A1 Refereed original research article in a scientific journal
Productivity analysis of research in Natural Sciences, Technology and Clinical Medicine: an input-output model applied in comparison of Top 300 ranked universities of 4 North European and 4 East Asian countries
Authors: Kivinen O, Hedman J, Kaipainen P
Publisher: SPRINGER
Publication year: 2013
Journal: Scientometrics
Journal name in source: SCIENTOMETRICS
Journal acronym: SCIENTOMETRICS
Number in series: 2
Volume: 94
Issue: 2
First page : 683
Last page: 699
Number of pages: 17
ISSN: 0138-9130
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0808-4
Abstract
The article introduces a relational input-output model for the productivity analysis of university research. The comparative analyses focus on top university research in hard sciences from 4 East Asian countries (Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan) and 4 North European countries (Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden), universities of which get altogether 95 recognitions in the HEEACT Top 300 rankings in the Natural Sciences (Sci), Technology (Tec) or Clinical Medicine (Med). According to productivity ratings (A(0), A, A(+), A(++)), Taiwan receives 10 A(++) ratings (Sci 5, Tec 5), Sweden 9 (Sci 4, Med 4, Tec 1) and Hong Kong 9 (Tec 4, Med 2, Sci 1). The smallest numbers of A(++) ratings are found in Norway, 1 (Med) and Finland 3 (all in Med). The only university with an A(++) rating in the top of all three fields is the National University of Singapore. The Pohang University of Science and Technology (South Korea) and the National Tsing Hua University (Taiwan) are exceptionally productive in Sci and Tec; Karolinska Institutet (Sweden) and the University of Helsinki (Finland) belong to the top in Med. Even though Northern European countries are ranked higher in the 'knowledge economy indicators', East Asians fare better by indicators of learning outcomes and by productivity of university research in Natural Sciences and Technology; North European countries are stronger in Clinical Medicine.
The article introduces a relational input-output model for the productivity analysis of university research. The comparative analyses focus on top university research in hard sciences from 4 East Asian countries (Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan) and 4 North European countries (Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden), universities of which get altogether 95 recognitions in the HEEACT Top 300 rankings in the Natural Sciences (Sci), Technology (Tec) or Clinical Medicine (Med). According to productivity ratings (A(0), A, A(+), A(++)), Taiwan receives 10 A(++) ratings (Sci 5, Tec 5), Sweden 9 (Sci 4, Med 4, Tec 1) and Hong Kong 9 (Tec 4, Med 2, Sci 1). The smallest numbers of A(++) ratings are found in Norway, 1 (Med) and Finland 3 (all in Med). The only university with an A(++) rating in the top of all three fields is the National University of Singapore. The Pohang University of Science and Technology (South Korea) and the National Tsing Hua University (Taiwan) are exceptionally productive in Sci and Tec; Karolinska Institutet (Sweden) and the University of Helsinki (Finland) belong to the top in Med. Even though Northern European countries are ranked higher in the 'knowledge economy indicators', East Asians fare better by indicators of learning outcomes and by productivity of university research in Natural Sciences and Technology; North European countries are stronger in Clinical Medicine.
UTU Research Portal