Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

International trade in ideas

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Geographical proximity, population, language and other cultural factors are given as reasons for international collaboration on scientific studies. These reasons are also used to analyze international trade in goods. The scientists exchange ideas in joint papers so international collaboration on scientific studies can be labeled as international trade in ideas. In this paper, we take on this perspective and establish a link between international trade in goods and ideas. First, we define export and import of ideas by using the co-authorship patterns. Second, we compute metrics such as net exports for the international trade in ideas. Third, we compare and contrast goods and ideas by using these metrics. Lastly, we use the international trade models such as the Hecksher–Ohlin model to analyze the factors that affect international trade in ideas. We find that the correlation is weak and even negative between international trade metrics for goods and ideas in general, but the correlation between some specific goods and ideas is positive and stronger. By using the Hecksher–Ohlin model, we explore reasons for comparative advantage in exporting ideas.

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

Notes

  1. The original source of the Hecksher–Ohlin is unclear so the model is not cited in the literature.

  2. See for example http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Intra-EU_trade_in_goods_recent_trends.

  3. We give the full list at the Appendix.

  4. This is partly due to the large scientific size of USA. If we normalized the total trade by the scientific size of the countries, the results would change (see Leydesdorff and Wagner 2008). However, we try to link the international collaboration in scientific studies to the international trade in goods. The main international trade data provided by the United Nations do not use any normalization while determining the main trade partner in goods. Therefore, we also do not do any normalization for the main trade partners in ideas.

  5. We have converted the variables to logarithms in order to compare results easily. However, the values which are zero cannot be converted so that the number observations of goods and ideas are different.

  6. For example, Yuret (2015b) finds that Turkish national research council diverts lower funds to social sciences.

References

  • Abt, H. A. (2007). The frequencies of multinational papers in various sciences. Scientometrics, 72(1), 105–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, J. (2012). The rise of research networks. Nature, 490(7420), 335–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alesina, A., & Wacziarg, R. (1998). Openness, country size and government. Journal of Public Economics, 69(3), 305–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baier, L. B., & Bergstrand, J. H. (2007). Do free trade agreements actually increase members’ international trade? Journal of International Economics, 71(1), 72–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balassa, B. (1986). Advantage in manufactured goods: A reappraisal. The review of economics and statistics., 68(2), 315–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergstrand, J. H. (1985). The gravity equation in international trade: Some microeconomic foundations and empirical evidence. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 67(3), 474–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boshoff, N. (2009). Neo-colonialism and research collaboration in Central Africa. Scientometrics, 81(2), 413–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Lange, C., & Glanzel, W. (1997). Modelling and measuring multilateral co-authorship in international scientific collaboration. Part I. Development of a new model using a series expansion approach. Scientometrics, 40(3), 593–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freund, C. L., & Weinhold, D. (2004). The effect of the internet on international trade. Journal of International Economics, 62(1), 171–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glanzel, W., & De Lange, C. (1997). Modelling and measuring multilateral co-authorship in international scientific collaboration. Part II. A comparative study on the extent and change of international scientific collaboration links. Scientometrics, 40(3), 605–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glanzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2005). Domesticity and internationality in co-authorship, references and citations. Scientometrics, 65(3), 323–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glanzel, W., Schubert, A., & Czerwon, H. Z. (1999). A bibliometric analysis of international scientific cooperation of the European Union (1985–1995). Scientometrics, 45(2), 185–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoekman, J., Frenken, K., & Tijssen, R. J. W. (2010). Research collaboration at a distance: Changing spatial patterns of scientific collaboration within Europe. Research Policy, 39(5), 662–673.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hummels, D. (2007). Transportation costs and international trade in the second era of globalization. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(3), 131–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J. S. (1994). Geographical proximity and scientific collaboration. Scientometrics, 31(1), 31–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., & Wagner, C. S. (2008). International collaboration in science and the formation of a core group. Informetrics, 2(4), 317–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, B. R., Irvine, J., Narin, F., Sterritt, C., & Stevens, K. A. (1990). Recent trends in the output and impact of British science. Science and Public Policy, 17(1), 14–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mattson, P., Sundberg, C. J., & Laget, P. (2011). Is correspondence reflected in the author position? A bibliometric study of the relation between corresponding author and byline position. Scientometrics, 87(1), 99–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattsson, P., Laget, P., Nilsson, A., & Sundberg, C. J. (2008). Intra-EU vs. extra-EU scientific co-publication patterns in EU. Scientometrics, 75(3), 555–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCallum, J. (1995). National borders matter: Canada–U.S. regional trade patterns. American Economic Review, 85(3), 615–623.

    Google Scholar 

  • Megnibeto, E. (2013). International collaboration in scientific publishing: The case of West Africa (2001–2010). Scientometrics, 96(3), 761–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nederhof, A. J., & Moed, H. F. (1993). Modeling multinational publication: Development of an on-line fractionation approach to measure national scientific output. Scientometrics, 27(1), 39–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schubert, A., & Braun, T. (1990). International collaboration in the sciences 1981–1985. Scientometrics, 19(1–2), 3–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schubert, A., Glanzel, W., & Braun, T. (1989). Scientometric datafiles. A comprehensive set of indicators on 2649 journals and 96 countries in all major science fields and subfields 1981–1985. Scientometrics, 16(1–6), 3–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Trade Organization. (2013). World Trade Report. www.wto.org/english/res_e/publications_e/wtr13_e.htm.

  • Yuret, T. (2014). Why do economists publish less? Applied Economics Letters, 21(11), 762–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuret, T. (2015a). Interfield comparison of academic output by using department level data. Scientometrics, 105(3), 1653–1664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuret, T. (2015b). Interfield equality: Journals versus Researchers. Working Paper.

  • Zitt, M., Bassecoulard, E., & Okubo, Y. (2000). Shadows of the past in international cooperation: Collaboration of the top five producers of science. Scientometrics, 47(3), 622–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, Faculty of Management, Istanbul Technical University, 34367, Macka, Istanbul, Turkey

    Tolga Yuret

Authors
  1. Tolga Yuret
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tolga Yuret.

Appendix

Appendix

List of countries

Albania, Algeria, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cote d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, Estonia, Ethiopia(excludes Eritrea), Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Hong Kong, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Korea Rep., Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Libya, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, FYR, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Tanzania, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela, Vietnam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe

Aggregated subject categories used in Table 5

Agriculture: Agriculture Economics and Policy, Agricultural Engineering, Agriculture and Dairy Animal Science, Agriculture Multidisciplinary, Food Science and Technology, Veterinary Sciences

Engineering: Chemical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Electric Electronic Engineering, Industrial Engineering, Manufacturing Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Metallurgy and Metallurgical Engineering

Materials Science: Materials Science Biomaterials, Materials Science Ceramics, Materials Science Characterization, Materials Science Coatings Films, Materials Science Composites, Materials Science Multidisciplinary, Materials Science Paper & Wood, Materials Science Textiles

Social Sciences: Economics, Political Science, Sociology

Mathematics: Mathematics, Mathematics Applied, Mathematics Interdisciplinary

Physics: Physics Applied, Physics Atomic Molecular and Chemical, Physics Condensed Matter, Physics Fluids and Plasmas, Physics Mathematical, Physics Multidisciplinary, Physics Nuclear, Physics Particles and Fields

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yuret, T. International trade in ideas. Scientometrics 107, 899–916 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1883-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1883-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation