Revealed comparative advantages in scientific and technological disciplines in Uruguay
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2022.4.1915Keywords:
revealed comparative advantages, bibliometrics, Scopus, science and technology policiesAbstract
Based on bibliometric information from Scopus for the period 1996-2019, this document characterizes the evolution of Uruguayan scientific production and establishes the areas in which the country has a revealed comparative advantage (RCA). Methodologically, it is proposed that there is a RCA in an area if this area has a greater share in national scientific production than the share of the area in world scientific production. The evidence presented considers two measurements of scientific production (published articles and citations) and three levels of aggregation in the areas (a minor one with 5 large areas, a more detailed one with 27 disciplines and another even more granular with more than 300 disaggregations). Within Health Sciences there is a RCA in Veterinary, Nursing and Medicine. Within Life Sciences there is a RCA in Agricultural and Biological Sciences, Immunology and Microbiology and Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology. In Physical Sciences there is only a RCA in Environmental Science and in Social Sciences only in Economics, Econometrics and Finance.
Downloads
References
Ardanche, M., Goñi, M., y Tomassini, C. (2014). De lo normativo a la teoría y de la teoría al «laboratorio»: políticas universitarias para el fortalecimiento institucional de la calidad en investigación. En Bianco, M. y Sutz, J. (coord..) Veinte años de políticas de investigación en la Universidad de la República: aciertos, dudas y aprendizajes. Universidad de la República, CSIC y TRILCE.
Amoroso, N., Chiquiar, D., y Ramos-Francia, M. (2011). Technology and endowments as determinants of comparative advantage: Evidence from Mexico. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 22(2), 164-196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.najef.2011.01.004
Balassa, B. (1965). Trade Liberalisation and "Revealed" Comparative Advantage. The Manchester School, 33, 99-123. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9957.1965.tb00050.x
Baptista, B., Buslón, N., Schenck, M., y Segantini, M. (2012). Relevamiento Nacional de Equipamiento Científico-Tecnológico. Informe Final. ANII.CSIC-UDELAR. BID. Montevideo.
Bértola, L., Bianchi, C., Darscht, P., Davyt, A., Pittaluga, L., Reig, N., Román, C., Snoeck, M., y Willebald, H. (2005). Ciencia, tecnología e innovación en Uruguay: diagnóstico, prospectiva y políticas. Serie de notas de referencia RE1-RN-05-001, Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. https://doi.org/10.16993/iberoamericana.390
Bianco, M., y Sutz, J. (2014)l Veinte años de políticas de investigación en la Universidad de la República: aciertos, dudas y aprendizajes. Universidad de la República, CSIC y TRILCE.
Bortagaray, I. (2017). Cultura, innovación, ciencia y tecnología en Uruguay. Trazos de sus vinculaciones. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, DS-FCS, 30, 87-110.
Cai, J., Hongzhong, Z., y Coyte, P. C. (2018). The Effect of Intellectual Property Rights Protection on the International Competitiveness of the Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Industry in China. Engineering Economics, 29(1), 62-71. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.29.1.16878
Chuang, Y. W., Lee, L. C., Hung, W. C., y Lin, P. H. (2010). Forging into the innovation lead-a comparative analysis of scientific capacity. International Journal of Innovation Management, 14(03), 511-529. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919610002763
Daim, T. U., Rueda, G., Martin, H., y Gerdsri, P. (2006). Forecasting Emerging Technologies: Use of Bibliometrics and Patent Analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73, 981-1012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2006.04.004
Dalum, B., Laursen, K., y Villumsen, G. (1998). Structural Change in OECD Export Specialisation Patterns: de-specialisation and "stickiness". International Review of Applied Economics, 12(3), 423-443. https://doi.org/10.1080/02692179800000017
De Benedictis, L. (2005). Three Decades of Italian Comparative Advantage. The World Economy, Vol. 28(11), 1679-1709. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9701.2005.00752.x
De Benedictis, L., y Tamberi, M. (2001). A Note on the Balassa Index of Revealed Comparative Advantage. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.289602
De Benedictis, L., y Tamberi, M. (2004). Overall Specialization Empirics: Techniques and Applications. Open economies review, 15, 323-346. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:OPEN.0000048522.97418.99
Depetris, E., Garcia, R., y Rossini, G. (2009). Desempeño competitivo de Argentina y Uruguay en la leche en polvo. Problemas del Desarrollo. Revista Latinoamericana de Economía, 40(157). https://doi.org/10.22201/iiec.20078951e.2009.157.7762
Dieter, M., y Englert, H. (2007). Competitiveness in the global forest industry sector: an empirical study with special emphasis on Germany. European Journal of Forest Research, 126, 401-412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-006-0159-x
Falkowski, K. (2017). Long Term Comparative Advantages of the Eurasian Economic Union Member States in International Trade. International Journal of Management and Economics, 53(4), 27-49. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijme-2017-0024
Fertö, I., y Hubbard, L. J. (2003). Revealed Comparative Advantage and Competitiveness in Hungarian Agri-Food Sectors. World Economy, 26 (2), 247-259. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9701.00520
Frame, J. D. (1977). Mainstream Research in Latin America and the Caribbean. Interciencia, 2, 143-148.
Glänzel, W. (2000). Science in Scandinavia: A bibliometric approach. Scientometrics, 48(2),121-150. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005640604267
Gnidchenko, A., y Salnikov, V. (2015). Net comparative advantage index: overcoming the drawbacks of the existing indices. National Research University, Higher School of Economics, WP BRP 119/EC/2015. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2709009
Goñi, M., Schenck, M., y Tomassini, C. (2014). Género e investigación científica: reflexiones a partir de la experiencia de CSIC. En Bianco, M., y Sutz, J. (coord..) Veinte años de políticas de investigación en la Universidad de la República: aciertos, dudas y aprendizajes. Universidad de la República, CSIC y TRILCE.
Grigorovici, C. (2009). Analysing the Degree of Specialization in Romania's Services Trade. Romanian Journal of Economic Forecasting, 1/2009.
Guerini, M., y Tenca, F. (2018). The geography of technology-intensive start-ups and venture capital: European evidence. Economia e Politica Industriale, 45, 361-386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40812-018-0098-9
Guevara, M., y Mendoza, M. (2013). Revealing Comparative Advantages in the Backbone of Science. CompSci '13: Proceedings of the 2013 workshop on Computational scientometrics: theory y applications, 31-36. https://doi.org/10.1145/2508497.2508503
Hicks, D. (2005), The four literatures of social science, Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research. Kluwer Academic.
Hicks, D. (2013), One size doesn't fit all: On the co-evolution of national evaluation systems and social science publishing. Confiero, 1, 67-90. https://doi.org/10.3384/confero13v1121207b
Jambor, A., y Babu, S. (2016)."Competitiveness of Global Agriculture. Policy lessons for Food Security. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44876-3
Kozlowski, J., Radosevic, S., y Ircha, D. (1999). History matters: The inherited disciplinary structure of the post-communist science in countries of central and Eastern Europe and its restructuring. Scientometrics, 45(1),137-166. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458473
Lattimore, R., y Revesz, J. (1996). Australian science-performance from published papers. Bureau of Industry Economics Report.
Laursen, K. (2015). Revealed comparative advantage and the alternatives as measures of international specialization. Eurasian Business Review (2015), 5: 99-115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40821-015-0017-1
Lee, L. C., Lee, Y. Y., y Liaw, Y. C. (2012). Bibliometric analysis for development of research strategies in agricultural technology: the case of Taiwan. Scientometrics, 93, 813-830. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0833-3
Mansourzadeh, M. J., Shahmoradi, B., Dehdarirad, H., y Janavi, E. (2019). A note on using revealed comparative advantages in scientometrics studies. Scientometrics, 121(1), 595-599. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03207-8
Radosevic, S., y Yoruk, E. (2014). Are there global shifts in the world science base? Analysing the catching up and falling behind of world regions. Scientometrics, 101, 1897-1924. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1344-1 PMid:25411515 PMCid:PMC4228169
Robaina, S., y Sutz, J. (2014). Una mirada de conjunto a veinte años de fomento de la investigación universitaria. En Bianco, M., y Sutz, J. (coord.) Veinte años de políticas de investigación en la Universidad de la República: aciertos, dudas y aprendizajes. Universidad de la República, CSIC y TRILCE.
Rousseau, R., y Yang, L. (2012). Reflections on the activity index and related indicators. Journal of Informetrics, 6(2012), 413-421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.01.004
Rousseau, R. (2018). The F-measure for Research Priority. Journal of Data and Information Science, 3(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2018-0001
Rousseau, R. (2019). Balassa = revealed competitive advantage = activity. Scientometrics, 121, 1835-1836. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03273-y
Ruiz Gómez, L. M., Rodríguez Fernández, L. y Navio-Marco, J. (2018). Application of communication technologies (ICT) within the tourism industry in the European Union. Tourism, 66(2),,239-245.
Sclavo, A., y Waiter, A. (2014). Los jóvenes y la investigación. En Bianco, M., y Sutz, J. (coord.) Veinte años de políticas de investigación en la Universidad de la República: aciertos, dudas y aprendizajes. Universidad de la República, CSIC y TRILCE.
Schubert, A., y Braun, T. (1996). Cross-Field normalization of scientometric indicators. Scientometrics, 36(3), 311-324. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02129597
Soete, L. G., y Wyatt, S. (1983). The use of foreign patenting as an internationally comparable science and technology output indicator. Scientometrics, 5(1), 31-54. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02097176
Stare, J., y Kejžar, N. (2014). On standardization of the Activity Index., 8, 503-507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2014.04.004
Yang, L. Y., Yue, T., Ding, J. L., y Han, T. (2012). A comparison of disciplinary structure in science between the G7 and the BRIC countries by bibliometric methods. Scientometrics, 93, 497-516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0695-8
Zheng, J., Zhao, Z., Zhang, X., Chen, D., Huang, M., Lei, X., Zhang, Z., Zhao, Y., y Liu, R. (2011). Industry evolution and key technologies in China based on patent analysis. Scientometrics, 87, 175-188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0316-3
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
© CSIC. Manuscripts published in both the print and online versions of this journal are the property of the Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, and quoting this source is a requirement for any partial or full reproduction.
All contents of this electronic edition, except where otherwise noted, are distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence. You may read the basic information and the legal text of the licence. The indication of the CC BY 4.0 licence must be expressly stated in this way when necessary.
Self-archiving in repositories, personal webpages or similar, of any version other than the final version of the work produced by the publisher, is not allowed.
