Coisas que se pode aprender sobre CT&I no Brasil pela análise das publicações científicas com autores no país
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2316-9036.i135p71-100Palavras-chave:
CT&I, Setor acadêmico e empresarial, Publicações brasileirasResumo
No presente trabalho usamos informações sobre publicações científicas com autores no Brasil para analisar algumas características do sistema de CT&I e identificar oportunidades para melhorar as políticas para ciência, tecnologia e inovação no país. Abordamos variações temporais nas tendências, de forma que o leitor possa observá-las à luz do histórico das políticas e condições do sistema de CT&I. Analisamos as taxas de crescimento do conjunto de publicações, as contribuições do setor acadêmico e empresarial, as contribuições regionais e a participação em termos de áreas de pesquisa e dos Objetivos do Desenvolvimento Sustentável. Entre as observações, destacamos a debilidade do esforço de P&D em empresas, o que limita a capacidade para estabelecer parcerias com universidades (mesmo que essas colaborações venham crescendo), e o lento aumento do impacto de citações do conjunto de publicações do país.
Downloads
Referências
ACSB and multiple signers. San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA). Retrieved August 31, 2022, from https://sfdora.org/read/. ARORA, A. et al. The changing structure of American innovation: some cautionary remarks
for economic growth. 2019 (http://www.nber.org/papers/w25893).
ARORA, A.; BELENZON, S.; SHEER, L. Back to basics: why do firms invest in research?. 2017 (http://www.nber.org/papers/w23187).
BAAS, J. et al. “Scopus as a curated, high-quality bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies”. Quantitative Science Studies, 1 (1), 2020, pp. 377-86.
“BEYOND the science bubble”. Nature, 391, 2017 (https://www.nature.com/articles/542391a).
BORNMANN, L.; HAUNSCHILD, R.; MUTZ, R. “Growth rates of modern science: a latent piecewise growth curve approach to model publication numbers from established and new literature databases”. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 8 (1), 2021.
BRITO CRUZ, C. H. “Benchmarking university/industry research collaboration in Brazil”, in E. B. Reynolds; B. R. Schneider; E. Zylberberg (eds.). Innovation in Brazil: advancing development in the 21st Century, 2019 (https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429053092).
BRITO CRUZ, C. H. “Ciência fundamental: desafios para a competividade acadêmica”, 2010 (https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.24512.61447).
BRITO CRUZ, C. H. “Ciência, tecnologia e desenvolvimento no Brasil”, 2013 (https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.11090.84166).
CALVERT, J.; PATEL, P. “University-industry research collaborations in the UK: bibliometric trends”. Science and Public Policy, 30 (2), 2003, pp. 85-96 (https://doi.org/10.3152/147154303781780597).
COLLEGE, L. Snowball Metrics Recipe Book, 2017 (www.snowballmetrics.com). EL-OUAHI, J.; ROBINSON-GARCÍA, N.; COSTAS, R. Analyzing scientific mobility and collaboration in the Middle East and North Africa, 2021 (https://doi.org/10.1162/qss).
ELSEVIER. What are the most used subject area categories and classifications in Scopus?, 2022 (https://Service.Elsevier.Com/App/Answers/Detail/A_id/14882/Supporthub/Scopus/~/What-Are-the-Most-Frequent-Subject-Area-Categories-and-ClassificationsUsed-In/).
FAPESP. Código de boas práticas científicas, 2014 (https://fapesp.br/boaspraticas/). GLOBAL Research Council. 2019 GRC statement of principles: addressing expectations of societal and economic impact, 2019.
GUERRERO-BOTE, V. P. et al. “Comparative analysis of the bibliographic data sources dimensions and Scopus: an approach at the country and institutional levels”. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 5, 2021 (https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2020.593494).
HICKS, D. et al. “Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics”. Nature, 520, 2015, pp. 429-30 (https://www.nature.com/articles/520429a).
LETA, J.; BRITO CRUZ, C. H. “A produção científica brasileira”, in E. B. Viotti; M. de M. Macedo (eds.). Indicadores de ciência, tecnologia e inovação no Brasil. Campinas, Editora da Unicamp, 2003, pp. 121-68.
LETA, J.; CHAIMOVICH, H. “Recognition and international collaboration: the Brazilian case”. Budapest Scientometrics, 53 (3), 2002, pp. 325-35.
MARX, M.; FUEGI, A. “Reliance on science: worldwide front-page patent citations to scientific articles”. Strategic Management Journal, 41 (9), 2020, pp. 1.572-94.
McMANUS, C. et al. “International collaboration in Brazilian science: financing and impact”. Scientometrics, 125 (3), 2020, pp. 2.745-72.
McMANUS, C. et al. “Profiles not metrics: the case of Brazilian universities”. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências, 93 (4), 2021.
McMANUS, C.; BAETA NEVES, A. A.; MARANHÃO, A. Q. “Brazilian publication profiles: where and how Brazilian authors publish”. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências,92 (2), 2020, pp. 1-22.
McMANUS, C.; BAETA NEVES, A. A. “Funding research in Brazil”. Scientometrics, 126 (1), 2021, pp. 801-23.
METRICAS.EDU – University performance and international comparison. Retrieved September 1, 2022 (https://metricas.usp.br/en/).
MOED, H. F.; AISATI, M.; PLUME, A. “Studying scientific migration in Scopus”. Scientometrics, 94 (3), 2013, pp. 929-42.
NARIN, F.; HAMILTON, K. S.; OLIVASTRO, D. “The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science”. Research Policy, 26, 1997, pp. 317-30.
NARIN, F.; OLIVASTRO, D. “Status report: Linkage between technology and science”. Research Policy, 1992, pp. 237-49.
NARIN, F.; OLIVASTRO, D. “Technology indicators based on patents and patent citations”, in Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology, 1988 (https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-444-70537-2.50020-9).
NATIONAL Research Council (US); COMMITTEE on Responsibilities of Authorship in the Biological Sciences. The Purpose of Publication and Responsibilities for Sharing, 2003 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK97153/).
RIVEST, M. et al. Dataset: Improving the Scopus and Aurora queries to identify research that supports the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 2021. Elsevier BV (https://doi.org/10.17632/9SXDYKM8S4.4).
ROBERGE, G.; KASHNITSKY, Y.; JAMES, C. Elsevier 2022 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) Mapping. Mendeley Data, V1, 2022 (https://elsevier.digitalcommonsdata.com/datasets/6bjy52jkm9).
SZOMSZOR, M.; ADIE, E. Overton – a bibliometric database of policy document citations, 2022 (http://arxiv.org/abs/2201.07643).
“THE IMPACT of the State on Scientific Research”. Nature, 122 (3062), 1928, pp. 1-3.
TIJSSEN, R. J. W. “Co-authored research publications and strategic analysis of publicprivate collaboration”. Research Evaluation, 2012a (https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvs013).
TIJSSEN, R. J. W. “Co-authored research publications and strategic analysis of public-private collaboration”. Research Evaluation, 21 (3), 2012b, pp. 204-15 (https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvs013).
TIJSSEN, R. J. W. “Universities and industrially relevant science: towards measurement models and indicators of entrepreneurial orientation”. Research Policy, 35 (10), 2006, pp. 1.569-85 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.09.025).
TIJSSEN, R. J. W.; VAN LEEUWEN, T. N. “Measuring impacts of academic science on industrial research: a citation-based approach”. Scientometrics, 66 (1), 2006, pp. 55-69.
VISSER, M.; VAN ECK, N. J.; WALTMAN, L. “Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, dimensions, crossref, and Microsoft academic”. Quantitative Science Studies, 2 (1), 2021, pp. 20-41.
YIN, Y. et al. “Public use and public funding of science”. Nature Human Behaviour, 2022 (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01397-5).
ZANOTTO, E. D. et al. “Internacionalização e pesquisa colaborativa”, in Fapesp 60 anos – A ciência no desenvolvimento nacional. São Carlos, Editora Cubo, 2022, pp. 2-29
Downloads
Publicado
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2022 Revista USP
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
|
Pertence à revista. Uma vez publicado o artigo, os direitos passam a ser da revista, sendo proibida a reprodução e a inclusão de trechos sem a permissão do editor. |
