the international research strategies of south africa, japan and the united states of america

7/30/2019 The International Research Strategies of South Africa, Japan and the United States of America

1/11

The International Research Strategies of SouthAfrica, Japan and the United States of America

Vuyani Lingela and Mapule Degama

Department of Science and Technology; Postal Address: Private Bag X894, Pretoria 0001, SouthAfrica; Tel: +27 12 843 6517; Fax: +27 86 681 0051; Email: [email protected]

29 November 2012
mailto:[email protected]


2/11

The International Research Strategies of South Africa, Japan and the United States of America

29 November 2012 2 of 11

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to examine the international research strategies of South Africa,Japan and the United States of America (USA) in order to develop an evidence-based planfor South Africa-Japan and South Africa-USA international research and technology transferprogramme, which is informed by the strategies of the three countries. The method used toexamine the international research strategies was to analyse the research outputs and theintensity of the international research partnerships between the three countries. In order todo that, data on the total number of publications produced by each country and the numberof co-authored publications were examined both at national and institutional levels. Theresults presented in this paper suggest that in different subject areas, different countries orcompanies and research organisations within countries follow a combination of the fouractivities in their international research strategy, namely: advanced research, nationalstrategic research, science diplomacy, and research capacity development. A description ofthe international research strategy is presented in the paper. Overall, it can be concludedthat South Africas international research strategy for the USA focuses more on nationalstrategic research. South Africas international research strategy for Japan focuses largely

on national strategic research and science diplomacy. On the other hand, Japansinternational research strategy for South Africa focuses less on national strategic research

and science diplomacy. Similarly, the USAs international research strategy for South Africafocuses less on national strategic research, science diplomacy and advanced research.

Introduction

The purpose of this paper is to examine the international research strategies of South Africa,Japan and the United States of America (USA) in order to develop an evidence-based planfor South Africa-Japan and South Africa-USA international research and technology transferprogramme, which is informed by the strategies of the three countries.

The method used to examine the international research strategies of South Africa, Japanand the USA was to analyse the research outputs and the intensity of the internationalresearch partnerships between the three countries. In order to do that, data on the numberof publications produced by researchers from the three countries were obtained fromInCites1. The total number of publications produced by each country and the number of co-authored publications were examined both at national and institutional levels. Japanese andAmerican institutions were ranked by the total number of their publications and the topinstitutions that accounted for at least 65% of all publications each country produced wereidentified. Out of those institutions, institutions that have co-authored at least one publicationwith South Africa were selected.

The international research partnership between South Africa and Japan

The results presented in Figure 1 show the percentage of scientific publications producedbetween South African researchers and their international partners per subject area, as wellas Japanese researchers and their international partners between 1981 and 2011. Japan isperforming well in international research partnerships in space science, where 52% (9 206)of publications in space science are generated with international co-authors. Space scienceis followed by geosciences, economics and business and environment/ecology, where 38%(12 194), 30% (1 816) and 29% (5 547) of publications, respectively, are generated withinternational co-authors. Japan demonstrates less reliance on international researchpartnerships in subject areas such as pharmacology and toxicology, agricultural sciences,and engineering, where only 12% (6 191), 12% (4 252) and 15% (22 577) of publications,respectively, are generated with international co-authors.


3/11



Figure 1. Percentage of total scientific publications produced with international researchpartnerships per subject area

Figure 2. Percentage of total scientific publications produced per subject area

It is also interesting to note that in space science, geosciences and environment/ecology,

where Japan relies heavily on international partnerships (see Figure 1), the total number ofJapanese publications is small (see Figure 2). The total number of publications produced

MultidisciplinaryEconomics & Business

Plant & Animal Science

Clinical Medicine

Psychiatry/Psychology

Social Sciences, general

Chemistry

Engineering

Computer Science

Agricultural Sciences

Pharmacology &

Environment/Ecology

Materials Science

Biology & Biochemistry

Geosciences

Mathematics

Microbiology

Neuroscience &

Molecular Biology &

Physics

Space Science

Immunology

JAPAN SOUTH AFRICA

MultidisciplinaryNeuroscience &

Computer Science

Molecular Biology &

Pharmacology &

Immunology

Economics & Business

Microbiology

Agricultural Sciences

Materials Science

Space SciencePsychiatry/Psychology

Mathematics

Biology & Biochemistry

Physics

Engineering

Geosciences

Environment/Ecology

Social Science s, general

Chemistry

Plant & Animal Science

Clinical Medicine

JAPAN SOUTH AFRICA


4/11



with international co-authors in these subject areas ranges between 29% and 53%. Thismight be because the strategy of Japan is to promote international partnerships in theseareas (i.e. space science, geosciences, and environment/ecology). On the other hand, itrelies heavily on its national research workforce in areas such as clinical medicine (81% =301 690), chemistry (84% = 262 315), engineering (92% = 129 195), physics (86% = 201052) biology and biochemistry (91% = 128 998), and materials science (94% = 90 401),which might be core to its economic development strategy.

South Africa's strategy appears to be different. In South Africa, where there is a high numberof international co-authored publications in subject areas such as immunology (70% =1 179), space science (67% = 1 881), physics (53% = 3134) and molecular biology andgenetics (52% = 808), the total number of South African publications in these subject areasis small (see Figure 2). In clinical medicine, and plant and animal science, where mostpublications (79% and 82%, respectively) are generated by the national research workforce,the total number of South African publications is very high (see Figure 2). A possible reasoncould be that these areas (i.e. clinical medicine, and plant and animal science) are core toSouth Africa's development strategy.

Figure 3. Total number of publications and publications co-authored with South Africa

Institutions that accounted for 65% of all publications produced in Japan and have co-authored publications with South Africa are presented in Figure 3. The results indicate thatbetween 1981 and 2011, the University of Tokyo, Kyoto University, Osaka University, theUniversity of Tsukuba and Nagoya University have co-authored the highest number ofpublications with South Africa. The National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science andTechnology (AIST), National Institute for Materials Science, Nihon University and JapanAtomic Energy Agency have co-authored the lowest number of publications with SouthAfrica.

Although AIST produced more publications (50 824) than the University of Tsukuba(38 524), the University of Tsukuba has co-authored more publications (134) with South

Africa than AIST (1). Tohoku University, which produced more publications (91 163) thanNagoya University (63 963), has co-authored fewer publications (81) with South Africa than

AISTKeio Univ

Osaka City

UnivChiba Univ

Kyushu Univ

Riken Hokkaido UnivKobe UnivOkayama Univ

Waseda UnivTohoku Univ

Tokyo Inst TechnolHiroshima Univ

Nagoya UnivUniv Tsukuba Osaka Univ

Kyoto Univ

Univ Tokyo

0

50

100

150

200

250

0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000120,000140,000160,000

Publicationsco-authoredwithSA

Number of publications per institution


5/11


6/11


7/11



between 1981 and 2011 Harvard University, Columbia University, the University ofWashington, Johns Hopkins University and the University of California (Berkeley) co-authored the highest number of publications with South Africa. On the other hand, theUniversity of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, the Universityof Texas (Austin), the University of Southern California and Northwestern University haveco-authored the lowest number of publications with South Africa.

Although the University of Washington, John Hopkins University and the University ofCalifornia (Berkeley) produced more publications (132 155, 128 743 and 128 375,respectively) than Columbia University (106 882), Columbia University has co-authoredmore publications (601) with South Africa than the University of Washington (484), JohnHopkins University (401) and the University of California (Berkeley) (398). The University ofWisconsin-Madison, which produced more publications (116 667) than the University ofChicago (71 528) and the University of Arizona (74 101), has co-authored fewer publications(5) with South Africa than the University of Chicago (198) and the University of Arizona(282). It is evident that international research partnerships between South African institutionsand Harvard University, Columbia University, the University of Washington, Johns Hopkins

University and the University of California (Berkeley) have generated more research outputsthan partnerships with other USA institutions (see Figure 6).

The international research partnership with South Africa per subject area

The percentages of the total number of publications co-authored by South Africa and Japanas well as by South Africa and the USA are presented in Figure 7. The totals are expressedin percentages because South Africa and the USA produce on average 18 times more jointpublications per subject area compared to joint publications produced with Japan.

Figure 7. Total number of publications co-authored with South Africa per subject area

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

Arts&Humanities

ComputerScience

Economics&Business

Multidisciplin

ary

MaterialsScience

Neuroscience&Behavior

AgriculturalSciences

Pharmacolog

y&

Psychiatry/Psychology

Mathema

tics

MolecularBiolog

y&

Chemistry

Microbiology

Physics

Environment/Ecology

SpaceScience

Engineering

Geosciences

Biology&Biochemistry

Immunology

SocialSciences,general

Plant&AnimalScience

ClinicalMedic

ine

Totaln

umberofpublications(%)

Japan USA


8/11



As illustrated in Figure 7, the top three subject areas in which most co-authored publicationshave been produced between South Africa and Japan are clinical medicine (14.2% = 225),space science (13.0% = 207) and physics (12.1% = 193). The top three subject areas inwhich most co-authored publications have been produced between South Africa and theUSA are clinical medicine (25.3% = 5 181), plant and animal science (9.6% = 1 961) andsocial sciences (8.2% = 1690). It is important to note that these international researchpartnerships focus on two of the USAs subject areas (i.e., clinical medicine and socialsciences) and two of Japans subject areas (i.e., clinical medicine and physics) in which thetwo countries rely heavily on their national research workforce and less on internationalpartnerships, probably because they are core to their national economic development.

The International Research Strategy

The results presented above suggest that in different subject areas, different countries orcompanies and research organisations within countries follow a combination of the fouractivities in their international research strategy, which is outlined in Figure 8, namely:advanced research, national strategic research, science diplomacy, and research capacity

development. A description of the international research strategy is presented below.

Figure 8. International research strategy

a) Advanced research could be pursued by companies or research organisations that arerecognised national or global leaders in a specific subject area. Advanced researchcould involve companies or organisations that have developed a very large portfolio ofintellectual property, including hundreds or thousands of publications (knowledge),patents (technologies), and researchers and engineers (research workforce), which theycould deploy in a specific international research partnership programme that wouldadvance their strategic objectives. Examples of advanced research partnerships couldinclude international research on mobile computing between Apple (USA) and Samsung(Korea), or aerospace and defence-related research between the European Aeronautic

Defence and Space Company, the parent company of Airbus, and the British BAESystems.

AdvancedResearch

NationalStrategic

Research

ResearchCapacity

Development

ScienceDiplomacyL

ow

High

High Low

International Research

NationalRese

arch


9/11



In the USA, physics seems to fall under advanced research. This is because it is one ofthe few subject areas in the USA in which there are high numbers of publicationsproduced with international co-authors, and the overall number of publications in thisarea is also high (see Figures 4 and 5). It is also interesting to note that 49% (96) of theNobel Prize Laureates in Physics, out of 194 Laureates between 1901 and 2012, wereaffiliated to institutions in the USA at the time of the award, even though some of themmight be naturalised American citizens (see www.nobelprize.org).

b) National strategic research could be pursued by countries that have prioritised specificsubject areas and have made large amounts of funding available to researchers incompanies or research organisations working on those specific subject areas. Thatsupport could be provided for priority subject areas without regard to internationalresearch trends or levels of support by international partners. As a consequence, acountry could develop a large portfolio of intellectual property (i.e. knowledge,technologies and research workforce) in a specific subject area of national strategicimportance with very little cooperation or support from international research partners.

In South Africa, clinical medicine, and plant and animal science seem to fall undernational strategic research. This is because a large percentage of publications in clinicalmedicine, and plant and animal science (79% and 82%, respectively) are produced bythe national research workforce and small percentage with international co-authors. TheSouth African Health Minister, Dr Aaron Motsoaledi, has said that African countries needto invest more in clinical trials so that they can have a greater influence over researchinto diseases affecting their people2. He also explained that, while South Africa receiveddonor funding for its HIV treatment programmes, it had drawn more than 80% of therequired budget from the fiscus2 (i.e. national budget).

Clinical medicine, chemistry, engineering, material science, biology and biochemistry,and physics seem to be national strategic research areas in Japan, where the Japanese

alone are responsible for between 81% and 94% of research outputs. Clinical medicine,chemistry, social sciences (general), engineering, and biology and biochemistry seem tobe national strategic research areas in the USA, where the USA alone is responsible forbetween 77% and 93% of research outputs.

c) Science diplomacy could be pursued by countries as a means to enhance friendlyrelations between the people, institutions and governments of other countries that theyregard as their partners in the global economic community. In this context, countriescould promote and facilitate the exchange of students, researchers and engineers(research workforce) between companies or research organisations by providingscholarships and research funding to enable research cooperation. Although thedevelopment of new knowledge and technologies and the research workforce is an

important measure of success, the existence of international research partnershipsamong the countries involved becomes a primary measure of success. As a result,countries tend to pursue science diplomacy in subject areas that have global significancebut limited national strategic importance.

Although the overall contribution of international researchers to knowledge generation ina specific subject area supported in the context of science diplomacy might be very high,the overall number publications produced in that specific subject area tends to be verylow. Japan for example, seems to advance science diplomacy through space science,geosciences and environment/ecology, where there are high numbers of publicationsproduced with international co-authors (52%, 38% and 29%, respectively), but the overallnumber of publications in these areas is low. The USA for example, seems to advancescience diplomacy through space science, mathematics and geosciences, where there
http://www.nobelprize.org%29./


10/11



are high numbers of publications produced with international co-authors (46%, 30% and30%, respectively), but the overall number of publications in these areas is low.

South Africa seems to promote science diplomacy through space science, physics,immunology, and molecular biology and genetics, where there are high numbers ofpublications produced with international co-authors (between 52% and 70%), but theoverall number publications in these areas is low.

d) Research capacity development could be pursued by countries that have very lowresearch capacity (mostly developing countries) as a means to gain expertise from acountry that has advanced research expertise (mostly developed countries) in specificsubject areas. A developed country with advanced research expertise will have very littleinterest in pursuing international research with a developing country that has very lowresearch capacity. However, the developed country might have an interest in extractingnatural resources or accessing the market in a developing country with very low researchcapacity. In exchange for natural resources or market access, the developed countrycould be directed by the developing country to implement a research capacity

development programme. Such a programme could be specific to natural resources thatare extracted or products and services that are offered to the developing country.

Examples of research capacity development could include a platinum beneficiationresearch and development programme with the support of a platinum mining company inthe country, such as Anglo American Platinum in South Africa. General Electric, anAmerican company that is contracted to manufacture locomotives in South Africa, couldsupport a metal casting research and development programme in South Africa. Hitachi, aJapanese company, which is building coal power plants in South Africa, could support aclean coal research and development programme in South Africa.

Conclusions

Overall, it can be concluded that South Africas international research strategy forthe USAfocuses more on national strategic research. This is because there are many jointpublications with the USA in two of South Africas national strategic research areas (i.e.,clinical medicine, and plant and animal science). It can also be concluded that South Africasinternational research strategy for Japan focuses largely on national strategic research andscience diplomacy. This is because there are many joint publications with Japan in one ofSouth Africas national strategic research areas (i.e., clinical medicine) and two of SouthAfricas science diplomacy areas (i.e., space science and physics).

On the other hand, it can be concluded that Japan s international research strategy for SouthAfrica focuses less on national strategic research and science diplomacy. This is because

although there are many joint publications with South Africa in two of Japans nationalstrategic research areas (i.e., clinical medicine and physics), there are less joint publicationswith South Africa in Japans four national strategic research areas (i.e., chemistry,engineering, material science, biology and biochemistry). Even further, although there aremany joint publications with South Africa in one of Japans science diplomacy areas (i.e.,space science), there are less joint publications with South Africa in two of Japans sciencediplomacy areas (i.e., geosciences and environment/ecology).

Similarly, it can be concluded that the USAs international research strategy for South Africafocuses less on national strategic research, science diplomacy and advanced research. Thisis because although there are many joint publications with South Africa in one of the USA snational strategic research area (i.e., clinical medicine), there are less joint publications withSouth Africa in USAs three national strategic research areas (i.e., chemistry, engineering,


11/11



and biology and biochemistry). There are also less joint publications with South Africa inthree of the USAs science diplomacy areas (i.e., space science, mathematics andgeosciences). Even further, there are less joint publications with South Africa in one of theUSAs advanced research areas (i.e., physics).

References

1. InCitesTM, Thomson Reuters (2012). Report Created: 25-30 Oct 2012. Data ProcessedDec 31, 2011. Data Source: Web of Science.

2. Tamar Kahn (2012). Clinical trials 'need more African cash'. Business Day, 6 November2012.

the international research strategies of south africa, japan and the united states of america

Documents