ISBN 978-952-263-133-6 (PDF) ISSN-L 1799-0343 ISSN 1799-0351 (Online) Helsinki 2012 S uom en kansainvälinen yhteisjulkaisem inen International co-publishing in Finland Reetta Muhonen, Yrjö Leino Reports of the Ministry of Education and Culture, Finland 2012:19 and Hanna-Mari Puuska Opetus- ja kulttuuriministeriö • Koulutus- ja tiedepolitiikan osasto • 2012 Ministry of Education and Culture • Department for Education and Science Policy • 2012 International co-publishing in Finland Reports of the Ministry of Education and Culture, Finland 2012:19 Reetta Muhonen, Yrjö Leino and Hanna-Mari Puuska Ministry of Education and Culture Department for Education and Science Policy P.O. Box 29 00023 Government, Finland www.minedu.fi/publications Layout: Teija Metsänperä, Ministry of Education and Culture, Finland Cover image: Kirsty Pargeter, www.Rodeo.fi ISBN 978-952-263-133-6 (PDF) ISSN-L 1799-0343 ISSN 1799-0351 (Online) Reports of the Ministry of Education and Culture, Finland 2012:19 Abstract This study looks at international co-publishing in Finland and the citation counts of publications in different disciplinary groups in 1990–2009. The results presented here are based on the Thomson Reuters Web of Science (WoS) publication and citation database from 1990 to 2009. The share of international co-publishing in all of Finland’s WoS publications increased from 25 per cent to 49 per cent in 1990–2009. In tandem with international co- publishing becoming more common, there has been an increase in the relative share of national cooperation between organisations, whereas the share of publications produced in national, intra-organisational cooperation in all of Finland’s international publications has declined. The trend of co-publishing in Finland can thus be described as an increase in transboundary cooperation – both between countries and between organisations. The share of single-author publications declined in 1990–2009. As an exception to most main scientific disciplines, single authorship remained clearly the most typical form of international authorship in humanities journals in 2006–2009; 70 per cent of these publications were written by a single author. While the relative share of single authorship has decreased, the number of co-authors in a publication has gone up: in 1990–2009, the number of co-authors in national publications increased from three to four, while this number in international co-publications has gone up from five to seven authors. In Finland’s international co-publications, the co-author was most typically affiliated with an organisation in the EU15+ states1. The second most typical participants in international publications were co-authors from North America, and third most typical were co-authors from the Nordic countries. No change took place in the order of the three most common country groups within the period of examination. In 1990–2008, international co-publications were on average cited more times than publications produced in national cooperation. The citation counts of the former exceeded the average global level throughout the period. The more authors that were involved in a publication, the more times it was cited on average. The high citation International co-publishing in Finland 1 EU15+ states = EU15 states excluding the Nordic countries + Switzerland. or Luxembourg. Ireland. Portugal. Austria. Belgium. the Netherlands. Greece. Spain. Italy. France. Germany. the United Kingdom and Switzerland. counts of international co-publications are partly explained by the fact that, on average, they involve a higher number of co-authors than national publications. A growing trend in international co-publishing has been cooperation involving researchers from more than one country group in addition to Finland. The more country groups that were involved in a publication, the higher its citation count on average. In the sphere of national cooperation, gauged by the citation counts, inter-organisational cooperation produced science with a higher impact than intra-organisational co- authorship. To summarise, this study indicates that co-publishing of Finnish scientists has diversified: the share of publications produced as a result of international cooperation, involvement of several country groups, and national inter-organisational cooperation in all WoS publications increased, and the more diverse the co-authorship was, the higher the citation count. Preface This is a summary report on the project ”International Co-authorship in Finland” funded by the Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture. The project was implemented by the Unit for Science, Engineering and Innovation Studies at the University of Tampere between April and November 2011. The principal investigator of the research project was Reetta Muhonen M.Soc.Sci. Responsibility for processing the data was assumed by Licentiate of Engineering Yrjö Leino from CSC (Tieteen tietotekniikan keskus Oy). Hanna-Mari Puuska MA took part in planning the study and provided expert support for the project. We would like to extend our thanks to the members of the Citation Index Working Group II, which acted as the steering group for the project: Olli Poropudas, Ministry of Education and Culture (chair), Otto Auranen, Federation of Finnish Learned Societies, Maija Miettinen, Academy of Finland, Anu Nuutinen, Academy of Finland, Janne Pölönen, Federation of Finnish Learned Societies. We would also like to thank Counsellor of Education Tiina Vihma-Purovaaraa for her comments on the report. Contents Abstract 3 Preface 5 1 Introduction 7 2 Data and methodology 9 3 Results 11 3.1 Trends in co-authorship. 1990–2009 11 3.2 Trends in international co-authorship by organisation type 13 3.3 Trends in author numbers 13 3.4 Geographical orientation of international co-authorship 14 3.5 Relationship between international cooperation and scientific impact 15 3.6 International co-authorship and scientific impact by organisation type 16 3.7 Relationship between number of authors and scientific impact 16 4 Conclusions 18 List of references 20 Appendices 22 Appendix 1. Typicality of co-publishing in 1990–2009 by scientific discipline 22 Appendix 2. The number of Finnish co-publications involving authors from various country groups and their share in international co-authorship by scientific discipline 23 Appendix 3. Co-publishing and the relative citation index in 1990–2008 by different disciplines 26 Appendix 4. Relative citation index for national and international co-publications by number of authors in 1990–2008 29 7 International co-publishing in Finland 1 Introduction Finland 2009, 41–54, 247–249). A Nordic study (NordForsk 2010, 24) indicated that as recently as in 1989–1993, citation counts of Finland’s international co-publications were 53 per cent higher than the world’s WoS publications on average, while in 2004–2007, this figure had decreased to 33 per cent. On the other hand, no change has been registered in the average citation counts of WoS publications only involving Finnish authors. In 1989–2004, these publications cumulated 3 per cent less citations than all WoS publications in the world on average. In this study, the internationalisation of Finnish research is approached by looking at the trends of international co-authorship and its links to the citation counts of publications in the different disciplinary groups. For the purposes of this study, Finnish international co-authorship is limited to publications listed in the Thomson Reuters Web of Science (WoS) database. The typicality of co-authorship can be assessed by the following research questions: 1 How did (national and international) co-authorship in Finland develop in 1990–2009? 2 What share of publications in different disciplinary groups are international co-publications? 3 Are there differences between disciplinary groups in terms of the number of authors in national and international co-publications? Encouraging internationalisation has been one of the most visible objectives of Finnish science policy in the last few decades. Internationality has always been part of scientific research activities – scientific debate has not been limited to a certain geographical area, and new ideas have been sought across national boundaries (e.g. Hakala 1998). Finnish research and scientists have been encouraged towards internationalisation due to internal reasons within the field of science, including the increase in research costs, specialisation and shared, global research targets. As the travel and various forms of communication have become less expensive, faster and more diverse, international visits, cooperation projects and publications have multiplied. In addition to internal reasons, researchers have also been encouraged towards internationalisation by means of science policy decisions. In science policy debate, internationalisation discourse has gained momentum since the late 1980s. (Hakala et al. 2003, 146–147; Hakala et al. 2004.) It has been demonstrated that international co-publications are cited more often than others (Narin et al. 1991; Katz & Hicks 1997; Glänzel 2001; Glänzel & Schubert 2001; NordForsk 2010; NordForsk 2011), and similar results have been obtained in the Finnish context (NordForsk 2010, 24; NordForsk 2011, 57). In recent years, concern has been expressed for the declining scientific impact of Finland’s international publications (Academy of 8 4 What shares of publications in different disciplinary groups involve co-authors from the Nordic countries, the EU15 states, the country group Other European2, the Baltic countries, Russia, Africa, Asia, North America, Central and South America, and Australia and Oceania? 5 What share of publications in different disciplinary groups have co-authors from two or more country groups? The relationship between international cooperation and the scientific impact of publications is gauged by the following research questions: 6 Do international co-publications/publications involving authors from Nordic countries (and publications with co-authors from the various country groups) cumulate more citations on average than publications with Finnish authors only? 7 Are Finnish publications written in intra and inter- organisational cooperation cited more often than single-author publications? 8 Do co-publications involving several country groups cumulate more citations on average than publications that, in addition to Finnish scientists, have co-authors from a single country group only? 9 Are there differences in citation counts between international co-publications and other publications in all scientific disciplines? 10 Is there a link between the number of authors and the number of citations cumulated by the publications in different disciplinary groups? 2 Other European= Poland, the former Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, Ukraine, Belarus, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Malta, Cyprus, Monaco, Liechtenstein, the Vatican, Albania, Croatia, Andorra, Moldova, San Marino, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia, Slovakia, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo. 9 International co-publishing in Finland 2 Data and methodology affiliation were not defined as international cooperation. The same argument applies to the definition of domestic cooperation: a single author’s affiliation with two Finnish organisations is not regarded as cooperation. Thomson Reuters categorises publications into more than 30 different types, of which three have been taken into account in this study: Article, Letter and Review. Of all Finnish publications found in the database, these types cover nearly 89 per cent in total. Other publication types excluded from the study include Meeting Abstract (8.5%), Editorial (1.6%) and Book Review (0.9%). In the analysis conducted for this report, each publication was classified as belonging to one or several disciplinary groups in multiple steps. The scientific discipline of an individual publication was directly determined by the journal in which the publication appeared. The Thomson Reuters data was collected by journal, with the publisher having determined one to six scientific disciplines for each journal. A publication may thus belong to between one and six scientific disciplines. Thomson Reuters classifies dozens of journals in the category ”Multidisciplinary Sciences”. This The results presented in this study are based on the Thomson Reuters Web of Science (WoS) database of publications and citations for 1990–2009.3 The Thomson Reuters database is compiled from three databases: the Science Citation Index Expanded, the Social Sciences Citation Index and the Arts & Humanities Citation Index. The coverage in the WoS data in all scientific research published in the world varies by the field, country and year of publication (Moed 2005, 126). In this report, a Finnish publication refers to one involving at least one scientist or research team that has recorded a Finnish address for itself in the publication. Finnish publications in the data were identified on the basis of country codes given in connection with addresses. International co- publications were defined as publications contained in the Thomson Reuters Web of Science (WoS) database where, in addition to one or several Finnish organisations, at least one foreign organisation was recorded. In this study, a national publication refers to international publications involving only Finnish affiliations. Single-author publications in which the author has registered both a domestic and an international 3 This study was conducted in parallel with a study of the Citation Index Working Group II appointed by the Ministry of Education and Culture, and the starting points and definitions used for producing the data are thus to a great extent similar in both studies (for more information, see the Citation Index Working Group II, 2011). 10 category includes journals in such fields as Nature and Science, the articles in which cumulate citation counts that clearly exceed the average. In this report, publications appearing in such multidisciplinary journals are treated as a class of their own. As the basis for determining the scientific discipline of a publication is the journal and not the author, the division of the journals into scientific disciplines is indicative and does not fully match the divisions into fields of education and research prevailing in research organisations. In addition to examination by scientific discipline, the report also discusses results compiled by organisation type. The organisation type of a publication is determined by the author’s affiliations. Relative citation index In this report, citation counts of Finnish publications are compared to the world average citation counts. As the citation practices in different disciplinary groups may vary considerably, the number of citations cumulated by each publication was normalised by comparing it with the average citation counts of all publications in the relevant subject field which were published in that year and which represent the same WoS article type (Article, Review or Letter). In this report, the citation counts of Finnish publications have been put into proportion with all publications in the world in each of the 260 scientific disciplines used in Thomson Reuters. The accumulation period of the citations was not limited; articles published in the early part of the period under scrutiny thus had more time to cumulate citations, but as publications of an individual year are always compared to all WoS article types in the world published in that year and in the relevant subject field, this sets the publications on an equal footing, regardless of their year of publication. When we calculate average citation counts normalised in terms of the scientific discipline, we obtain a field-based relative citation index, which describes the average scientific impact of Finnish publications compared to other publications in the same scientific discipline. If the value of this index exceeds 1, the impact is higher than the world average, whereas an index of less than 1 indicates an impact lower than the average. As publications that came out in 2009 have not had time to cumulate statistically significant citation counts, all indicators based on citation counts were only calculated for those publications published in or before 2008. When calculating absolute citation counts, self- citations, i.e citations from publications whose authors included some of the same names as the cited publication, were discarded. Self-citations do not specifically describe the scientific impact of publications, and self-citations have thus been excluded from the data in this study. Fractional counting of publication numbers When looking at the trends in and impact of authorship, we can either use the actual publication numbers, or fractional numbers obtained on the basis of organisations or number of co-authors involved (see for example Citation Index Working Group II 2011). The publication numbers given in this report are based on whole counts. The purpose of the study is to find out how typical international and national co-authorship is, rather than looking at the productivity of various forms of cooperation. As international co-publications always involve other countries, fractional counting by the countries or organisations involved in the publications, for example, would distort the number of international co-publications as compared to publications that were not written in cooperation with organisations in other countries. If the publication involves authors from more than one country group, the publication is thus counted for each group. As a single publication can belong to several country groups, the sum of country groups exceeds 100 per cent (see e.g. Table 3.3). 11 International co-publishing in Finland 3 Results 3.1 Trends in co-authorship, 1990–2009 The share of Finnish international co-publications in all Finnish Web of Science publications has been increasing during 1990–2009 (Figure 3.1). In 1990– 1993, this share was one fourth of all publications, and in 2006–2009 almost one half (49%) of all publications were already co-authored with foreign scientists. In addition to a dramatic increase in the share of international co-publications over the last twenty years, in proportion to her size, Finland stands out among other OECD countries for her total volume of WoS publications: in 2006–2009, more scientific publications entered in the WoS database per capita appeared in Finland than in any other OECD country (Citation Index Working Group II, 2011, 20). Of the main scientific disciplines, the greatest increase in international co-authorship in 1990–2009 was recorded for journals in agriculture and forestry, or from 10 per cent to 40 per cent (Figure 3.2). The lowest share of international co-publications was found in humanities journals, while this field showed a relatively strong internationalisation trend with the share of international publications going up from 4 to 13 per cent. While the share of international co-publications increased in journals of all fields in 1990–2009, the majority of publications in the main scientific disciplines in 2006–2009 (excluding natural Figure 3.1. Typicality of cooperation in 1990–2009. 19% 13% 11% 9% 7% 36% 32% 23% 21% 18% 20% 22% 26% 26% 26% 25% 32% 40% 44% 49% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 1990- 1993 1994- 1997 1998- 2001 2002- 2005 2006 - 2009 Single author Several authors from the same organisation Authors from several domestic organisations International co-publications science journals) were those only involving scientists affiliated with domestic organisations. 12 Table 3.1. Typicality of co-authorship in 1990–2009. Number of publications 1990–1993 1994–1997 1998–2001 2002–2005 2006–2009 Single author Several authors from the same organisation Authors from several domestic organisations International co-publications 3,316 6,218 3,522 4,452 19% 36% 20% 25% 3,139 7,716 5,384 7,725 13% 32% 22% 32% 3,221 7,036 7,761 12,164 11% 23% 26% 40% 2,798 6,947 8,707 14,422 9% 21% 26% 44% 2,829 6,935 9,705 18,438 7% 18% 26% 49% Total 17,508 100% 23,964 100% 30,183 100% 32,874 100% 37,908 100% Figure 3.2. Share of international co-publications by main scientific discipline in 1990–2009 34% 20% 26% 10% 16% 4% 41% 25% 41% 26% 32% 21% 19% 8% 60% 32% 49% 35% 38% 30% 25% 11% 66% 40% 50% 41% 40% 32% 31% 11% 79% 44% 55% 45% 44% 40% 35% 13% 75% 49% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Natural sciences Medical and health sciences Engineering Agriculture and forestry Social sciences Humanities Multidisciplinary science journals Total 1990– 1993 1994 –1997 1998– 2001 2002– 2005 2006– - 2009 In tandem with international co-authorship becoming more common, there has been an increase in the relative share of national cooperation between organisations (Table 3.1), whereas the share of publications produced in national, intra- organisational cooperation in all international publications in Finland has declined. The trend in co-authorship in Finland can thus be described as an increase in transboundary cooperation – both between countries and between organisations. In the early years of the period under scrutiny, publications appearing as a result of either intra or inter-organisational national cooperation were a more common type of WoS publications than international co-authorship. Not before the four- year period between 2006 and 2009 did Finnish international co-publications outnumber the total share of articles created in national cooperation (49% and 44% respectively). The share of single-author publications declined in 1990–2009 in all main scientific disciplines (appendix 1). As an exception to most main scientific disciplines, single authorship remained clearly the most typical form of international authorship in humanities journals in 2006–2009; 70 per cent of publications were by a single author. 13 3.2 Trends in international co- authorship by organisation type The share of international co-publications in all WoS publications increased for all organisation types. In 2006–2009, international co-authorship accounted for slightly over one-half of publications in universities, state research institutes and university hospitals (Figure 3.3). 3.3 Trends in author numbers The average number of co-authors in Web of Science publications increased from three to four authors in national publications and from five to seven in international co-publications in 1990–2009 (Figures 3.4. and 3.5). Figure 3.3. Share of international co-publications in all publications by organisation type in 1990–2009. 29% 0% 30% 18% 22% 36% 33% 35% 29% 32% 44% 36% 50% 40% 39% 48% 35% 50% 51% 44% 53% 36% 54% 56% 50% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Universities Polytechnics State research institutes University hospitals Companies 1990– 1993 1994– 1997 1998– 2001 2002– 2005 2006– - 2009 Figure 3.4. Trends in author numbers of international co-publications in 1990–2009 by main scientific discipline. Average number of authors in international co-publications 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1990- 1993 1994- 1997 1998- 2001 2002- 2005 2006- 2009 Natural sciences Medical and health sciences Engineering Agriculture and forestry Social sciences Humanities Multidisciplinary science journals Total 14 3.4 Geographical orientation of international co-authorship In Finnish international co-publications, the co-author most typically came from a research organisation in one the EU15+ countries4 (Table 3.3). The second highest number of co-authors in international publications were from North America, and the third most common co- authorship partner came from the Nordic countries. No change took place in the order of the three most common country groups involved in co-authorship, but their shares in Finland’s international co- authorship have undergone different development Figure 3.5. Trends in author numbers of national publications by main scientific discipline in 1990–2009. patterns. During the period under scrutiny, the share of EU15+ countries increased from 38 to 54 per cent, while the share of North America decreased from 35 to 30 per cent. The share of the Nordic countries in Finnish co-publications showed a slight increase from 24 to 26 per cent, whereas Asia increased its share in Finnish co-authorship from 8 to 14 per cent. When we look at the authors’ geographical background by the main scientific discipline, the top three remain the same, with changes in the order of the country groups only (appendix 2). Compared to other main scientific disciplines, Russia is an important partner in natural sciences, and Asia in the field of engineering. in national publications Average number of authors 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Natural sciences Medical and health sciences Engineering Agriculture and forestry Social sciences Humanities Multidisciplinary science journals Total 1990- 1993 1994- 1997 1998- 2001 2002- 2005 2006- 2009 4 EU15+ states= EU15 states excluding Nordic countries + Switzerland, or Luxembourg, Ireland, Portugal, Austria, Belgium, the Netherlands, Greece, Spain, Italy, France, Germany, the United Kingdom and Switzerland. 15 Table 3.3. The number of Finnish co-publications with authors from various country groups and their share in international co-authorship. Number of publications* 1990–1993 1994–1997 1998–2001 2002–2005 2006–2009 Nordic countries EU15+Switzerland Other European Baltic countries Russia 1,052 1,691 483 32 415 24% 38% 11% 1% 9% 1,943 3,075 838 249 735 25% 40% 11% 3% 10% 3,100 5,675 1,311 390 1,109 25% 47% 11% 3% 9% 3,611 7,227 1,425 472 1,132 25% 50% 10% 3% 8% 4,806 9,925 2,260 659 1,509 26% 54% 12% 4% 8% Africa Asia Australia & Oceania North America Central and South America 69 346 92 1,577 96 2% 8% 2% 35% 2% 101 746 191 2,816 233 1% 10% 2% 36% 3% 140 1,229 403 3,989 280 1% 10% 3% 33% 2% 187 1,612 503 4,521 357 1% 11% 3% 31% 2% 294 2,638 896 5,590 481 2% 14% 5% 30% 3% 1 country group 2 country groups Min. 3 country groups 3,586 632 234 81% 14% 5% 5,842 1,285 598 76% 17% 8% 8,775 2,406 983 72% 20% 8% 10,030 3,106 1,286 70% 22% 9% 11,987 4,200 2,251 65% 23% 12% Total 4,452 100% 7,725 100% 12,164 100% 14,422 100% 18,438 100% *Publications involving several country groups were included in the total number of publications of each country group, producing a total of over 100 per cent. 3.5 Relationship between international cooperation and scientific impact In 1990–2008, international co-publications were on average cited more often than publications produced in domestic cooperation. The citation counts of the former exceeded the average world level throughout this period. This study indicates that no great changes took place in the relative citation index of international co-publications during the period under scrutiny: in 1990–1993, the relative citation index was 1.29, while in 2006–2008 it was 1.31 (Table 3.9; cf. NordForsk 2010, 24). Table 3.9. Co-authorship and the relative citation index in 1990–2008* (calculated if the number of publications was 50 or over) Relative citation index 1990– 1993 1994– 1997 1998– 2001 2002– 2005 2006– 2008 Trend 1990–1993 –> 2006–2008 Single author Several authors from the same organisation Authors from several domestic organisations International co-publications 0.73 0.92 1.18 1.29 0.78 1.01 1.11 1.30 0.71 0.96 1.11 1.33 0.79 1.00 0.99 1.23 0.81 1.00 1.00 1.31 0.08 0.08 -0.18 0.01 Nordic countries EU15+Switzerland Other European Baltic countries Russia 1.44 1.22 0.73 - 0.82 1.37 1.36 1.01 1.01 0.73 1.40 1.47 0.95 1.12 0.74 1.44 1.35 0.99 1.03 0.72 1.55 1.49 1.20 1.06 0.90 0.11 0.27 0.47 0.05* 0.08 Africa Asia Australia & Oseania North America Central and South America 0.84 1.20 1.85 1.68 0.87 0.97 1.23 1.55 1.69 0.94 1.45 1.19 1.86 1.74 1.33 1.00 1.19 1.71 1.55 1.18 1.24 1.32 1.95 1.68 1.70 0.40 0.12 0.10 0.00 0.83 1 country group 2 country groups Min. 3 country groups 1.28 1.40 1.75 1.25 1.56 2.03 1.29 1.46 2.42 1.19 1.45 2.02 1.21 1.54 2.49 -0.07 0.14 0.74 *trend 1994–1997 –> 2006–2008 16   Of Finnish international co-publications, the highest relative citation index was displayed by publications co-written with authors from Australia and Oceania, which cumulated 85 per cent more citations in 1990–1993 and 95 per cent more in 2006–2008 than the world’s publications on average (Table 3.9). These publications are relatively unimportant in Finnish international co-authorship, as their numbers were very low (see Table 3.3). Measured by citation counts, Finnish scientists achieved their second highest impact in cooperation with North American organisations. The scientific impact resulting from cooperation with Nordic countries ranked third when gauged by citation counts. Co-publications with the most typical co- authors for Finnish scientists, or those from EU15+ countries, also cumulated more citations than the average world level throughout the period under scrutiny, but the relative citation index remained slightly lower than that for co-publications with scientists from Nordic countries. An analysis by the main scientific discipline produces similar results (appendix 3). The impact of co-publications with Central and South American scientists improved the most in relative terms (Table 3.9). In 2006–2008, the citation counts of these publications were on average 70 per cent higher than those of other WoS publications in their field. In the final years of the period under scrutiny in particular, or in 2006–2008, the impact of Finland’s co-publications has exceeded the world average in nearly all country groups. An exception to this is co-publications with Russia, the relative citation index of which has remained below the world level throughout the period. A growing trend in international co-authorship has been cooperation involving researchers from more than one country group in addition to Finland (Table 3.3). The more groups of countries that were involved in the publication, the higher its citation count on average: publications with at least three country groups cumulated nearly 2.5 times more citations in 2006–2008 than the world’s WoS publications on average (Table 3.9). As regards national cooperation, cooperation between organisations has produced science with a higher impact when gauged by the citation counts than intra-organisational cooperation (Table 3.9). The lowest numbers of citations were cumulated by single-author publications in all main scientific disciplines (appendix 3). Single-author publications in social science journals were cited significantly less often than similar publications in other main scientific disciplines. In a nutshell, we can say that when gauged by the citation counts, science with the highest impact has been the result of co-authorship across organisational or national boundaries. In this study, differences in citation counts between national and international co-publications were found in all main scientific disciplines (appendix 3; cf. Persson 2010). In natural science journals, differences between the relative citation indices of national and international co- publications were minor compared to other main scientific disciplines, and in the field of engineering, greater than in other main fields. 3.6 International co-authorship and scientific impact by organisation type Both in this and the following subsection 3.7, Finnish Web of Science publications are not categorised as above into publications produced in intra and inter-organisational cooperation and single-author publications, but are rather examined as a uniform category of national publications, comparing them with publications produced as a result of international co-authorship. The citation counts of international co- publications are, on average, higher than the counts of national publications for all organisation types in all four-year periods (Table 3.17; for more information, see Citation Index Working Group II, 2011.) 3.7 Relationship between number of authors and scientific impact The more authors that were involved in a publication, the higher its citation count on average (figure 3.6). The high citation counts cumulated by 17 international co-publications are partly explained by the fact that, on average, they have a higher number of authors than national publications (Figures 3.4 and 3.5). While international co-publications cumulated more citations than national publications on average, the citation counts of national co- publications with more than five authors were higher than the counts of international publications with two or three co-authors, and national publications with more than ten authors similarly had higher citation counts than international publications with ten authors or less (Figure 3.6). In the field of engineering in particular, the citations counts are explained not only by the international character of a publication but also the number of its co-authors (appendix 4.c). Table 3.17. Trends in the relative citation index for national publications and international co-publications by organisation type in 1990–2008 (calculated if the number of publications was 50 or over) Relative citation index (discipline-based) 1990– 1993 1994– 1997 1998– 2001 2002– 2005 2006– 2008 Universities National publications International co-publications 0.91 1.20 0.99 1.20 1.00 1.24 0.98 1.17 0.99 1.26 Polytechnics National publications International co-publications - - - - - - 0.70 - 0.63 - State research institutes National publications International co-publications 0.98 1.49 1.03 1.39 0.99 1.45 1.00 1.28 0.99 1.37 University hospitals National publications International co-publications 1.02 1.57 1.01 1.66 0.99 1.58 0.93 1.51 0.95 1.49 Companies National publications International co-publications 0.88 1.41 1.00 1.33 0.78 1.34 0.82 1.22 0.80 1.15 Figure 3.6. Number of publications and relative citation index by number of authors in 1990–2008 (calculated if the number of publications was 50 or over) Total for all disciplines 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 45000 2-3 4-5 6-10 yli 10 Number of authors N um be r o f pu bl ic at io ns 0,6 0,8 1,0 1,2 1,4 1,6 1,8 2,0 2,2 R elative citation index Number of national publications Number of international co-publications Relative citation index for national publications Relative citation index for international co-publications 2,4 18 International co-publishing in Finland 4 Conclusions This study indicates that the internationalisation policy of Finnish science has been productive: in 2006–2009, the share of international co- publications was nearly one-half of all Web of Science publications. At the beginning of this report, a reference was made to the concern felt in science policy debate for the declining scientific impact of Finland’s international publications in comparison with other OECD countries. This study indicates that no great changes took place in the relative citation index of international co-publications during the period under scrutiny. The scientific impact of publications produced in cooperation between domestic organisations, however, did show a decline (Cf. NordForsk 2010, 24). Based on the study results we can say in a nutshell that co-authorship has diversified: the share of publications appearing as a result of international cooperation, involvement of several country groups, and domestic inter-organisational cooperation in all WoS publications increased, and the more diverse the co-authorship was, the higher the citation counts. The average number of co-authors involved in a publication similarly increased. The share of international co-authorship increased regardless of the fact that the funding allocation model of the Ministry of Education and Culture, for example, does not comment on international co-authorship, nor does the Working Group on Funding Models in its opinion on the new funding allocation model for universities to be applied from 2013 (Ministry of Education and Culture 2011a). In the eligibility criteria for external funding applications, particularly in funding provided by the Academy of Finland and European Union Framework Programmes, however, international cooperation is significant, even if international co- authorship is not an explicitly stated objective. In impact studies, international co-authorship has been found more useful for countries located in the so-called scientific periphery, and this phenomenon has been described by the concept of periphery effects (Glänzel et al. 1999; Goldfinch et al. 2003, 328). In the results of this project, from the perspective of European cooperation networks the periphery effect is most clearly reflected in the co-publications of Finland – described as being situated in the middle ground between the centre and the periphery – with Russia, a country located in the scientific periphery (see European Commission 2008, 99–101). The citation counts of Finland’s international co-publications with Russia were lower than the counts of Finnish publications on average. However, compared to Russia’s own WoS publications (Citation Index Working Group II, 2011), these co-publications have cumulated considerably higher numbers of citations; in other words, gauged by the citation counts, cooperation with Finland has been lucrative for Russia. In the citation counts of Finnish co-publications with North America, on the other hand, the position of the United States as a hub of science is reflected as higher average citation counts than those for other country groups, and gauged by 19 the number of citations, cooperation is also beneficial for the United States. The report of the Citation Index Working Group II (2011) describes the trend in the impact of publications of the OECD countries. In 1990–2008, differences in citation counts between various OECD countries have levelled out: in relative terms, the citation counts for the publications of countries that have done less well in the citation index were higher than before, while the relative citation counts of publications of the stronger countries were lower (Citation Index Working Group II, 2011, 22–23). The results of this study point to the same finding: the groups whose relative citation index increased the most were Finnish scientific co-publications involving research organisations from Central and South America, the country group Other European or Africa (Table 3.9), while publications involving research organisations from North America are the only type of publications whose citation counts did not increase in 1990–2009. Citation counts are an established and relatively easy-to-gauge method for measuring the trends in scientific impact – but they only offer one perspective to assessing the quality of research (cf. e.g. JUFO 2011). In addition to internationalisation, expectations of regional and social impact are placed on scientific work (Ministry of Education 2004; 2005; Ministry of Education and Culture 2011). Stressing internationality in science policy has clearly overshadowed another policy goal, or the social impact of research, at least when examining the publication profiles of universities. While the third mission of the universities was incorporated in the Finnish Universities Act in 2004, it is not reflected in the development of the universities’ publication profiles: the share of international scientific publications in all Finnish publications has shown a strong increase over the last twenty years, while during this period, the share of domestic non- scientific publications has been declining (Puuska 2011; see also Muhonen, Auranen & Talola 2009). While based on the results discussed in this report, cooperation with certain country groups rather than others appears to make more sense in the light of citation counts, the basic setting for cooperation in a scientist’s everyday work is also affected by other factors, including shared research interests and funding providers’ criteria for desired partners (e.g. Nordic and European cooperation). The most desirable partners may also vary in different fields of research. This study examines the trends of international co-authorship and its relationship with the citation counts of publications. While we could state that international co-authorship and, in particular, co- publications with several country groups on average result in publications with a higher scientific impact than national authorship on the basis of these results, they do not permit us to directly draw the conclusion that it is precisely international cooperation in itself that influences the citation counts. Typically, it is scientists whose research themes and degree of establishment are likely to differ from average research in general who engage in international cooperation. For example, publications involving three country groups in addition to Finland are likely to have highly established research activities and research settings of a certain type in their background, and the high citation counts cumulated by these publications are an indication of other causes besides the significance of cooperation. It would make an interesting theme for further study to establish who the co-authors of Finnish scientists are in these multinational publications; for example, to what extent the publications are produced in internal or external European cooperation. Qualitative data and bibliometric analyses at an individual level could also broaden our understanding of international co- authorship of scientists and its motives. Even if the data used is limited to certain types of authorship, the analysis that was completed in this study offers the most comprehensive picture of trends in Finnish international co-authorship so far. 20 List of references Hakala, Johanna (1998) Internationalisation of Science. Views of the Scientific Elite in Finland. Science Studies, 11 (1), 52–74. Hakala, Johanna, Kaukonen, Erkki, Nieminen, Mika & Ylijoki, Oili-Helena (2003) Yliopisto – Tieteen kehdosta projektimyllyksi? Yliopistollisen tutkimuksen muutos 1990–luvulla. Gaudeamus. Hakala, Johanna, Kaukonen, Erkki, Koski Pasi & Piirainen, Tatu (2004) Tiedettä ja teknologiaa yli rajojen: kansainvälistymisen uudet haasteet. In Lemola, Tarmo & Honkanen, Petri (ed.) Innovaatiopolitiikka – Kenen hyväksi, keiden ehdoilla? Gaudeamus, 72–88. JUFO (2011) Website of the Publication Forum project at: [http://www.tsv.fi/julkaisufoorumi/] (Read on 17 Nov 2011) Moed, Henk F. (2005) Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation. Springer. Katz, J. Sylvan & Hicks, Diana (1997) How much is a collaboration worth? A Calibrated Bibliometric Model. Scientometrics, 40 (3), 541–554. Ministry of Education (2004) Education and Research 2003–2008. Development Plan. Publications of the Ministry of Education 2004:6. [http://www.minedu.fi/ OPM/Julkaisut/2004/liitteet/opm_190_opm06.pdf] (Read on 17 Nov 2011) Academy of Finland (2009) Suomen tieteen tila ja taso 2009. Publications of the Academy of Finland 9/09. Citation Index Working Group II (2011) Report from the Finnish Citation Index Working Group. Finnish research organizations’ publications and citations in the Web of Science. 1990–2009. Reports of the Ministry of Education and Culture. Finland 2012:18. European Commission (2008) A more research- intensive and integrated European Research Area: Science, Engineering and Competitiveness key figures report 2008/2009. EC Brussels 2008. Glänzel Wolfgang (2001) National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations. Scientometrics 51 (1), 69–115. Glänzel, Wolfgang, Schubert, András & Czerwon, H.- J. (1999) A bibliometric analysis of international scientific cooperation of the European Union (1985- 1995). Scientometrics 45 (2), 185–202. Glänzel Wolfgang & Schubert, András (2001) Double effort = Double impact? A critical view at international co- authorship in chemistry. Scientometrics, 50 (2), 199–214. Goldfinch, Shaun, Dale, Tony & DeRouen, Karl Jr. (2003) Science from the Periphery: Collaboration, networks and ‘Periphery effects’ in the citation of New Zealand Crown Research Institutes articles, 1995–2000, 321–337. 21 Ministry of Education (2005) Government Resolution on the Structural Development of the Public Research System 7.4.2005. [http://www.minedu.fi/OPM/Tiede/ tiedepolitiikka/liitteet/Periaatepaatos07042005.pdf] (Read on 17 Nov 2011) Ministry of Education and Culture (2011) Education and Research in 2011–2016. Development Plan, draft 13.9.2011. [http://www.minedu.fi/OPM/Koulutus/ koulutuspolitiikka/asiakirjat/KESUluonnos_13092011. pdf] (Read on 17 Nov 2011) Muhonen, Reetta, Auranen, Otto & Talola, Nina (2009) Research productivity and publishing profiles of Finnish universities – analyzing the influences of single universities and data sources. Seminar paper, Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy, Stockholm 29.–30.9.2009. [http://www.vr.se/download/18.227c330c123 c73dc586800011222/51_Muhonen_Talola_ Auranen_09+(2).pdf] (Read on 16 Nov 2011.) Narin, F., Stevens, K., & Whitlow, E. S. (1991) Scientific cooperation in Europe and the citation of multinationally authored papers. Scientometrics, 21 (3), 313–323. NordForsk (2010) Bibliometric research performance indicators for the Nordic countries. A Publication from the NORIA-net “The Use of bibliometrics in research policy and evaluation activities”. Editor: Jesper W. Schneider, Royal School of Library & Information Science, Denmark. NordForsk (2011) Comparing Research at Nordic Universities using Bibliometric Indicators. A publication from the NORIA-net < Bibliometric Indicators for the Nordic Universities >, NordForsk. Persson, Olle, Glänzel, Wolfgang, & Danell, Rickard (2004) Inflationary bibliometric values: The role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies. Scientometrics, 60 (3), 421–423. Persson, Olle (2010) Are highly cited papers more international? Scientometrics 83, 397–401. Puuska, Hanna-Mari (2011) Julkaisemisen muodot ja niiden kehitys eri tieteenaloilla. In E. Kaukonen, L. Himanen, R. Muhonen, H.-M. Puuska, N. Talola & O. Auranen (ed.) Tutkimuksen tuottavuuden kehitys Suomen yliopistoissa. Publications of the Ministry of Education and Culture 2011:2. 22 Appendix 1. Typicality of co-publishing in 1990–2009 by scientific discipline Number of publications 1990–1993 1994–1997 1998–2001 2002–2005 2006–2009 Natural sciences Single author Several authors from the same organisation Authors from several domestic organisations International co-authorship 1,443 2,417 983 2,508 20% 33% 13% 34% 1,472 3,249 1,648 4,353 14% 30% 15% 41% 1,414 3,415 2,472 7,006 10% 24% 17% 49% 1,345 3,897 3,056 8,206 8% 24% 19% 50% 1,250 3,778 3,418 10,491 7% 20% 18% 55% Total 7,351 100% 10,722 100% 14,306 100% 16,504 100% 18,938 100% Medical and health sciences Single author Several authors from the same organisation Authors from several domestic organisations International co-authorship 1,017 3,392 2,439 1,693 12% 40% 29% 20% 914 3,777 3,484 2,884 8% 34% 32% 26% 812 2,705 4,945 4,497 6% 21% 38% 35% 531 1,909 5,093 5,235 4% 15% 40% 41% 415 1,726 5,493 6,341 3% 12% 39% 45% Total 8,541 100% 11,059 100% 12,960 100% 12,768 100% 13,976 100% Engineering Single author Several authors from the same organisation Authors from several domestic organisations International co-authorship 458 648 301 502 24% 34% 16% 26% 474 999 553 944 16% 34% 19% 32% 502 1,223 872 1,574 12% 29% 21% 38% 438 1,520 1,074 2,022 9% 30% 21% 40% 383 1,726 1,345 2,688 6% 28% 22% 44% Total 1,909 100% 2,970 100% 4,171 100% 5,054 100% 6,141 100% Agriculture and forestry Single author Several authors from the same organisation Authors from several domestic organisations International co-authorship 256 363 156 90 30% 42% 18% 10% 193 447 216 226 18% 41% 20% 21% 204 522 377 482 13% 33% 24% 30% 147 545 502 569 8% 31% 28% 32% 105 540 588 826 5% 26% 29% 40% Total 865 100% 1,082 100% 1,585 100% 1,763 100% 2.059 100% Social sciences Single author Several authors from the same organisation Authors from several domestic organisations International co-authorship 379 195 118 131 46% 24% 14% 16% 425 343 307 260 32% 26% 23% 19% 528 420 459 472 28% 22% 24% 25% 519 462 552 702 23% 21% 25% 31% 737 639 780 1 169 22% 19% 23% 35% Total 823 100% 1.335 100% 1.879 100% 2.234 100% 3.324 100% Humanities Single author Several authors from the same organisation Authors from several domestic organisations International co-authorship 193 16 5 9 87% 7% 2% 4% 161 14 14 16 79% 7% 7% 8% 267 30 16 38 76% 9% 5% 11% 275 37 22 40 74% 10% 6% 11% 436 60 50 78 70% 10% 8% 13% Total 223 100% 205 100% 351 100% 374 100% 624 100% Multidisciplinary science Single author Several authors from the same organisation Authors from several domestic organisations International co-authorship 19 22 10 36 22% 25% 11% 41% 14 23 15 78 11% 18% 12% 60% 15 32 19 128 8% 16% 10% 66% 11 13 12 133 7% 8% 7% 79% 17 32 22 209 6% 11% 8% 75% Total 87 100% 130 100% 194 100% 169 100% 280 100% 23 The number of Finnish co-publications involving authors from various country groups and their share in international co-authorship by scientific discipline Table 2 a. Natural sciences: the number of Finnish co-publications with authors from different country groups and their share in international co-authorship. Number of publications* 1990–1993 1994–1997 1998–2001 2002–2005 2006–2009 Nordic countries EU15 + Switzerland Other European Baltic countries Russia 521 1,070 375 18 320 20.8% 42.7% 15.0% 0.7% 12.8% 968 1,847 649 153 643 22.2% 42.4% 14.9% 3.5% 14.8% 1,569 3,416 980 268 1,007 22.4% 48.8% 14.0% 3.8% 14.4% 1,714 4,300 987 320 999 20.9% 52.4% 12.0% 3.9% 12.2% 2,331 5,779 1,570 374 1,303 22% 55% 15% 4% 12% Africa Asia Australia & Oceania North America Central and South America 38 204 39 750 66 1.5% 8.1% 1.6% 29.9% 2.6% 33 444 82 1,430 166 0.8% 10.2% 1.9% 32.9% 3.8% 67 767 175 2,038 208 1.0% 10.9% 2.5% 29.1% 3.0% 93 930 222 2,227 233 1.1% 11.3% 2.7% 27.1% 2.8% 119 1,586 378 2,915 253 1% 15% 4% 28% 2% 1 country group 2 country groups Min. 3 country groups 1,979 385 144 78.9% 15.4% 5.7% 3,207 780 366 73.7% 17.9% 8.4% 4,971 1,411 624 71.0% 20.1% 8.9% 5,690 1,800 716 69.3% 21.9% 8.7% 6,796 2,407 1,288 64.8% 22.9% 12.3% Total 2,567 100% 4,425 100% 7,173 100% 8,342 100% 10,610 100% *Publications involving several country groups were included in the total number of publications for each country group, producing a total of over 100 per cent. Table 2 b. Medical and health sciences: the number of Finnish co-publications with authors from various country groups and their share in international co-authorship. Number of publications* 1990–1993 1994–1997 1998–2001 2002–2005 2006–2009 Nordic countries EU15 + Switzerland Other European Baltic countries Russia 484 554 89 12 73 28.6% 32.7% 5.3% 0.7% 4.3% 881 1,058 170 94 65 30.5% 36.7% 5.9% 3.3% 2.3% 1,360 1,949 280 125 87 30.2% 43.3% 6.2% 2.8% 1.9% 1,641 2,471 386 140 115 31.3% 47.2% 7.4% 2.7% 2.2% 2,106 3,327 590 215 158 33% 52% 9% 3% 2% Africa Asia Australia & Oceania North America Central and South America 29 130 41 675 20 1.7% 7.7% 2.4% 39.9% 1.2% 53 249 97 1,203 56 1.8% 8.6% 3.4% 41.7% 1.9% 65 407 198 1,659 66 1.4% 9.0% 4.4% 36.9% 1.5% 80 545 239 1,980 94 1.5% 10.4% 4.6% 37.8% 1.8% 141 783 405 2,173 185 2% 12% 6% 34% 3% 1 country group 2 country groups Min. 3 country groups 1,409 204 80 83.2% 12.1% 4.7% 2,205 457 222 76.5% 15.8% 7.7% 3,263 939 295 72.6% 20.9% 6.6% 3,549 1,171 515 67.8% 22.4% 9.8% 4,036 1,494 811 63.7% 23.6% 12.8% Total 1,706 100% 2,910 100% 4,541 100% 5,266 100% 6,361 100% *) Publications involving several country groups were included in the total number of publications for each country group, producing a total of over 100 per cent. Appendix 2. 24 Table 2 c. Engineering: the number of Finnish co-publications with authors from various country groups and their share in international co-authorship. Number of publications* 1990–1993 1994–1997 1998–2001 2002–2005 2006–2009 Nordic countries EU15 + Switzerland Other European Baltic countries Russia 106 175 52 1 32 21.1% 34.9% 10.4% 0.2% 6.4% 186 409 92 28 47 19.7% 43.3% 9.7% 3.0% 5.0% 356 708 180 59 73 22.6% 45.0% 11.4% 3.7% 4.6% 463 977 196 70 124 22.9% 48.3% 9.7% 3.5% 6.1% 571 1,398 263 93 168 21% 52% 10% 3% 6% Africa Asia Australia & Oceania North America Central and South America 4 39 15 190 18 0.8% 7.8% 3.0% 37.8% 3.6% 20 94 24 315 20 2.1% 10.0% 2.5% 33.4% 2.1% 23 180 49 496 20 1.5% 11.4% 3.1% 31.5% 1.3% 20 246 84 583 41 1.0% 12.2% 4.2% 28.8% 2.0% 37 456 119 742 61 1% 17% 4% 28% 2% 1 country group 2 country groups Min. 3 country groups 416 65 21 82.9% 12.9% 4.2% 735 158 51 77.9% 16.7% 5.4% 1,206 258 110 76.6% 16.4% 7.0% 1,491 382 149 73.7% 18.9% 7.4% 1,864 578 246 69.3% 21.5% 9.2% Total 512 100% 947 100% 1,602 100% 2,048 100% 2,705 100% *) Publications involving several country groups were included in the total number of publications for each country group, producing a total of over 100 per cent. Table 2 d. Agriculture and forestry: the number of Finnish co-publications with authors from various country groups and their share in international co-authorship. Number of publications* 1990–1993 1994–1997 1998–2001 2002–2005 2006–2009 Nordic countries EU15 + Switzerland Other European Baltic countries Russia 29 20 6 2 1 32.2% 22.2% 6.7% 2.2% 1.1% 63 53 14 7 4 27.9% 23.5% 6.2% 3.1% 1.8% 167 170 13 17 13 34.6% 35.3% 2.7% 3.5% 2.7% 176 258 26 20 20 30.9% 45.3% 4.6% 3.5% 3.5% 243 385 58 46 35 29% 47% 7% 6% 4% Africa Asia Australia & Oceania North America Central and South America 4 5 3 26 2 4.4% 5.6% 3.3% 28.9% 2.2% 8 22 11 67 8 3.5% 9.7% 4.9% 29.6% 3.5% 4 47 25 127 7 0.8% 9.7% 5.2% 26.3% 1.5% 18 62 19 114 15 3.2% 10.9% 3.3% 20.0% 2.6% 17 92 37 158 34 2% 11% 4% 19% 4% 1 country group 2 country groups Min. 3 country groups 84 6 0 93.3% 6.7% 0.0% 202 21 3 89.4% 9.3% 1.3% 412 56 14 85.5% 11.6% 2.9% 450 94 25 79.1% 16.5% 4.4% 624 149 53 75.5% 18.0% 6.4% Total 92 100% 226 100% 490 100% 577 100% 830 100% *) Publications involving several country groups were included in the total number of publications for each country group, producing a total of over 100 per cent. 25 Table 2 e. Social sciences: the number of Finnish co-publications involving authors from various country groups and their share in international co-authorship. Number of publications* 1990–1993 1994–1997 1998–2001 2002–2005 2006–2009 Nordic countries EU15 + Switzerland Other European Baltic countries Russia 36 27 11 2 7 27.5% 20.6% 8.4% 1.5% 5.3% 66 69 10 4 9 25.4% 26.5% 3.8% 1.5% 3.5% 124 232 20 8 11 26.2% 49.1% 4.2% 1.7% 2.3% 137 350 28 11 20 19.5% 49.9% 4.0% 1.6% 2.9% 302 627 51 43 29 26% 54% 4% 4% 2% Africa Asia Australia & Oceania North America Central and South America 0 6 1 78 1 0.0% 4.6% 0.8% 59.5% 0.8% 2 22 8 122 3 0.8% 8.5% 3.1% 46.9% 1.2% 7 34 12 189 4 1.5% 7.2% 2.5% 40.0% 0.8% 9 65 26 266 7 1.3% 9.3% 3.7% 37.9% 1.0% 24 92 92 370 20 2% 8% 8% 32% 2% 1 country group 2 country groups Min. 3 country groups 113 16 2 86.3% 12.2% 1.5% 227 28 5 87.3% 10.8% 1.9% 368 82 22 78.0% 17.4% 4.7% 555 121 26 79.1% 17.2% 3.7% 875 228 66 74.8% 19.5% 5.6% Total 149 100% 275 100% 505 100% 727 100% 1.219 100% *Publications involving several country groups were included in the total number of publications for each country group, producing a total of over 100 per cent. 26 Appendix 3. Co-publishing and the relative citation index in 1990–2008 by different disciplines Table 3 a. Natural sciences: co-publishing and the relative citation index in 1990–2008 (calculated if the number of publications was 50 or over) Relative citation index 1990– 1993 1994– 1997 1998– 2001 2002– 2005 2006– 2008 Trend 1990–1993 ->2006–2008 Single author Several authors from the same organisation Authors from several domestic organisations International co-authorship 0.77 0.84 0.94 1.10 0.80 1.00 0.96 1.07 0.80 0.95 1.01 1.08 0.83 1.00 0.99 1.08 0.77 1.01 0.96 1.21 0.00 0.17 0.02 0.11 Nordic countries EU15+Switzerland Other European Baltic countries Russia 1.16 1.09 0.69 - 0.89 1.16 1.16 0.94 1.02 0.66 1.20 1.22 0.85 0.94 0.71 1.25 1.14 0.95 0.97 0.69 1.34 1.34 1.08 1.11 0.85 0.18 0.25 0.39 0.09* -0.04 Africa Asia Australia & Oceania North America Central and South America - 1.03 - 1.36 1.03 - 1.05 1.37 1.38 0.78 1.53 1.01 1.45 1.46 1.09 0.79 1.10 1.43 1.34 1.09 1.19 1.32 1.85 1.51 1.31 -0.34** 0.29 0.48* 0.15 0.28 1 country group 2 country groups Min. 3 country groups 1.08 1.10 1.49 1.03 1.28 1.53 1.05 1.22 1.73 1.08 1.19 1.26 1.18 1.33 1.72 0.10 0.23 0.23 *) Trend calculated for the four-year period 1994–1997 as the number of cases was less than 50 in the preceding four-year period **) Trend calculated for the four-year period 1998–2001 as the number of cases was less than 50 in the preceding four-year periods 27 Table 3 b. Medical and health sciences: co-publishing and the relative citation index in 1990–2008 (calculated if the number of publications was 50 or over) Relative citation index 1990– 1993 1994– 1997 1998– 2001 2002– 2005 2006– 2008 Trend 1990–1993 –>2006–2008 Single author Several authors from the same organisation Authors from several domestic organisations International co-authorship 0.74 0.98 1.24 1.57 0.76 1.01 1.19 1.54 0.62 0.92 1.14 1.64 0.77 0.96 0.99 1.45 0.77 0.94 1.02 1.38 0.03 -0.04 -0.22 -0.19 Nordic countries EU15+Switzerland Other European Baltic countries Russia 1.67 1.47 1.00 - 0.68 1.57 1.54 1.42 0.98 1.48 1.59 1.86 1.32 1.44 1.05 1.70 1.71 1.26 1.15 0.96 1.75 1.61 1.53 0.94 1.13 0.08 0.14 0.53 -0.04* 0.45 Africa Asia Australia & Oceania North America Central and South America - 1.50 - 2.08 - 0.78 1.45 1.60 1.93 1.35 1.44 1.38 2.10 1.99 1.99 1.28 1.36 1.94 1.80 1.30 1.50 1.32 2.03 1.72 2.53 0.72* -0.18 0.43* -0.36 1.18 1 country group 2 country groups Min. 3 country groups 1.57 2.06 2.24 1.46 1.93 2.66 1.61 1.80 3.12 1.33 1.89 3.01 1.25 1.68 3.14 -0.32 -0.38 0.90 **) Trend calculated for the four-year period 1994–1997 as the number of cases was less than 50 in the preceding four-year period. Table 3 c. Engineering: co-publishing and the relative citation index in 1990–2008 (calculated if the number of publications was 50 or over) Relative citation index 1990– 1993 1994– 1997 1998– 2001 2002– 2005 2006– 2008 Trend 1990–1993 –>2006–2008 Single author Several authors from the same organisation Authors from several domestic organisations International co-authorship 0.86 1.00 1.49 1.13 0.91 1.02 1.12 1.45 0.83 1.05 1.03 1.35 0.92 1.02 0.97 1.19 0.87 0.99 0.88 1.44 0.01 -0.01 -0.61 0.31 Nordic countries EU15+Switzerland Other European Baltic countries Russia 1.35 1.11 0.44 - - 1.33 1.46 0.86 - - 1.25 1.41 0.72 1.21 0.74 1.24 1.32 0.78 1.19 0.79 2.04 1.78 1.29 1.11 1.03 0.69 0.67 0.85 -0.10** 0.29** Africa Asia Australia & Oceania North America Central and South America - - - 1.28 - - 1.31 - 1.97 - - 1.29 - 1.67 - - 1.10 2.07 1.43 - - 1.37 2.19 2.27 1.24 - *** 0.06* 0.12 0.99 - **** 1 country group 2 country groups Min. 3 country groups 1.11 1.06 - 1.38 1.81 1.92 1.26 1.61 1.66 1.11 1.45 1.93 1.15 2.15 4.26 0.04 1.09 2.34* *) Trend calculated for the four-year period 1994–1997 as the number of cases was less than 50 in the preceding four-year period **) Trend calculated for the four-year period 1998–2001 as the number of cases was less than 50 in the preceding four-year periods ***) The number of cases less than 50 in each four-year period ****) The number of cases is 50 or more only in 2006–2008 28 Table 3 d. Agriculture and forestry: co-publishing and the relative citation index in 1990–2008 (calculated if the number of publications was 50 or over) Relative citation index 1990– 1993 1994– 1997 1998– 2001 2002– 2005 2006– 2008 Trend 1990–1993 –>2006–2008 Single author Several authors from the same organisation Authors from several domestic organisations International co-authorship 0.79 0.74 1.07 1.59 1.04 1.05 1.28 1.29 0.65 1.12 1.56 1.73 0.93 1.13 1.14 1.52 1.11 1.25 1.17 1.47 0.32 0.51 0.10 -0.12 Table 3 e. Social sciences: co-publishing and the relative citation index in 1990–2008 (calculated if the number of publications was 50 or over) Relative citation index 1990– 1993 1994– 1997 1998– 2001 2002– 2005 2006– 2008 Trend 1990–1993 –>2006–2008 Single author Several authors from the same organisation Authors from several domestic organisations International co-authorship 0.53 0.65 1.11 1.18 0.63 0.84 0.80 1.28 0.61 0.95 1.03 1.39 0.65 0.90 0.82 1.25 0.63 0.77 0.98 1.23 0.10 0.12 -0.13 0.05 29 Figure 4 a. Natural sciences: number of publications and relative citation index by number of authors in 1990–2008 (calculated if the number of publications was 50 or over) Natural sciences 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 2-3 4-5 6-10 yli 10 Number of authors 0,8 0,9 1,0 1,1 1,2 1,3 1,4 1,5 1,6 R elative citation index Number of national publications Number of international co-publications Relative citation index for national publications Relative citation index for international co-publications N um be r o f p ub lic at io ns Appendix 4. Relative citation index for national and international co-publications by number of authors in 1990–2008 Figure 4 b. Medical and health sciences: number of publications and relative citation index by number of authors in 1990–2008 (calculated if the number of publications is 50 or over) N um be r o f p ub lic at io ns Medical and health sciences 0 3000 6000 9000 12000 15000 2-3 4-5 6-10 yli 10 Number of authors 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 R elative citation index Number of national publications Number of international co-publications Relative citation index for national publications Relative citation index for international co-publications 30 Figure 4 c. Engineering: number of publications and relative citation index by number of authors in 1990–2008 (calculated if the number of publications was 50 or over) Engineering 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 2-3 4-5 6-10 yli 10 Number of authors N um be r o f p ub lic at io ns 0,6 1,0 1,4 1,8 2,2 2,6 3,0 R elative citation index Number of national publications Number of international co-publications Relative citation index for national publications Relative citation index for international co-publications Figure 4 d. Agriculture and forestry: number of publications and relative citation index by number of authors in 1990–2008 (calculated if the number of publications is 50 or over) Number of authors N um be r o f p ub lic at io ns Agriculture and forestry 0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 2-3 4-5 6-10 yli 10 0,6 0,8 1,0 1,2 1,4 1,6 1,8 2,0 R elative citation index Number of national publications Number of international co-publications Relative citation index for national publications Relative citation index for international co-publications Figure 4 e. Social sciences: number of publications and relative citation index by number of authors in 1990–2008 (calculated if the number of publications is 50 or over) Number of authors N um be r o f p ub lic at io ns R elative citation index Social sciences 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 2-3 4-5 6-10 yli 10 0,6 0,8 1,0 1,2 1,4 1,6 1,8 Number of national publications Number of international co-publications Relative citation index for national publications Relative citation index for international co-publications 1 Published in the publication series of the Ministry of Education and Culture in 2012 Online publications: http://www.minedu.fi/OPM/Julkaisut/julkaisulistaus?lang=en 1 Koulutus ja tutkimus vuosina 2011–2016; Kehittämissuunnitelma 2 Utbildning och forskning 2011–2016; Utvecklingsplan 3 Education and Research 2011–2016; A development plan 4 Suomen kansainvälinen yhteisjulkaiseminen 5 Tehostettua ja erityistä tukea tarvitsevien oppilaiden opetuksen kehittäminen 2007– 2011; Kehittävän arvioinnin loppuraportti. 6 Lapsi- ja nuorisopolitiikan kehittämisohjelma 2012–2015 7 Barn- och ungdomspolitiskt utvecklingsprogram 2012–2015 9 Toiminta- ja taloussuunnitelma 2013–2016 10 Hitaasti mutta varmasti? Saavutettavuuden edistyminen yliopistoissa ja ammattikorkeakouluissa 2000-luvulla 13 Sport and Equality 2011 14 Koulutuksen arviointisuunnitelma vuosille 2012–2015 15 Utvärderingsplan för utbildningen 2012–2015 17 The National Policy Programme for Older People’s Physical Activity; Health and well- being from physical activity 20 Liikuntatoimi tilastojen valossa; Perustilastot vuodelta 2010 21 Yliopistolakiuudistuksen vaikutusten arviointi ISBN 978-952-263-133-6 (PDF) ISSN-L 1799-0343 ISSN 1799-0351 (Online) Helsinki 2012 International co-publishing in Finland Reetta Muhonen, Yrjö Leino Reports of the Ministry of Education and Culture, Finland 2012:19 and Hanna-Mari Puuska International co-publishing in Finland Abstract Preface Contents 1 Introduction 2 Data and methodology 3 Results 4 Conclusions List of references Appendix 1. Typicality of co-publishing in 1990–2009 by scientific discipline Appendix 2. The number of Finnish co-publications involving authors from various country groups and their share in international co-authorship by scientific discipline Appendix 3. Co-publishing and the relative citation index in 1990–2008 by different disciplines Appendix 4. Relative citation index for national and international co-publications by number of authors in 1990–2008