Brussels, 15 Jul 2004  
    
   After the US, the UK is 
the second most productive country in the world when it comes to 
publishing scientific papers, according to a global analysis conducted 
by Sir David King, the UK government's chief scientific adviser. The 
combined effort of EU15 countries in this area outranks the US 
performance, he also found.  
   The analysis, based on data from 
US company Thomson ISI, showed that between 1997 and 2001, the US 
produced almost 35 per cent of all scientific papers, almost four times 
the number produced by second placed UK, with 9.43 per cent. Next came 
Japan with 9.23 per cent; followed by Germany (8.76 per cent); France 
(6.39 per cent); Canada (4.58 per cent) and Italy (4.05 per cent).  
  
 The survey also demonstrated that the combined effort of the 15 
countries of the pre-enlargement EU represented 37.12 per cent of all 
scientific publications, putting it ahead of its American competitors.  
  
 Thomson ISI catalogues the world's research journals and assesses the 
impact of each paper according to the number of times it is cited by 
other academics.  
   Drawing on a study of 8000 journals from 31 
countries for his research, Sir David noted that those 31 nations 
produced almost the entire top one per cent of most cited publications. 
Other countries to feature in this top tier include Switzerland, Israel,
 South Africa - the only African representative - and Iran, the sole 
Islamic nation.  
   Sir David's analysis also showed that the UK 
produced 12.8 per cent of the world's most cited papers, followed by 
Germany with 10.4 per cent and Japan with 6.9 per cent. The US produced 
63 per cent of all high impact papers. However, analysis shows that that
 the US has lost almost three percentage points since the period 
1993-97.  
   The top eight countries in the citation 
classification accounted for 84.5 per cent of the top one per cent of 
the world's most often cited scientific articles in the period from 1993
 to 2001.  
   'There is a stark disparity between the first and 
second divisions in the scientific impact of nations,' wrote Sir David 
in the journal Nature, where the survey was published. 'Moreover, 
although my analysis includes only 31 of the world's 193 countries, 
these produce 97.5% of the world's most cited papers.'  
   The 
political implications of this state of affairs are 'difficult to 
exaggerate' he added. 'My key point in response to these statistics is 
that sustainable economic development in highly competitive world 
markets requires a direct engagement in the generation of knowledge.'  
   Sir David's study also showed that different countries have different strengths and weaknesses in the scientific field.  
  
 For example, the survey showed that France stood out in mathematics 
while the UK was strong in medicine and life and environmental sciences,
 but weak in physical sciences. China and India were shown to have 
developed their scientific base swiftly and successfully over a short 
period of time.  
   When output figures were related to the 
amount spent on research, the survey showed that the UK had the 
leadership in scientific productivity, ahead of the US, due to the 
significant cutbacks in private spending on research between 1980 and 
1995, explained Sir David.  
   'Although many UK scientists 
campaigned against these cuts, they encouraged a level of 
resourcefulness among researchers, and approaches to industry and the EU
 that are now bearing fruit. Now that the present UK government is 
increasing funding and rebuilding infrastructure, the pruned plant of UK
 science is re-growing vigorously,' Sir David concluded.  
 
No comments:
Post a Comment