政府资助国际合作效果的国别和学科差异研究

A study of country and discipline variations in government funded international collaboration

摘要:

国际合作研究效果取决于许多因素,而合作伙伴的学科地位尤为重要。本文以收录于Web of Science的国家自然科学基金资助论文为对象,从高被引论文和平均引用影响两个视角,评价我国与G7国家的合作效果。研究表明,美国是第一大合作伙伴,加拿大、日本、英国、德国和法国与我国的合作规模相当,意大利与我国合作最少；在提升国际合作影响力(高被引论文份额和平均引用影响)方面,NSFC对数学、化学与化工、以及物理学与材料科学领域的提升作用明显,但这种提升效果因合作国家不同而异；NSFC资助对国际合作影响力提升作用较好的领域也是我国总体上实力相对较强的领域,而需要付出更大努力的是我国影响力远低于世界平均水平的领域(如环境与生态学、神经科学与行为学、微生物学、分子生物学与遗传学、以及临床医学等),NSFC资助的国际合作效果甚至不及非NSFC资助的国际合作。文末提出了资助政策建议。

Abstract:

Effect of international collaboration research depends on many factors, among which disciplinary positions of collaboration partners are critical. Based on publications indexed in the Web of Science and funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC), we studied the effects of international collaboration of China with G7 countries in terms of highly cited publications and average citations. The USA is the leading partner of China, followed by Canada, Japan, the UK, Germany and France. Italy has least collaborations with China. In raising impact (i.e., percentage of highly cited publications and average citations) of international collaboration, the effects of NSFC are more obvious in mathematics, chemistry and chemical engineering, physics and materials sciences, although such effects are dependent on countries. The NSFC’s impact-raising effect is more apparent in areas in which China is relatively strong. In weak areas of China, such as environment and ecology, neuroscience and behavioral science, microbiology and genetics, as well as clinical medicine, the impact-raising effect of NSFC for international collaboration is not as good as those of unfunded. In the end, policy suggestions are provided.