Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The structure and change of the research collaboration network in Korea (2000–2011): network analysis of joint patents

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study is to examine the structure, characteristics, and change of a research collaboration network using co-assignee information of joint patents in Korea. The study was conducted in three stages: data collection, network construction, and network analysis. For network analysis, network topological analysis, node centrality analysis, and block modeling were performed in sequence. The analysis results revealed that the network has small-world properties. The results also showed that while government-sponsored research institutes (GRIs) played a role as a hub and bridge in the network in the early 2000s, universities gradually took their place to play a key role as a hub and bridge in the network. In addition, the block modeling analysis indicated that while, in the early 2000s, GRI-centered network density was shown to be high, the network density became concentrated around universities after 2004, and this tendency intensified after 2008. Bearing in mind a lack of empirical studies on inter-organizational research collaboration networks using patent data, this study made an academic contribution by specifically analyzing the structure and change of research collaboration networks by targeting Korea’s major innovative actors. From the policy perspective, it provides important implications for figuring out the effects of university–industry–GRI (UIG) collaboration policies implemented so far, and can be of assistance for making evidence-based policies to build up a more effective UIG collaboration network or establish a new national science and technology innovation system.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This is a pay service provider of patent information searches and offers sets of commercially produced patent data in the Korean language. It also provides the same services in English (www.wipsglobal.com), in Chinese (www.wipsglobal.com/servicecn/mai/main.wips) and in Japanese (www.patbridge.com).

  2. Refer to Tables 8, 9 and 10 in Appendix for more details on individual organizations.

  3. We did not add any marks to Figs. 4 and 5 because the two networks are composed of only one cluster each.

References

  • Albert, R., & Barabási, A. L. (2002). Statistical mechanics of complex networks. Reviews of Modern Physics, 74(1), 47–97.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Amaral, L. A. N., & Uzzi, B. (2007). Complex systems—A new paradigm for the integrative study of management, physical, and technological systems. Management Science, 53(7), 1033–1035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barabási, A., Jeong, H., Neda, Z., Ravasz, E., Schubert, A., & Vicsek, T. (2002). Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 311(3–4), 590–614.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Breschi, S., & Cusmano, L. (2004). Unveiling the texture of a European research area: Emergence of oligarchic networks under EU framework programmes. International Journal of Technology Management, 27(8), 747–772.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiffoleau, Y. (2005). Learning about innovation through networks: the development of environment-friendly viticulture. Technovation, 25(10), 1193–1204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choe, H., Lee, D. H., Seo, I. W., & Kim, H. D. (2013). Patent citation network analysis for the domain of organic photovoltaic cells: Country, institution, and technology field. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 26, 492–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clauset, A., Shalizi, C. R., & Newman, M. E. J. (2009). Power-law distributions in empirical data. SIAM Review, 51(4), 661–703.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Defazio, D., Lockett, A., & Wright, M. (2009). Funding incentives, collaborative dynamics and scientific productivity: Evidence from the EU framework program. Research Policy, 38(2), 293–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social networks, 1(3), 215–239.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Gay, B., & Dousset, B. (2005). Innovation and network structural dynamics: Study of the alliance network of a major sector of the biotechnology industry. Research Policy, 34(10), 1457–1475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz, E., Mehta, D., & Sahni, S. (1995). Fundamentals of data structures in C++.

  • Hou, H., Kretschmer, H., & Liu, Z. (2008). The structure of scientific collaboration networks in scientometrics. Scientometrics, 75(2), 189–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamada, T., & Kawai, S. (1989). An algorithm for drawing general undirected graphs. Information processing letters, 31(1), 7–15.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • KIAT. (2011). 2011 Korean industrial R&D investment scoreboard of the top 1000 R&D investors. Seoul: Korean Institute for Advancement of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, C., & Song, J. (2007). Creating new technology through alliances: An empirical investigation of joint patents. Technovation, 27(8), 461–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H. D., Lee, D. H., Choe, H., & Seo, I. W. (2014). The evolution of cluster network structure and firm growth: A study of industrial software clusters. Scientometrics, 99(1), 77–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koschützki, D., Lehmann, K. A., Peeters, L., Richter, S., Tenfelde-Podehl, D., & Zlotowski, O. (2005). Centrality indices. In Network analysis (pp. 16–61): Springer.

  • Lee, P.-C., & Su, H.-N. (2010). Investigating the structure of regional innovation system research through keyword co-occurrence and social network analysis. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, 12(1), 26–40.

  • Lee, J. Y., Kim, Y. H., & Lee, H. J. (2011). A survey of research and development in Korea, 2010. Seoul: National Science & Technology commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, D. H., Seo, I. W., Choe, H. C., & Kim, H. D. (2012). Collaboration network patterns and research performance: the case of Korean public research institutions. Scientometrics, 91(3), 925–942.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moody, J. (2004). The structure of a social science collaboration network: Disciplinary cohesion from 1963 to 1999. American Sociological Review, 69(2), 213–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mote, J. E., Jordan, G., Hage, J., & Whitestone, Y. (2007). New directions in the use of network analysis in research and product development evaluation. Research Evaluation, 16(3), 191–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman, M. E. (2001). Scientific collaboration networks. I. Network construction and fundamental results. Physical Review E, 64(1), 016131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NRF. (2011). An analysis of research and development in Korean universities, 2011. Daejeon: National Research Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • NRF. (2012). University–industry collaboration white paper in 2010. Daejeon: National Research Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • NRF (2013). BK21.NURI Commitee. http://bnc.krf.or.kr/home/eng/index.jsp. Accessed October 2013.

  • Okamura, K., & Vonortas, N. S. (2006). European alliance and knowledge networks. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 18(5), 535–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otte, E., & Rousseau, R. (2002). Social network analysis: a powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. Journal of information Science, 28(6), 441–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, S. D. (1998). The role of government-sponsored institutes: Past, present, and future. Journal of Technology Innovation, 6(1), 30–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, K.-H., Kwon, K. S., Eun, J. H., Han, D. S., Han, Y. J., & Han, S. H. (2007). Analysis on the impact of university–industry collaboration policy on research activities and patenting activities in Korean universities. Seoul: Korea Research Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. W., White, D. R., Koput, K. W., & Owen-Smith, J. (2005). Network dynamics and field evolution: The growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences1. American Journal of Sociology, 110(4), 1132–1205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramasco, J. J., Dorogovtsev, S. N., & Pastor-Satorras, R. (2004). Self-organization of collaboration networks. Physical Review E, 70(3), 036106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Subramanyam, K. (1983). Bibliometric studies of research collaboration: A review. Journal of information Science, 6(1), 33–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomassini, M., & Luthi, L. (2007). Empirical analysis of the evolution of a scientific collaboration network. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 385(2), 750–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomassini, M., Luthi, L., Giacobini, M., & Langdon, W. B. (2007). The structure of the genetic programming collaboration network. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines, 8(1), 97–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uzzi, B., Amaral, L. A., & Reed-Tsochas, F. (2007). Small-world networks and management science research: a review. European Management Review, 4(2), 77–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Valk, T., Chappin, M. M., & Gijsbers, G. W. (2011). Evaluating innovation networks in emerging technologies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 78(1), 25–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verspagen, B., & Duysters, G. (2004). The small worlds of strategic technology alliances. Technovation, 24(7), 563–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, C. S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research Policy, 34(10), 1608–1618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, J., Blumer, A., & Lee, K. (2006). An algorithm for modularity analysis of directed and weighted biological networks based on edge-betweenness centrality. Bioinformatics, 22(24), 3106–3108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government (2014S1A3A2044459).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chemistry Policy and Information Center, Korea Research Institute of Chemical Technology (KRICT), 141 Gajeong-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 34114, Republic of Korea

    Hochull Choe

  2. School of Business and Technology Management, College of Business, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), 291 Daehak-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 34141, Republic of Korea

    Duk Hee Lee

Authors
  1. Hochull Choe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Duk Hee Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Duk Hee Lee.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 8, 9 and 10.

Table 8 Top 30 R&D firms (2010)
Full size table
Table 9 Top 20 R&D universities (2010)
Full size table
Table 10 Government-sponsored institutes of science and technology (2010)
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Choe, H., Lee, D.H. The structure and change of the research collaboration network in Korea (2000–2011): network analysis of joint patents. Scientometrics 111, 917–939 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2321-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2321-2

Keywords

Mathematical Subject Classifications

JEL Classifications

Search

Navigation