Abstract
Due to rapid environmental change, policymakers no longer choose foresight issues based on their own experience. Instead, they need to consider all the possible factors that will influence new technological developments and formulate an appropriate future technological development strategy to the country through the technology foresight system. For the sake of gathering more objective evidence to convince stakeholders to support the foresight issues, researchers can employ bibliometric analysis to describe current scientific development and forecast possible future development trends. Through this process, a consensus is reached about the direction of future technology development. However, we believe that bibliometric analysis can do more for technology policy formulation, such as (1) offer quantitative data as evidence to support the results of qualitative analysis; (2) review the situations of literature publication in specific technological fields to seize the current stage of technology development; and (3) help us grasp the relative advantage of foresight issues development in Taiwan and the world and develop profound strategic planning in accordance with the concept of Revealed Comparative Advantage. For those reasons, our research will revisit the role that bibliometric analysis plays for nations while choosing the foresight issues. In addition, we will analyze the development of the technology policy in Taiwan based on bibliometric analysis, and complete the foresight issues selection by processing key issue integration, key word collection related to this field, the searching and confirmation of literature, development opportunities exploration, comparative development advantage analysis and the innovation-foresight matrix construction, etc.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Albuquerque, E. (2001). Scientific infrastructure and catching-up process: Notes about a relationship illustrated by science and technology statistics. Revista Brasileira de Economia, 55, 545–566.
Albuquerque, E. (2003). Immature systems of innovation: introductory notes about a comparison between South Africa, India, Mexico and Brazil based on science and technology statistics. Discussion paper No. 221. Belo Hirozonte: CEDEPLAR/FACE/IFMG.ASGI-SA.
Butler, L. (2003). Explaining Australia’ s increased share of ISI publications—The effects of a funding formula based on publication counts. Research Policy, 32, 43–155.
Chen, Y. H., Chen, C. Y., & Lee, S. C. (2010). Technology forecasting of new clean energy: The example of hydrogen energy and fuel cell. African Journal of Business Management, 4(7), 1372–1380.
Cheng, A. C., Chen, C. J., & Chen, C. Y. (2008). A fuzzy multiple criteria comparison of technology forecasting methods for predicting the new materials development. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 75, 131–141.
Christensen, C. M. (1992). Exploring the limits of the technology s-curve. Part 1: Component technologies. Production and Operations Management, 1, 334–357.
Chuang, Y. W., Lee, L. C., Hung, W. C., & Lin, P. H. (2010). Forging into the innovation lead—A comparative analysis of scientific capacity. International Journal of Innovation Management, 14, 511–529.
Daim, T. U., Rueda, G., Martin, H., & Gerdsri, P. (2006). Forecasting emerging technologies: Use of bibliometrics and patent analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73, 981–1012.
Debackere, K., & Glänzel, W. (2004). Using a bibliometric approach to support research policy making: The case of the Flemish BOF-key. Scientometrics, 59, 253–276.
Frank, L. D. (2004). An analysis of the effect of the economic situation on modeling and forecasting the diffusion of wireless communications in Finland. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 71, 391–403.
Garcia, C. E., & Sanz-Menéndez, L. (2005). Competition for funding as an indicator of research competitiveness. Scientometrics, 64, 271–300.
Geisler, E. (1994). Key output indicators in performance evaluation of research and development organizations. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 47, 189–203.
Hood, W. W., & Wilson, C. S. (2001). The literature of bibliometrics, scientometrics, and informetrics. Scientometrics, 52, 291–314.
Hsu, C. W., & Chiang, H. C. (2001). The government strategy for the upgrading of industrial technology in Taiwan. Technovation, 21, 123–132.
Hsu, F. M., Horng, D. J., & Hsueh, C. C. (2009). The effect of government-sponsored R&D programmes on additionality in recipient firms in Taiwan. Technovation, 29, 204–217.
Hsu, Y. G., Tzeng, G. H., & Shyu, J. Z. (2003). Fuzzy multiple criteria selection of government-sponsored frontier technology R&D projects. R&D Management, 33, 539–551.
Kahn, M. (2011). A bibliometric analysis of South Africa’ s scientific outputs–some trends and implications. South African Journal of Science, 107, 1–6.
Katz, J. S., & Hicks, D. (1997). Bibliometric indicators for national systems of innovation. IDEA Paper Series 12, available at: http://www.sussex.ac.uk/Users/sylvank/best/nsi/index.html.
Lattimore, R., & Revesz, J. (1996). Australian science-performance from published papers. Bureau of Industry Economics Report.
Lee, L. C., Lin, P. H., Chuang, Y. W., & Lee, Y. Y. (2011). Research output and economic productivity: A Granger causality test. Scientometrics, 89, 465–478.
Marinova, D., & Newman, P. (2008). The changing research funding regime in Australia and academic productivity. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 78, 283–291.
Martin, B. R. (1995). Foresight in science and technology. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 7, 139–168.
May, R. M. (1997). The scientific wealth of nations. Science, 275, 793–796.
Moed, H. F. (2000). Bibliometric indicators reflect publication and management strategies. Scientometrics, 47, 323–346.
Nederhof, A. J., Meijer, R. F., Moed, H. F., & van Raan, A. F. J. (1993). Research performance indicators for university departments: A study of an Agricultural University. Scientometrics, 27, 157–178.
Schilling, M. A., & Esmundo, M. (2009). Technology S-curves in renewable energy alternatives: Analysis and implications for industry and government. Energy Policy, 37, 1767–1781.
Smith, K., & Marinova, D. (2005). Use of bibliometric modelling for policy making. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 69, 177–187.
Sommer, S. (2005). Bibliometric analysis and private research funding. Scientometrics, 62, 165–171.
Teece, D. J. (1996). Firm organization, industrial structure, and technological innovation. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 31, 193–224.
Van Der Meulen, B. (1999). The impact of foresight on environmental science and technology policy in the Netherlands. Futures, 31, 7–23.
Van Dijk, J. W. A. (1991). Foresight studies: A new approach in anticipatory policy making in the Netherlands. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 40, 223–234.
Ventura, O. N., & Mombrú, A. W. (2006). Use of bibliometric information to assist research policy making. A comparison of publication and citation profiles of full and associate professors at a school of chemistry in Uruguay. Scientometrics, 69, 287–313.
Watts, R. J., & Porter, A. L. (1997). Innovation forecasting. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 56, 25–47.
Acknowledgments
The authors are extremely grateful to the editor, and the anonymous referees who provided useful comments on earlier drafts. We also gratefully acknowledge financial support from the Council of Agriculture in Taiwan (101AS-6.2.1-ST-a4).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lee, LC., Lee, YY. & Liaw, YC. Bibliometric analysis for development of research strategies in agricultural technology: the case of Taiwan. Scientometrics 93, 813–830 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0833-3
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0833-3