Measuring scientific research in emerging nano-energy field

  • Jiancheng Guan
  • Na Liu
Research Paper


The purpose of this paper is to comprehensively explore scientific research profiles in the field of emerging nano-energy during 1991–2012 based on bibliometrics and social network analysis. We investigate the growth pattern of research output, and then carry out across countries/regions comparisons on research performances. Furthermore, we examine scientific collaboration across countries/regions by analyzing collaborative intensity and networks in 3- to 4-year intervals. Results indicate with an impressively exponential growth pattern of nano-energy articles, the world share of scientific “giants,” such as the USA, Germany, England, France and Japan, display decreasing research trends, especially in the USA. Emerging economies, including China, South Korea and India, exhibit a rise in terms of the world share, illustrating strong development momentum of these countries in nano-energy research. Strikingly, China displays a remarkable rise in scientific influence rivaling Germany, Japan, France, and England in the last few years. Finally, the scientific collaborative network in nano-energy research has expanded steadily. Although the USA and several major European countries play significantly roles on scientific collaboration, China and South Korea exert great influence on scientific collaboration in recent years. The findings imply that emerging economies can earn competitive advantages in some emerging fields by properly engaging a catch-up strategy.


Nano-energy Growth pattern Scientific influence Collaborative networks Cross-countries/regions comparison Survey 



This study is supported by a Grant from National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71373254). The authors are very grateful for the valuable comments and suggestions from the anonymous reviewers. The authors also wish to thank the Editor of the Journal for his careful English corrections of the article, which significantly improved the readability of the paper.


  1. Alivisatos P, Cummings P, De Yoreo J, Fishthorn K, Gates B, Hwang R, Lowndes D, Majumdar A, Makowski L, Michalske T (2005) Nanoscience research for energy needs.
  2. Arora SK, Porter AL, Youtie J, Shapira P (2013) Capturing new developments in an emerging technology: an updated search strategy for identifying nanotechnology research outputs. Scientometrics 95(1):351–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bajwa RS, Yaldram K, Rafique S (2013) A scientometric assessment of research output in nanoscience and nanotechnology: Pakistan perspective. Scientometrics 94(1):333–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bhushan B (2010) Introduction to nanotechnology. In: Bhushan B (ed) Springer handbook of nanotechnology. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bornmann L, Anegon FD, Leydesdorff L (2012) The new excellence indicator in the world report of the SCImago Institutions Rankings 2011. J Informetr 6(2):333–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen XB, Li C, Gratzel M, Kostecki R, Mao SS (2012) Nanomaterials for renewable energy production and storage. Chem Soc Rev 41(23):7909–7937CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. de Solla Price DJ (1963) Little science, big science. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Diallo MS, Fromer NA, Jhon MS (2013) Nanotechnology for sustainable development: retrospective and outlook. J Nanopart Res 15(11):2044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dong BS, Xu GQ, Luo X, Cai Y, Gao W (2012) A bibliometric analysis of solar power research from 1991 to 2010. Scientometrics 93(3):1101–1117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. EIA U (2013) International energy outlook 2013. United States Energy Information Administration, Washington.
  11. Fisher RA (1921) Some remarks on the methods formulated in a recent article on “The quantitative analysis of plant growth”. Ann Appl Biol 7(4):367–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fromer NA, Diallo MS (2013) Nanotechnology and clean energy: sustainable utilization and supply of critical materials. J Nanopart Res 15(11):2011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gonzalez-Brambila CN, Veloso FM, Krackhardt D (2013) The impact of network embeddedness on research output. Res Policy 42(9):1555–1567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Guan J, Gao X (2008) Comparison and evaluation of Chinese research performance in the field of bioinformatics. Scientometrics 75(2):357–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Guo KW (2012) Green nanotechnology of trends in future energy: a review. Int J Energy Res 36(1):1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hirsch JE (2005) An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102(46):16569–16572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Huang C, Notten A, Rasters N (2011) Nanoscience and technology publications and patents: a review of social science studies and search strategies. J Technol Transf 36(2):145–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Li EY, Liao CH, Yen HR (2013) Co-authorship networks and research impact: a social capital perspective. Res Policy 42(9):1515–1530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liu W, Gu M, Hu G, Li C, Liao H, Tang L, Shapira P (2013) Profile of developments in biomass-based bioenergy research: a 20-year perspective. Scientometrics. doi:  10.1007/s11192-013-1152-z
  20. Mahapatra M (1985) On the validity of the theory of exponential growth of scientific literature. In: 15th IASLIC conference proceedings, IASLIC, Bangalore, pp 61–70Google Scholar
  21. Mallik A, Mandal N (2014) Bibliometric analysis of global publication output and collaboration structure study in microRNA research. Scientometrics 98:2011–2037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Menendez-Manjon A, Moldenhauer K, Wagener P, Barcikowski S (2011) Nano-energy research trends: bibliometrical analysis of nanotechnology research in the energy sector. J Nanopart Res 13(9):3911–3922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Milojevic S (2012) Multidisciplinary cognitive content of nanoscience and nanotechnology. J Nanopart Res 14(1):685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Molinari JF, Molinari A (2008) A new methodology for ranking scientific institutions. Scientometrics 75(1):163–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Porter AL, Youtie J, Shapira P, Schoeneck DJ (2008) Refining search terms for nanotechnology. J Nanopart Res 10(5):715–728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Roco MC, Mirkin CA, Hersam MC (2011) Nanotechnology research directions for societal needs in 2020: summary of international study. J Nanopart Res 13(3):897–919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sanz-Casado E, Garcia-Zorita JC, Serrano-Lopez AE, Larsen B, Ingwersen P (2013) Renewable energy research 1995–2009: a case study of wind power research in EU, Spain, Germany and Denmark. Scientometrics 95(1):197–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sci2Team (2009) Science of science (Sci2) tool. Indiana University and SciTech Strategies.
  29. Serrano E, Rus G, Garcia-Martinez J (2009) Nanotechnology for sustainable energy. Renew Sust Energ Rev 13(9):2373–2384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. So DS, Kim CW, Chung PS, Jhon MS (2012) Nanotechnology policy in Korea for sustainable growth. J Nanopart Res 14(6):854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tang L, Shapira P (2011) China–US scientific collaboration in nanotechnology: patterns and dynamics. Scientometrics 88(1):1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tegart G (2009) Energy and nanotechnologies: priority areas for Australia’s future. Technol Forecast Soc Change 76(9):1240–1246CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of ManagementChinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations