Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Knowledge network hubs and measures of research impact, science structure, and publication output in nanostructured solar cell research

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study on co-authorship networks in the area of nanostructured solar cells aims to contribute to a further understanding of the use of research evaluation measures of science output, impact and structure in an emerging research field. The study incorporates quantitative bibliometric methods of analysis and social network analysis in combination with a qualitative case study research approach. Conclusions drawn from the results emphasise, firstly, the importance of distinguishing between early and later phases of the evolution of a novel research field, and secondly, the application of a systemic view on learning processes and knowledge diffusion in a science-based technology field.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arnall, H. A. (2003), Future Technologies, Today’s Choices: Nanotechnology, Artificial Intelligence and Robotics; A Technical, Political and Institutional Map of Emerging Technologies.

  • Beckman, M. (1994), On knowledge networks in science: collaboration among equals. The Annals of Regional Science, 28: 233–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, T., A. Schubert, S. Zsindely (1997), Nanoscience and nanotechnology on the balance. Scientometrics, 38(2): 321–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnside, S., S. Winkel, K. Brooks, V. Shklover, M. Gratzel, A. Hinsch, R. Kinderman, C. Bradbury, A. Hagfeldt, H. Pettersson (2000), Deposition and characterization of screen-printed porous multi-layer thick film structures from semiconducting and conducting nanomaterials for use in photovoltaic devices. Journal of Materials Science — Materials in Electronics, 11(4): 355–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calero, C., R. Buter, C. Cabello Valdés, E. Noyons (2006), How to identify research groups using publication analysis: an example in the field of nanotechnology. Scientometrics, 66(2): 365–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C., D. Hicks (2004), Tracing knowledge diffusion. Scientometrics, 59(2): 199–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CWTS (2005), Figure 4.4 Citatie-impactscores naar type samenwerkingsrelatie, In the Dutch version of the report: Science and technology indicators 2005. English summary and the Dutch full version of the report, also available on the website of the Netherlands Observatory of Science and Technology. 〈www.nowt.nl〉, latest accessed 11 October 2006.

  • Darby, M. R., L. G. Zucker (2003), Grilichesian Breakthroughs: Inventions of Methods of Inventing and Firm Entry in Nanotechnology, NBER working paper 9825, National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • David, P. A., L. C. Keely (2003), The economics of scientific research coalitions: collaborative network formation in the presence of multiple funding agencies. In: A. Geuna, A. Salter, E. W. Steinmueller (Eds)., Science and Innovation: Rethinking the Rationales for Funding and Governance, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham-Northampton.

    Google Scholar 

  • ESRC (2003), The Social and Economic Challenges of Nanotechnology, Report by S. WOOD, R. JONES AND A. GELDART, ISBN 086226-294-1. The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauffriau, M., P. Olesen Larsen (2005), Counting methods are decisive for rankings based on publication and citation studies. Scientometrics, 64(1): 85–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W., K. Debackere, B. Thijs, A. Schubert (2006), A concise review on the role of author self-citations in information science, bibliometrics and science policy. Scientometrics, 67(2): 263–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godø, H., L. Nedrum, A. Rapmund, S. Nygaard (2003), Innovations in Fuel Cells and Related Hydrogen Technology in Norway — OECD Case Study in the Energy Sector, NIFU report 35/2003.

  • Hagfeldt, A., R. Bergstrom, H. O. G. Siegbahn, S. Lunell (1993), Structure and stability of small titanium-oxygen clusters studied by ab-inito quantum-chemical calculations. Journal of Physical Chemistry, 7(49): 12725–12730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagfeldt, A., M. Gratzel (1994), Light induced redox reactions in nanocrystalline systems, Chemical Reviews, 95: 49–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heinze, T. (2006), Emergence of Nano S&T in Germany. Network Formation and Company Performance. Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research, Discussion paper No 7/2006, ISSN 1612-1430.

  • Hicks, D., S. Katz (1997), The Changing Shape of British Industrial Research. STEEP Special Report No. 6, SPRU — Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex.

  • Jacobsson, S., B. A. Andersson, L. Bångens (2001), Transforming the energy system — the evolution of the German technological system for solar cells. SPRU electronic working paper series, No. 84, SPRU — Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex.

  • Jakélius, S. (2001), Clean technologies for sustainable development.. In: S. Silveira (Ed.), Building Sustainable Energy Systems: Swedish Experiences, Stockholm: Svensk Byggtjänst and Swedish National Energy Administration, pp. 267–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J. S., B. Martin (1997), What is research collaboration? Research Policy 26: 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J. S., D. Hicks (1995), The Classification of Interdisciplinary Journals: A New Approach (Version 2.0), ESRC Centre for Science, Technology, Energy and Environment Policy, Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex.

  • Law, M., L. E. Greene, J. C. Johnson, R. Saykally, P. Yang (2005), Nanowire dye-sensitized solar cells. Nature Materials, 4: 455–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melin, G., O. Persson (1996), Studying research collaboration using co-authorships. Scientometrics, 36(3): 363–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M. (2000a), Does science push technology? Patents citing scientific literature. Research Policy, 29: 409–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M. (2000b), What is special about patent citations? Differences between scientific and patent citations. Scientometrics, 49(1): 93–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M. (2000c), Patent citation analysis in a novel field of technology: an exploration of nano-science and nano-technology. Scientometrics, 51(1): 163–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M., O. Persson (1998), Nanotechnology — interdisciplinarity, patterns of collaboration and differences in application. Scientometrics, 42(2): 195–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MISTRA (2002), Mistra Annual Report 2002 (report in Swedish: Mistra är en källa till kunskap — Mistra årsrapport 2002), the Swedish foundation for strategic environmental research.

  • NNI (2005), National Nano Initiative in the US, http://nano.gov, last accessed 4 August 2005.

  • OECD (2003), STI Scoreboard 2003, OECD, Paris, pp. 44–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Regan, B., M. Gratzel (1991), A low-cost, high efficiency solar-cell based on dye-sensitized colloidal TiO2 films, Nature, 353(6346): 737–740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orsenigo, L., F. Pammoli, M. Riccaboni (2001), Technological change and network dynamics. Lessons from the pharmaceutical industry. Research Policy, 30: 485–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavitt, K. (1984), Sectoral patterns of technical change: towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy, 13: 343–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavitt, K. (1998), Do patents reflect the useful output of universities? Research Evaluation, 7(2): 105–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. W., W. K. Koput, L. Smith-Doerr, J. Owen-Smith (2005), Network dynamics and field evolution: The growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences. American Journal of Sociology, 110(4): 1132–1205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. W., W. K. Koput, L. Smith-Doerr, J. Owen-Smith (1999), Network position and firm performance: Organizational returns to collaboration in the biotechnology industry. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 16: 129–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rinia, E. J., T. J. Van Leeuwen, H. G. Van Vuren, A. F. J. Van Raan (2001), Influence of interdisciplinarity on peer-review and bibliometric evaluations in physics research. Research Policy, 30(3): 357–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ROYAL SOCIETY (2003), Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/nanotechnology, last accessed 4 August 2005.

  • Schummer, J. (2004), Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology. Scientometrics, 59(3): 425–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silveira, S. (Ed.) (2001), Building Sustainable Energy Systems: Swedish Experiences. Svensk Byggtjänst and Swedish National Energy Administration, Stockholm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Small, H. (1973), Co-citation in the scientific literature: a new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24(4): 265–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • STEM (2004), Electricity from the Sun-Energy and Industry in Sweden (report in Swedish: El från solen — energi och industri i Sverige), Swedish National Energy Administration (STEM).

  • Tijssen, R. J. W. (1991), A quantitative assessment of interdisciplinary structures in science and technology: co-classification analysis of energy research. Research Policy, 21: 27–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, S., K. Faust (1994), Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. KTH — The Royal Institute of Technology, Teknikringen 72, Stockholm, Sweden

    Katarina Larsen

Authors
  1. Katarina Larsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katarina Larsen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Larsen, K. Knowledge network hubs and measures of research impact, science structure, and publication output in nanostructured solar cell research. Scientometrics 74, 123–142 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-0107-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-0107-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation