are high numbers of publications produced with international co-authors (52%, 38% and 29%, respectively), but the overall number of publications in these areas is low. The USA for example, seems to advance science diplomacy through space science, mathematics and geosciences, where there

29 November 2012

9 of 11

The International Research Strategies of South Africa, Japan and the United States of America

are high numbers of publications produced with international co-authors (46%, 30% and 30%, respectively), but the overall number of publications in these areas is low. South Africa seems to promote science diplomacy through space science, physics, immunology, and molecular biology and genetics, where there are high numbers of publications produced with international co-authors (between 52% and 70%), but the overall number publications in these areas is low. d) Research capacity development could be pursued by countries that have very low research capacity (mostly developing countries) as a means to gain expertise from a country that has advanced research expertise (mostly developed countries) in specific subject areas. A developed country with advanced research expertise will have very little interest in pursuing international research with a developing country that has very low research capacity. However, the developed country might have an interest in extracting natural resources or accessing the market in a developing country with very low research capacity. In exchange for natural resources or market access, the developed country could be directed by the developing country to implement a research capacity development programme. Such a programme could be specific to natural resources that are extracted or products and services that are offered to the developing country. Examples of research capacity development could include a platinum beneficiation research and development programme with the support of a platinum mining company in the country, such as Anglo American Platinum in South Africa. General Electric, an American company that is contracted to manufacture locomotives in South Africa, could support a metal casting research and development programme in South Africa. Hitachi, a Japanese company, which is building coal power plants in South Africa, could support a clean coal research and development programme in South Africa. Conclusions Overall, it can be concluded that South Africas international research strategy for the USA focuses more on national strategic research. This is because there are many joint publications with the USA in two of South Africas national strategic research areas (i.e., clinical medicine, and plant and animal science). It can also be concluded that South Africas international research strategy for Japan focuses largely on national strategic research and science diplomacy. This is because there are many joint publications with Japan in one of South Africas national strategic research areas (i.e., clinical medicine) and two of South Africas science diplomacy areas (i.e., space science and physics). On the other hand, it can be concluded that Japans international research strategy for South Africa focuses less on national strategic research and science diplomacy. This is because although there are many joint publications with South Africa in two of Japans national strategic research areas (i.e., clinical medicine and physics), there are less joint publications with South Africa in Japans four national strategic research areas (i.e., chemistry, engineering, material science, biology and biochemistry). Even further, although there are many joint publications with South Africa in one of Japans science diplomacy areas (i.e., space science), there are less joint publications with South Africa in two of Japans science diplomacy areas (i.e., geosciences and environment/ecology). Similarly, it can be concluded that the USAs international research strategy for South Africa focuses less on national strategic research, science diplomacy and advanced research. This is because although there are many joint publications with South Africa in one of the USAs national strategic research area (i.e., clinical medicine), there are less joint publications with South Africa in USAs three national strategic research areas (i.e., chemistry, engineering,

29 November 2012

10 of 11

The International Research Strategies of South Africa, Japan and the United States of America

and biology and biochemistry). There are also less joint publications with South Africa in three of the USAs science diplomacy areas (i.e., space science, mathematics and geosciences). Even further, there are less joint publications with South Africa in one of the USAs advanced research areas (i.e., physics). References 1. InCitesTM, Thomson Reuters (2012). Report Created: 25-30 Oct 2012. Data Processed Dec 31, 2011. Data Source: Web of Science. 2. Tamar Kahn (2012). Clinical trials 'need more African cash'. Business Day, 6 November 2012.

29 November 2012

11 of 11

Você também pode gostar