Major cities concentrate less scientific production

October 11, 2017
Major cities concentrate less scientific production
Evolution of the distribution of citations received by publications published between 2000 and 2010. There is a geographical deconcentration of citations, with a very marked growth in the number of citations received by the cities of so-called “emerging” countries, such as Iran and China (in very dark red). Credit: Marion Maisonobe et al. with data from Clarivate Analytics & Natural Earth

The world's major cities, including New York, London and Tokyo, are losing their predominant position in the production and circulation of scientific articles, according to a study carried out by the Laboratoire interdisciplinaire solidarités, sociétés, territoires (CNRS/University of Toulouse Jean Jaurès/EHESS/ENSFEA), the INCREASE Federation at the CNRS, and the Centre Marc Bloch in Berlin (CNRS/MEAE). These results are published in the October issue of the journal Scientometrics.

From the early 2000s onwards, higher-education policies in many countries favored the concentration of resources (both financial and human), thereby benefiting a few major university hubs. On the other hand, the exponential growth of the student population on a global scale has led to a spatial deconcentration of sites of knowledge production. Researchers have demonstrated that this phenomenon of deconcentration affects not only the production of scientific articles, but also their visibility and quality, measured by the number of citations (in other words, how many times an is used as a reference in other ).

In order to assess the visibility of world publications, Marion Maisonobe and her co-authors have geocoded more than 14 million of them, issued between 1999 and 2011 and listed on the Web of Science1—a database of articles from around the world, together with their links. The results show that the cities whose scientific papers are historically most often cited (New York, London, Tokyo, etc.) are losing their hegemony. The share of the top ten global cities in terms of the number of citations received fell from 23 percent in 2000 to 17.3 percent in 2010.

The researchers also estimated the evolution of the scientific influence of cities and countries worldwide, taking as an indicator the ratio between the share of quotations received and that of published articles.2 All other things being equal, cities in the emerging countries have gained impact, to the detriment of the main metropolises of the Western world. This is particularly noteworthy when it comes to urban centers in Asia (China, India, and Singapore), which recorded the highest progression rate across all disciplines. This is also the case for countries suffering from a lack of visibility: between 2000 and 2010, Iran thus gained 0.5 impact points in the sciences of the Universe and 0.8 points in mathematics, while South Africa gained 0.3 points in medicine.

Researchers have shown that this rebalancing in the geography of citations is also taking place within countries. In the US, the increased influence of Chicago and Los Angeles has come at the expense of that of New York. In France, the advantage of Paris dwindled over the period 2000–2010, as its national share of citations dropped from 41.7 percent to 37 percent.

This trend is observed in all disciplines. In the human and social sciences, there remains an asymmetry to the advantage of English-speaking countries—whose publications remain the most cited—but this tends to become less pronounced.

These results challenge the assumption that the world's largest cities are a breeding ground for high-quality and the only legitimate recipients of human and financial resources. The deconcentration of research on a global scale has not accentuated the quality gap—measured by the number of citations—between the world's metropolises and the rest. On the contrary, new high-quality higher education and research hubs are now emerging.

Explore further: Two independent studies find mobility of researchers results in better science

More information: The global geography of scientific visibility: a deconcentration process (1999–2011), Scientometrics, October 2017. DOI 10.1007 / s11192-017-2463-2

Related Stories

The complex role of citations as measure of scientific quality

October 14, 2013

Allocation of resources in the scientific community is increasingly based on various quantitative indicators. One of the most important indicators of scientific quality is how often research is cited. However, a new doctoral ...

Study reveals most impactful neuroscience research

July 21, 2017

A study of the 100 most-cited neuroscience articles has revealed that 78 of these papers cover five topics, including neurological disorders, the prefrontal cortex, brain connectivity, brain mapping and methodology studies. ...

Material definition of humanity

May 19, 2017

We define human history through the materials we use: the stone age, the bronze age, the iron age. Perhaps we now live in the plastic age. The next epoch may well be the nanocomposite age. Art and architecture, transport ...

Recommended for you

New paper answers causation conundrum

November 17, 2017

In a new paper published in a special issue of the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, SFI Professor Jessica Flack offers a practical answer to one of the most significant, and most confused questions in evolutionary ...

Chance discovery of forgotten 1960s 'preprint' experiment

November 16, 2017

For years, scientists have complained that it can take months or even years for a scientific discovery to be published, because of the slowness of peer review. To cut through this problem, researchers in physics and mathematics ...

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.