Three key definitions were operationalized: Science and Technology Capabilities, International Research Collaboration, and Research Team.
3.1.1 Science and Technology Capabilities
S&T Capabilities are defined in this dissertation by the revealed ability of research teams to produce and disseminate knowledge and to contribute to the study of issues that may be of local interest. In this framework, Research Team Output is measured by the team’s revealed productivity, that is, their production of journal articles, books, book chapters, proceedings, working papers, and other bibliographical products done by the teams during the period observed (See the list of bibliographical products in Appendix A)8. Research Team Ability to Contribute to Local Knowledge (also referred in this
8 All these products are given equal weight in the econometric analysis presented. Although this may be seen as problematic, the reason is that we are interested more on the scientific capacity of the teams to
dissertation to as research “orientation” or research “relevance” or “ability to work on Colombian issues” or “ability to work on local concerns,” etc.) is measured by the extent to which teams work on R+D projects and/or write journal articles that take into account Colombia either as unit of analysis, as ‘laboratory,’ or as the focus of their research activity. This is observed by the use (or lack thereof) the word “Colombia” in the title of their research projects or journal articles, or in their corresponding abstracts.
3.1.2 International Research Collaboration
The operational definition of International Research Collaboration (IRC) is
threefold: IRC as co-authored work, IRC as foreign researchers affiliated with Colombian research teams, and IRC as foreign funding to team R&D projects.
1. IRC as co-authored work that involves at least one researcher with a contact address outside Colombia. Although co-authorship (local or international) is criticized for failing to capture the real breath of collaborative activities that do not end in publications, or because it counts as collaboration ‘honorary co- authors’ with little real contribution to the collaborative output (Harsanyi 1993; Katz and Martin 1997; Moed 2000; Laudel 2002; Cronin, Shaw et al. 2004; Yoshikane and Kageura 2004), it remains amply accepted, mostly because it eases analysis and does imply a relatively high level of actual collaboration (Beaver and Rosen 1979; Melin 1996; Bordons and Gomez 2000; Beaver 2001; Newman 2004). As Bordons and Gomez (2000) posit, defining research collaboration as
produce knowledge than on the quality or the relevance of their products themselves. The issue of relevance is analyzed differently here.
co-authorship eases bibliometric analyses, which are more reliable and offers several advantages when compared with other methods such as interviews or surveys. The reliability of bibliometric results can be verified by means of repeated analysis (Bordons and Gomez 2000), and its techniques enable the analysis of large amounts of data, producing cost-effective and statistically significant results (Cole 2000; Van Raan 2000).
2. IRC as foreign researchers affiliated with Colombian research teams. Given the limitations of co-authorship as a proxy for research collaboration, the extent to which a team has a member from another country is considered to better account for international research collaboration. Foreign students are excluded from this category.
3. IRC as foreign funding to R&D projects. For a developing country like Colombia, this source of collaboration is vital. Indeed, as could be established by the
interviews with scientists in the framework of this dissertation, many research teams exist in Colombia thanks to foreign funding. Sometimes funding involves foreign researchers as well, and if successful, ends in co-authorship, but this is not always the case.
In addition, two types of partners are considered: partners from northern countries and partners from southern countries. Appendix B provides the classification used to operationalize these two types.
3.1.3 Research Team
For the purpose of this dissertation, a Research Team is defined as a) two or more people who claim they work together on common research problems or interests; b) are
recognized by their home institution and Colciencias as such; c) work on at least one R&D project active during the period of observation; and d) produce research outputs jointly or independently that are attributed to the team’s work. People affiliated with the team producing ‘certified’ research outputs or working as technicians are counted as part of the ‘core’ research team. Certified research outputs include research articles, literature reviews, books, book chapters, software, technical pilots, technical projects, prototypes, industrial designs, technical norms, masters theses directed, and PhD dissertations directed (Colciencias 2000a). Taking policymaking and managerial considerations, and based on the principle of national sovereignty, the focus of this dissertation is on the ‘national’ S&T system as represented by a set of research units affiliated with institutions located in a single country, in this case, Colombia. This, of course, does not deny the essentially international character of modern science and technology, a basic
characteristic of its implicit universality. It also does not impose an artificial boundary since developing countries tend to be more ‘locally-constrained’ than developed countries which are more internationally-oriented (Wagner and Leydesdorff 2005).
The next section presents the data sources used to support the analyses done in the following chapters.