Comparative Trends in Research Performance of the Russian Universities

Scientometrics (2018) 116:2019–2052 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2807-6(0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789().,-volV) Comparative trends in research performance of the Russian universities Anna A. Avanesova1 • Tatyana A. Shamliyan2 Received: 5 March 2018 / Published online: 14 June 2018 Ó Akade´miai Kiado´, Budapest, Hungary 2018 Abstract We analyzed comparative trends in research performance of the Russian institutions based on the quantitative and qualitative data available in the international SciVal, Scopus, web of science and the national Russian databases from 2012 to December 2017. Russian Federation represented 2.0% of the world population and 2% of the researchers while accounting to 2.2% of the world publications (14th place in the world scholarly output) with overall field-weighted citation impact of 0.75. Scholarly output of the Russian authors increased by 79%, field-weighted citation impact by 12% and outputs in top citation percentiles by 21% but without a statistically significant positive association between higher investment in research and development and the increase the national GDP. Scholarly output for the Russian publications in mathematics, physics and astronomy are among 5 top countries. However, field-weighted mass media impact, the number of citations per publication, citations per author and per publication, metrics of international collaboration and the academic–corporation collaboration and economic impact of the Russian research remain low. Routine analysis of the research performance and economic impact of R&D expenditure should be reflected in transparent distribution of state research funding. Legal aspects of the international research must be developed to ensure a com- plete integration of the Russian science into international research activities. Keywords Academic institutions Á Productivity Á Internationalization Á Russian Federation Á Artificial intelligence & Tatyana A. Shamliyan [email protected] Anna A. Avanesova [email protected] 1 North-Caucasian Federal University, Pushkina street, 1, Stavropol, Russian Federation 355009 2 Quality Assurance, Evidence-Based Medicine Center, Elsevier, 1600 JFK Blvd, Philadelphia, PA 19103, USA 123 2020 Scientometrics (2018) 116:2019–2052 Introduction Science-driven innovation is essential for the national economic success (O’meara 2015; Asheim et al. 2016). State investment in higher education and facilitation of foreign direct investments into multidisciplinary international research activities improve research performance and increase innovation capabilities of all contributors across the borders (Chen et al. 2017; Salter et al. 2016;Li2011; Kulmala et al. 2015). Russian government implemented several programs supporting leading universities in science-based innovation (Schiermeier 2010; Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation 2013; Decree of the President of the Russian Federation 2012; The Directive of the Government of the Russian Federation 2012, 2013; Federal Assembly Of The Russian Federation 2017). The Russian Academic Excellence Project and Project 5-100 aimed at improving ‘‘the com- petitive position of the leading Russian universities in the global research and education market’’ (Turko et al. 2016; The Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation). These initiatives improved some parameters of research performance of the Russian universities (Markusova et al. 2013; Pislyakov and Shukshina 2014; Lyagushkina and Bogatov 2017). However, the place of Russia in the modern global scientific community remains unexplored. Overall productivity, scientific, economic and societal impact of the Russian research institutions is unclear. Comparative trends in specific research performance indicators and the most current ranking of Russian contribution in various scientific subjects have not been analyzed. Methods We conducted a comprehensive analysis of international SciVal, Scopus, web of science and the Russian electronic library databases to identify publications of the authors affiliated with Russian Federation, the USA, China and other countries (Li et al. 2017; Reznik-Zellen 2016). We analyzed research performance data from 2012 to December 2017 to address a lag between increased Russian investment in the national research performance (Schier- meier 2010). We analyzed country’ investment in research and development using the data from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (https://data.oecd.org). We analyzed the value of awarded grants based on the data available in SciVal from the following funding entities: Welcome Trust, the National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, Arts and Humanities Research Council, Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, Economic and Social Research Council, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, Medical Research Council, Natural Environment Research Council, Science and Technology Facilities Council, Australian Research Council, National Health and Medical Research Council (Colledge and Verlinde 2014). We analyzed Patent Article Citations data available in SciVal from European Patent Office, Intellectual Property Office, Japan Patent Office, United States Patent and Trade- mark Office and the World Intellectual Property Organization (Colledge and Verlinde 2014). We analyzed media exposure available in SciVal from the LexisNexis Metabase portal (http://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/en-uk/terms.page). We analyzed the dynamic of share of Russian publications in the global number of publications in Scopus and the position of Russia in the global ranking of countries by number of publications in Scopus. We compared country population, spending on research 123 Scientometrics (2018) 116:2019–2052 2021 and development, research productivity and impact of Russia in comparison with other countries. We tested hypotheses of the association between spending on research and development and scientific productivity. We tested hypotheses of the statistical significance of annual trends in research performance indicators and the differences between indicators of the Russian and The US institutions and authors. We compared research performance between the Russian Fed- eration and the USA because the USA is a recognized leader in diverse research fields. We analyzed the scientific collaboration of Russia with other countries. We examined how the intensity of scientific collaboration varies by disciplines. We explored what countries and what foreign research organizations and universities are key scientific partners of Russian authors. We ranked indicators of research performance in different research areas across countries of author’ affiliation. We also ranked indicators of research performance among the Russian institutions. We analyzed correlations between various performance and economic impact indicators. We extracted the data on publication activity of the Institutes of Russian Academy of Sciences, other research universities, and other research organization of enterprise sector (Russian Academy of Science 2013). To address differences in research productivity, collaboration, scientific and economic impact, we analyzed the Russian Science Citation Index (Mongeon and Paul-Hus 2016; Gorin et al. 2016; Bolotov et al. 2014) and the following indicators of all publications indexed in Scopus (Table 1). For statistical analyses we used STATA (StataCorp http://www.stata.com). Significance was analyzed at 95% confidence level. Results Russian Federation represented 2.0% of the world population and 2% of the researchers while accounting to 2.2% of the world publications with overall Field-Weighted Citation Impact of 0.75 (Figs. 1, 2). In comparison, the US represented 1.5% of the world population but 18% of the researchers accounting to 22.8% of the world population with overall Field-Weighted Citation Impact of 1.45. Switzerland and Netherlands represent 0.1 and 0.2% of the world population with the highest Field-Weighted Citation Impact of 1.83 and 1.79 respectively (Figs. 1, 2). We analyzed the association between countries investment into research and development and research performance. We found that country’s gross domestic spending on research and developments is positively associated with the number of the authors and publications but not with citations per publications and Field-Weighted Citation Impact indices. However, higher percentage of spending on research and development was positively associated with higher Field-Weighted Citation Impact indices (p value 0.032). In 2012–December 2017, scholarly output of the Russian authors represented only 9.4% of the US of scholarly output (Table 2). However, during this period of time the Russian scholarly output increased by 79% while the US scholarly output decreased by 1.4% (Table 2). Increase in the Russian scholarly output was incrementally higher than the Russian investment in research and development. For instance, in 2015, Russia invested in research and development 1.1% of GDP with the total GDP of $24,710/capita. At the same year, the US invested in research and development 2.8% of GDP with the total GDP of $56,420/capita. Overall during 2000–2015, there was a statistically significant positive 123 2022 Scientometrics (2018) 116:2019–2052 Table 1 Indicators of research productivity, collaboration, scientific and economic impact Indicator Measured entity Definition characteristic Scholarly output Productivity The number of indexed in Scopus publications Field-weighted citation Scientific

Load more