The geography of Chinese science

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Standard

The geography of Chinese science. / Andersson, David Emanuel; Gunessee, Saileshsingh; Matthiessen, Christian Wichmann; Find, Soren.

I: Environment and Planning A, Bind 46, Nr. 12, 2014, s. 2950-2971.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Harvard

Andersson, DE, Gunessee, S, Matthiessen, CW & Find, S 2014, 'The geography of Chinese science', Environment and Planning A, bind 46, nr. 12, s. 2950-2971. https://doi.org/10.1068/a130283p

APA

Andersson, D. E., Gunessee, S., Matthiessen, C. W., & Find, S. (2014). The geography of Chinese science. Environment and Planning A, 46(12), 2950-2971. https://doi.org/10.1068/a130283p

Vancouver

Andersson DE, Gunessee S, Matthiessen CW, Find S. The geography of Chinese science. Environment and Planning A. 2014;46(12):2950-2971. https://doi.org/10.1068/a130283p

Author

Andersson, David Emanuel ; Gunessee, Saileshsingh ; Matthiessen, Christian Wichmann ; Find, Soren. / The geography of Chinese science. I: Environment and Planning A. 2014 ; Bind 46, Nr. 12. s. 2950-2971.

Bibtex

@article{02dbb21b6ebd41a4a215a855ba8b92cf,
title = "The geography of Chinese science",
abstract = "Chinese scientific output has increased dramatically in recent years, but its internal spatial structure has received scant attention. Estimated gravity models of intercity scientific coauthorships show that there are two types of spatial political bias in China, apart from the expected mass and distance effects. Intercity coauthorships involving Beijing are more common than Beijing{\textquoteright}s output volume and location would imply, and this Beijing bias is increasing over time. The second type of spatial political bias is greater intraprovincial collaboration than is accounted for by size and distance. The geography of Chinese science is thus not only monocentric as regards overall scientific output, but also exhibits unusually hierarchical collaboration patterns. Unlike in Europe and North America, national and regional capitals are becoming ever more important as scientific coordination centers. ",
author = "Andersson, {David Emanuel} and Saileshsingh Gunessee and Matthiessen, {Christian Wichmann} and Soren Find",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1068/a130283p",
language = "English",
volume = "46",
pages = "2950--2971",
journal = "Environment and Planning A",
issn = "0308-518X",
publisher = "SAGE Publications",
number = "12",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - The geography of Chinese science

AU - Andersson, David Emanuel

AU - Gunessee, Saileshsingh

AU - Matthiessen, Christian Wichmann

AU - Find, Soren

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Chinese scientific output has increased dramatically in recent years, but its internal spatial structure has received scant attention. Estimated gravity models of intercity scientific coauthorships show that there are two types of spatial political bias in China, apart from the expected mass and distance effects. Intercity coauthorships involving Beijing are more common than Beijing’s output volume and location would imply, and this Beijing bias is increasing over time. The second type of spatial political bias is greater intraprovincial collaboration than is accounted for by size and distance. The geography of Chinese science is thus not only monocentric as regards overall scientific output, but also exhibits unusually hierarchical collaboration patterns. Unlike in Europe and North America, national and regional capitals are becoming ever more important as scientific coordination centers.

AB - Chinese scientific output has increased dramatically in recent years, but its internal spatial structure has received scant attention. Estimated gravity models of intercity scientific coauthorships show that there are two types of spatial political bias in China, apart from the expected mass and distance effects. Intercity coauthorships involving Beijing are more common than Beijing’s output volume and location would imply, and this Beijing bias is increasing over time. The second type of spatial political bias is greater intraprovincial collaboration than is accounted for by size and distance. The geography of Chinese science is thus not only monocentric as regards overall scientific output, but also exhibits unusually hierarchical collaboration patterns. Unlike in Europe and North America, national and regional capitals are becoming ever more important as scientific coordination centers.

U2 - 10.1068/a130283p

DO - 10.1068/a130283p

M3 - Journal article

VL - 46

SP - 2950

EP - 2971

JO - Environment and Planning A

JF - Environment and Planning A

SN - 0308-518X

IS - 12

ER -

ID: 140301854