Revista de Biología Tropical ISSN Impreso: 0034-7744 ISSN electrónico: 2215-2075

OAI: https://revistas.ucr.ac.cr/index.php/rbt/oai
The countries and languages that dominate biological research at the beginning of the 21st century
PDF

Keywords

article productivity
country
region
ranking
language of science
cultural attitude
productividad
número de artículos
país
región
rango
idioma de la ciencia
actitud cultural

How to Cite

Monge-Nájera, J., & Nielsen, V. (2005). The countries and languages that dominate biological research at the beginning of the 21st century. Revista De Biología Tropical, 53(1-2), 283–294. https://doi.org/10.15517/rbt.v53i1-2.14563

Abstract

Traditionally, studies of scientific productivity are biased in two ways: they are based on Current Contents, an index centered in British and American journals, and they seldom correct for population size, ignoring the relative effort that each society places in research. We studied national productivity for biology using a more representative index, the Biological Abstracts, and analyzed both total and relative productivity. English dominates biological publications with 87% (no other individual language reaches 2%). If the USA is considered a region by itself, it occupies the first place in per capita production of biology papers, with at least twice the productivity of either Asia or Europe. Canada, Oceania and Latin America occupy an intermediate position. The global output of scientific papers is dominated by Europe, USA, Japan, Canada, China and India. When corrected for population size, the countries with the greatest productivity of biology papers are the Nordic nations, Israel, Switzerland, Netherlands, Australia, Saint Lucia and Montserrat. The predominance of English as the language of biological research found in this study shows a continuation of the trend initiated around the year 1900. The large relative productivity of the USA reflects the importance that American society gives to science as the basis for technological and economic development, but the USA’s share of total scientific output has decreased from 44% in 1983 to 34% in 2002, while there is a greater growth of science in India, Japan and Latin America, among others. The increasing share obtained by China and India may reflect a recent change in attitude towards funding science. The leadership of Nordic nations, Israel, Switzerland, Netherlands and Australia can be explained by cultural attitude. Apparently, a positive trend is emerging in Latin America, where Chile improved its ranking in per capita productivity but Argentina, Costa Rica, Uruguay, Brazil and Cuba fell. Nevertheless, the most productive countries in total number of papers are Brazil, Mexico and Argentina: large countries with a long tradition of funding scientific research.
https://doi.org/10.15517/rbt.v53i1-2.14563
PDF

References

Bharvi, D., K.C. Garg & A. Bali. 2003. Scientometrics of the international journal Scientometrics. Scientometrics 56: 81-93.

Garfield, E. 1984a. Latin American Research. Current Contents 19: 3-8.

Garfield, E. 1984b. Latin American Research. Current Contents 20: 3-10.

Inönü, E. 2003. The influence of cultural factors on scientific production. Scientometrics 56: 137-146.

Li, L. & F. Zhang. 2003. Developing English-language academic journals of China. Scientometrics 57: 119- 125.

Monge-Nájera, J. 2002. How to be a tropical scientist. Rev. Biol. Trop. 50: XIX-XXIII.

Papavero, N., J. Llorente-Bousquets & D. Espinosa- Organista. 1995. Historia de la biología comparada. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico D.F., Mexico (eight volumes). Ruiz Z., A. 2003. Historia y fiolosofía de las matemáticas. Universidad Estatal a Distancia, San José, Costa Rica. 620 p.

Singer, C. 1959. A history of biology to about the year 1900. Abelard-Schuman, London. 580 p.

Thelwall, M., R. Tang & L. Price. 2003. Linguistic patterns of academic Web use in Western Europe. Scientometrics 56: 417-432.

van Leeuwen, T.N., M.S. Visser, H.F. Moed, T.J. Nederhof & A.F.J. van Raan. 2003. The Holy Grail of science policy: Exploring and combining bibliometric tools in search of scientific excellence. Scientometrics 57: 257-280.

van Looy, B., E. Zimmermann, R. Veugelers, A. Verbeek, J. Mello & K. Debackere. 2003. Do science-technology interactions pay off when developing technology? Scientometrics 57: 355-367.

Zitt, M., S. Ramanana-Rahary & E. Bassecoulard. 2003a. Correcting glasses help fair comparisons in international science landscape: Country indicators as a function of ISI database delineation. Scientometrics

: 259-282.

Zitt, M., S. Ramanana-Rahary, E. Bassecoulard & F. Laville. 2003b. Potential science-technology spillovers

in regions: An insight on geographic co-location of knowledge activities in the EU. Scientometrics 57: 295-320.

Comments

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2005 Revista de Biología Tropical

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.