Mapping the Landscape of Space Sciences in Latin America: a Bibliometric Study of Productivity and Collaboration in Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, and Chile
Main Article Content
Abstract
This paper presents a regional bibliometric study of space sciences in Latin America. The research is conducted in solar physics, magnetospheric physics, physics of solar-terrestrial relationships, cosmic ray physics, and planetary physics, over a 20-years period from 2001 to 2020. The Latin American countries where research is carried out in these areas of knowledge are Brazil, Chile, Argentina, and Mexico. The results show that Chile has more collaborative networks abroad, as its productivity is considerable in solar physics, solar-terrestrial relationships, and planetary physics; Brazil has been consistent in the number of publications and authors per document in the areas of solar physics and magnetospheric physics and, Argentina collaborates mainly with Brazil in planetary physics. The results also show that the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) is the leading institution in Mexico conducting research in the field of space sciences. According to the values obtained from the bibliometric parameters, the productivity of the Mexican research group dedicated to space sciences at the Institute of Geophysics of the UNAM has not increased, at least in the last twenty years. At regional level, the countries under study have had a deficient scientific development in the five areas of knowledge analyzed, despite the formation of scientific societies and the organization of conferences, seminars, and courses to create working groups and international collaboration networks.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Andersen, J., Belmont, J., & Cho, C. T. (2006). Journal impact factor in the era of expanding literature. Journal of Microbiology Immunology and Infection, 39(6), 436-443.
Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
Arocena, R., & Sutz, J. (2001). Changing knowledge production and Latin American universities. Research Policy, 30(8), 1221-1234. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00143-8
Bar-Ilan, J. (2008). Which h-index? — A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 74(2), 257–271. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-0216-y
Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. D. (2005). Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work? Scientometrics, 65(3), 391–392. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0281-4
Bornmann, L., Stefaner, M., de Moya Anegón, F., & Mutz, R. (2014). Ranking and mapping of universities and research-focused institutions worldwide based on highly-cited papers: A visualisation of results from multi-level models. Online Information Review, 38(1), 43–58. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-12-2012-0214
Buendía, A., García Salord, S., Grediaga, R., Landesmann, M., Rodríguez-Gómez, R., Rondero, N., Rueda, M., & Vera, H. (2017). Queríamos evaluar y terminamos contando: Alternativas para la evaluación del trabajo académico. Perfiles Educativos, 39(157). doi: https://doi.org/10.22201/iisue.24486167e.2017.157.58464
Callon, M., Courtial, J.-P., & Laville, F. (1991). Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemistry. Scientometrics, 22(1), 155–205. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02019280
Callon, M., Courtial, J.-P., Turner, W. A., & Bauin, S. (1983). From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis. Social Science Information, 22(2), 191–235. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/053901883022002003
Cronin, B., & Sugimoto, C. R. (Eds.). (2014). Beyond bibliometrics: Harnessing multidimensional indicators of scholarly impact. MIT press. doi: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9445.001.0001
Dávila Rodríguez, M., Guzmán Sáenz, R., Macareno Arroyo, H., Piñeres Herera, D., De la Rosa Barranco, D., & Caballero-Uribe, C. V. (2009). Bibliometría: conceptos y utilidades para el estudio médico y la formación profesional. Revista Salud Uninorte, 25(2), 319-330.
Donovan, C. (2007). The qualitative future of research evaluation. Science and Public Policy, 34(8), 585–597. doi: https://doi.org/10.3152/030234207X256538
Ellegaard, O. (2018). The application of bibliometric analysis: disciplinary and user aspects. Scientometrics, 116(1), 181-202. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2765-z
Fontes, J. F. G., Stack, J. M., & Antón, M. G. (2020). The emergence of the New Mexican academic meritocracy. Higher Education Governance and Policy, 1(2), 138-151. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/1401146
Gauthier, É. (1998, September). Bibliometric analysis of scientific and technological research: a user's guide to the methodology. Business Special Surveys and Technology Statistics Division Working Papers, 8, 1998008. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/catalogue/88F0006X1998008
González Alcaide, G., Alonso Arroyo, A., González De Dios, J., Pérez Sempere, Á., Valderrama Zurián, J. C., & Aleixandre Benavent, R. (2008). Redes de coautoría y colaboración institucional en Revista de Neurología. Revista de Neurología, 46(11), 642-651. doi: https://doi.org/10.33588/rn.4611.2008158
Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., De Rijcke, S., & Rafols, I. (2015). Bibliometrics: the Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature, 520(7548), 429-431. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/520429a
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(46), 16569-16572. doi: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102
Hood, W. W., & Wilson, C. S. (2001). The literature of bibliometrics, scientometrics, and informetrics. Scientometrics, 52(2), 291-314. doi: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017919924342
Jonkers, K., & Derrick, G. E. (2012). The bibliometric bandwagon: Characteristics of bibliometric articles outside the field literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(4), 829-836. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22620
Knight, J. (2012). A conceptual framework for the regionalization of higher education: Application to Asia. In Hawkins, J. N., Mok, K. H., Neubauer, D. E. (eds) Higher education regionalization in Asia Pacific: Implications for governance, citizenship and university transformation (pp. 17-35). Palgrave Macmillan US. doi: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137311801_2
Koh, A. (2007). Deparochializing education: Globalization, regionalization, and the formation of an ASEAN education space. Discourse: studies in the cultural politics of education, 28(2), 179-195. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/01596300701289144
Larivière, V. (2012). The decade of metrics? Examining the evolution of metrics within and outside LIS. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 38(6), 12-17. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/bult.2012.1720380605
Lee, C. J., Sugimoto, C. R., Zhang, G., & Cronin, B. (2013). Bias in peer review. Journal of the American Society for information Science and Technology, 64(1), 2-17. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22784
Lee, M. N. (2007). Higher education in Southeast Asia in the era of globalization. In Forest, J. J. F., Altbach, P. G. (Eds.). International handbook of higher education (pp. 539-555). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978–1-4020–4012-2_27
Lübken, F. J. (Ed.). (2012). Climate and weather of the sun-earth system (CAWSES): highlights from a priority program. Springer Science & Business Media. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4348-9
Martin, B. R. (2011). What can bibliometrics tell us about changes in the mode of knowledge production? Prometheus, 29(4), 455-479. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/08109028.2011.643540
Martin, B. R., & Irvine, J. (1983). Assessing basic research: some partial indicators of scientific progress in radio astronomy. Research policy, 12(2), 61-90. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(83)90005-7
Moed, H. F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3714-7
Moral-Muñoz, J. A., Herrera-Viedma, E., Santisteban-Espejo, A., & Cobo, M. J. (2020). Software tools for conducting bibliometric analysis in science: An up-to-date review. Profesional de la Información, 29(1). doi: https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.ene.03
Newman, M. E. (2004). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 101(1), 5200-5205. doi: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0307545100
Norris, M., & Oppenheim, C. (2010). The h‐index: A broad review of a new bibliometric indicator. Journal of Documentation, 66(5), 681-705. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/00220411011066790
Oldac, Y. I., & Yang, L. (2023). Regionalisation and agency in science space: A historical bibliometric analysis of ASEAN science. International Journal of Educational Development, 97, 102735. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2023.102735
Ovseiko, P. V., Oancea, A., & Buchan, A. M. (2012). Assessing research impact in academic clinical medicine: a study using Research Excellence Framework pilot impact indicators. BMC health services research, 12(1), 478. doi. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-12-478
Salinas-Ríos, K. (2022). Bibliometrics, a useful tool within the field of research. Journal of Basic and Applied Psychology Research, 3(6), 9-16. doi: https://doi.org/10.29057/jbapr.v3i6.6829
Stankus, T. (1996). Astronomy, Astrophysics, and Space Sciences. The Serials Librarian, 27(2-3), 59-65. doi: https://doi.org/10.1300/J123v27n02_04
Tarbuck, E. J., Lutgens, F. K., & Tasa, D. (2005). Earth: an introduction to physical geology. Pearson. https://lccn.loc.gov/2012039349
Van Raan, A. (2003). The use of bibliometric analysis in research performance assessment and monitoring of interdisciplinary scientific developments. TATuP–Journal for Technology Assessment in Theory and Practice, 12(1), 20-29. doi: https://doi.org/10.14512/tatup.12.1.20
Weingart, P. (2005). Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences? Scientometrics, 62(1), 117-131. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0007-7
Wilsdon, J., Allen, L., Belfiore, E., Campbell, P., Curry, S., Hill, S., ... & Johnson, B. (2015). The metric tide. Report of the independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment and management. doi: https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.4929.1363
Wouters, P., Thelwall, M., Kousha, K., Waltman, L., De Rijcke, S., Rushforth, A., ... & Wouters, P. (2015). The metric tide. Literature review. Supplementary report I to the independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment and management. doi: https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.5066.3520