A Bibliometric Study of the Portuguese Research System in Biotechnology

Transcription

1 RISE - RTOs in the service economy A Bibliometric Study of the Portuguese Research System in Biotechnology Tiago Tavares Santos Pereira December 2000 DMS 020/2000

2 A Bibliometric Study of the Portuguese Research System in Biotechnology * Tiago Tavares Santos Pereira 1 - Introduction While it has become common to talk about the Knowledge Economy, there is yet relatively little understanding of the economies of knowledge that are the base of its future development. Knowledge is produced and is exchanged by a variety of institutions and in a variety of forms and is therefore difficult to track. Nevertheless, even if knowledge is a relatively fluid concept, it is clear that there are specific institutions which have a central role in the activities primarily dedicated to its production, research, and its exchange and dissemination, often through scientific and technical publications the research and technology organisations (RTOs). The existence of such published forms of knowledge provide a particularly useful window to track the activities of knowledge production and knowledge exchange, identify the actors and their inter-linkages. This is the objective of this study. This study follows on the tradition of the systems of innovation approach and takes as specific object of analysis the biotechnology cluster in Portugal. It will contribute to the characterisation of the Portuguese biotechnology innovation system through the identification of the actors directly participating in research activities which have scientific publications as an output. As the studies of systems of innovation make clear, it is also important to go beyond the identification of the actors to also identify the links between them, where knowledge is exchanged and disseminated. Scientific publications provide an important tracing of such activities through the identification of institutional coauthorships, which reflect the existence of links between different actors in knowledge producing activities. Furthermore, the bibliometric analysis of scientific publications also provides indications of the scientific capabilities of the different actors of the system through the analysis of the scientific fields in which they most actively publish. Although the analysis of the research system cannot provide a full picture of the innovation system, since some actors in the latter are not likely to participate in scientific research and in scientific publications, it can nevertheless describe the activities of a variety of actors, from firms to universities. * This study has been prepared with the support of EU funding in the TSER Programme to the RISE Project, RTO s in the Service Economy: Knowledge Infrastructures, Innovation Intermediaries and Institutional Change. We would also like to acknowledge the support of the Observatório das Ciências e das Tecnologias, who provided the bibliometric data analysed in this study. Currently at the Instituto da Cooperação Científica e Tecnológica Internacional (ICCTI), R. Castilho, 5-4º, Lisboa, Portugal. tsp@ip.pt 1

3 The next section, Section 2, will provide a brief overview of the development of the Portuguese research system, with particular reference to biotechnology research, as a background for the study. This will be followed, in Section 3, by a description of the methodology adopted in this study and the implications thereof for the analysis of the data presented. Section 4 will present data on the scientific output in biotechnology related sciences by Portuguese institutions. The analysis will focus on the regional distribution of the published output, the sectoral distribution, the participation of Portuguese firms and the distribution per scientific fields. Following from the innovation systems approach, beyond the identification of the active institutions it is important to identify the existence of linkages between these. This analysis will be developed in Section 5. This will address both the existence of linkages at the national level, between the different institutions, and the existence of linkages between Portuguese and foreign institutions. The conclusions of the study will be presented in Section The Portuguese Research System and Biotechnology The Portuguese research system has undergone considerable changes in the most recent years. With the support of the European structural funds, important institutional and, particularly, infrastructural reforms have taken place. However, a research system that was largely isolated during the years of the dictatorial regime of Salazar until 1974 (Gago, 1990), has faced difficulties in breaking away from such isolation. The analysis by Gonçalves (1996) of the development of science policy in Portugal exemplifies this. While scientists took steps in trying to bridge new links and to enrol the political, economic and social spheres, after the establishment of democracy, they were generally unable to develop such links, even if they found some support abroad. As a consequence the research system has been embedded by an academic culture, with the universities replacing the central position of the state laboratories (and their orientation towards the user) during the earlier years. The entrance to the EC in 1986 radically changed the research system. The inflow of resources to renew the scientific and technological infrastructures, together with the participation in European collaborative networks under the Framework Programmes, meant that, for the first time, science was attracting new actors. Nevertheless, the system kept some of its previous features. A strong academic culture remained, to which, on the contrary, the state laboratories also adhered (MCT, 1997), together with recently formed private non-profit research institutions, often the result of direct initiatives of universities, but with their own autonomy. In this context, biotechnology also gained new importance. Changing from the earlier disciplinary culture strongly influenced by physics researchers and the former National Board for Nuclear Physics, biotechnology was included as one of the priorities in national research programmes. In the significant investment in the post-graduate training programmes that followed the entry into the EU the largest number of scholarships was attributed in the area of the biological sciences (OCT, 1999a). These fields also benefited 2

4 from large scale infrastructural investment, providing them with instrumentation and facilities of international level. Finally, the EU RTD programmes also focused on biotechnology as a priority which facilitated the development of international networks by researchers in this area and further inflow of resources (Pereira, 2000). However, the new programmes, more oriented towards scientific research, had little industrial participation. The technological activity of Portuguese industry is low and predominantly in the traditional sectors, which are of low technological intensity (Caraça, 1993). At the same time, government technology policy did not parallel the investment in the upstream side with targeted policies at the downstream, even if some investment was made in interface institutions, which led to an unbalanced development of the Portuguese system of innovation in biotechnology (Fontes and Novais, 1998). In this context, the present study will focus on the scientific output of international level, in biotechnology related sciences, by Portuguese institutions, which, as will be shown below, has increased significantly during the last years. 3 - Methodology The study developed here of the research institutions in the Portuguese biotechnology innovation system uses bibliometric indicators based on data produced by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI), in its National Citation Report for Portugal, based on the Science Citation Index Expanded, and were provided by the Observatório das Ciências e das Tecnologias, which holds all Portuguese data. The use of bibliometrics provides a picture of the scientific production. Therefore, this study should only be viewed as portraying the scientific production of the biotechnology innovation sector. Nevertheless, the analysis of publications is not necessarily restricted to the traditional vision of the academia, restricted and can also characterise the participation of a variety of institutions in these activities, including also activities performed by firms (Hicks, 1995; Hicks and Katz, 1997). Although some of the limitations of bibliometrics are well known, the use of this method provides a systematic analysis of the research system, both across time and across countries or institutions. Nevertheless, it must be pointed out that the Science Citation Index (SCI), the database used for most bibliometric studies, provides generally a better coverage of the scientific literature of the English speaking countries, and it tends to cover publications of a more basic nature, even if it is certainly not restricted to such literature. While this is likely to lead to a lower identification of the output of Portuguese researchers, who are also likely to have an output in non-classified journals, it has the advantage of identifying those publications which are of a greater international standing, therefore creating a threshold which provides better international comparisons. A more difficult methodological question is posed by the definition of biotechnology itself. What counts as biotechnology is hard to make, and this term has been used to refer to often 3

5 quite distinct realities, depending on different factors. The approach taken here was to adopt a wide definition, capable of including a variety of activities that are, more or less directly, linked to the processing of biological agents, which include microorganisms, cultured cells and enzymes (Bull et al., 1982). Such broad definition expects to reach activities oriented towards a variety of industrial sectors (such as pharmaceutical, agriculture and food, for example) and based on a variety of scientific disciplines (such as biochemistry, molecular biology or plant sciences), in order to identify the greatest number of related actors. While the ISI classification defines one category as Biotechnology & Applied Microbiology, this corresponds to a narrow definition rather than the broader identification intended for the characterisation of the institutions which are part of a system of innovation. Furthermore, it is clear that there are other areas which contribute to or draw upon, more or less directly, biotechnology research and which are not included in such category. Molecular Biology & Genetics is a particularly good example, having been at the centre of the biotechnological developments in earlier periods and at the current phase, but other, less central, areas are also strongly related in this multidisciplinary field, as described by Leydesdorff and Gauthier (1996). The identification of the relevant categories was made through consultation with experts, and through the analysis of the publications (journals, publication titles, keywords) included in the different categories. As a consequence of the non-existence of a direct identification between publications and categories, but only between journals and categories, 1 some publications will be included which are not biotechnology related and some biotechnology related publications will not be included. Nevertheless, the objective of providing a broad overview of the actors in the system will be better achieved with the broader approach. ISI classifies some journals as multidisciplinary and to others included in the expanded version no category is attributed. In these cases the titles and journals of these papers were screened individually to decide on their inclusion. Table 1 displays the selected categories and areas (the latter including several categories) and the corresponding number of articles identified in each category with the participation of a Portuguese institution. 1 The identification between journals and categories is not univocal, as ISI may classify one specific scientific journal in more than one category. 4

6 Table 1 - Distribution of Selected Papers per Scientific Field AREA CATEGORY Total NO CATEGORY 165 AGRICULTURE,BIOLOGY, AND ENVIROMENTAL SCIENCES AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTRY 163 ANIMAL SCIENCES 21 BIOLOGY 151 BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY 362 FOOD SCIENCE/NUTRITION 195 PLANT SCIENCES 146 VETERINARY MEDICINE/ANIMAL HEALTH 7 AGRICULTURE,BIOLOGY, AND ENVIROMENTAL SCIENCES Total 1045 ENGINEERING,COMPUTING, & TECHNOLOGY CHEMICAL ENGINEERING 23 ENGINEERING,COMPUTING, & TECHNOLOGY Total 23 LIFE SCIENCES ANIMAL & PLANT SCIENCES 218 BIOCHEMISTRY & BIOPHYSICS 499 CELL & DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY 92 CHEMISTRY & ANALYSIS 54 ENDOCRINOLOGY, NUTRITION & METABOLISM 1 EXPERIMENTAL BIOLOGY 14 IMMUNOLOGY 161 MICROBIOLOGY 539 MOLECULAR BIOLOGY & GENETICS 236 MULTIDISCIPLINARY 55 PHARMACOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY 338 LIFE SCIENCES Total

7 Taking into account that this study will be based on the analysis of publications in the above identified scientific fields, mentions to the biotechnology innovation sector in the following sections of this paper should be understood under the light of these definitions and methodological constraints. A second major methodological issue in relation to the analysis intended, beyond the identification of the publications corresponding to the definition of biotechnology, concerns the institutional identification. One of the important assets of the SCI is that it provides all the institutional addresses listed by the authors. However, the addresses listed have significant variation for the same institutions, sometimes due to simple misspellings, and others to the identification of internal departments, therefore requiring to be cleaned and standardised. The central guiding line in this process was to attribute the address to the main autonomous institution, in order to reach greater comparability of the results. Furthermore, the strong institutional linkages between some institutions in the Portuguese biotechnology innovation system, particularly between universities and private non-profit institutions, also lead to further difficulties in such identifications. Such difficulties are also faced by the researchers themselves, who often list more than one institution in the same address. In such cases it was decided to attribute the address to the smallest autonomous institution 2. Where a university and a hospital were listed in the same address, the address was attributed to the university, on the understanding that it is a university hospital. The analysis of collaboration patterns in Section 5 shows that the existence of those links is still evident in the existing data. In cases of double institutional affiliation of a researcher, the addresses listed identify a research collaboration. In these cases, it is not possible to clearly identify if such collaboration is the result of an actual process of institutional collaboration or simply the bibliometric result of double institutional affiliation. This is another case where the strong institutional linkages between universities and private non-profit organisations in the Portuguese research system become evident, as will be discussed in Section 5. In addition to the identification of the institutions, it was also necessary to identify their sector of activity and regional location. The period studied corresponds to a 10-year span, between 1988 and Due to the continuous updating of the database the data for the year of 1998 registers a more significant decline, since data relative to each year continues to be updated usually during the following year (such difference has been estimated in 10% of the output). 3 It is therefore likely that the actual total for 1998 be greater than that for 1997, and no specific inference can be made at the moment. 2 If a private non-profit institution and a university were listed in the same address (although this occurred it was not frequent) the address was attributed to the private non-profit institution. However, if the two institutions were listed in different addresses they are both identified and a collaboration is registered. 3 On the contrary, 5 papers dated 1999 were already included in the last updating. It was decided to keep these for the analysis (with the exception of the yearly data). 6

8 The data used was restricted to articles, notes, reviews and letters which are considered the publication types that contain new scientific findings. 4 Table 2 describes the set of publications used according to the different types, showing that most publications are journal articles. Table 2 - Distribution of Publication Types Publication Type Total Article 2559 Note 122 Review 62 Letter 40 Total Scientific Output The number of publications identified with the participation of Portuguese institutions has gradually increased throughout the period analysed. Figure 1 displays the evolution of the Portuguese scientific output in the fields selected. In 1998 the 460 publications identified were more than four times higher than the corresponding number 10 years earlier, in The comparison with the evolution of the total national scientific production for this period, which increased by less than fourfold, from 713 publications in 1988 to 2621 in 1998, 6 reveals that the biotechnology sector has been particularly dynamic. Figure 1 - Total Portuguese Output in Biotechnology Related Areas Number of Publications Some bibliometric studies do not consider letters, but these were included here as the objective of this study was to obtain a wider identification of the relevant actors and these also include new contributions. 5 Taking into account the estimated updating of the last year, these figures are expected to be even higher. 6 These data, estimated from OCT (1999) are not directly comparable to the ones produced here, due to slight methodological differences, but the ratio between the two different years is nevertheless comparable. 7

9 Table 3 presents the distribution of the publications according to scientific fields between the years of 1988 and In order to attenuate fluctuations due to the low output figures, the data are presented for a two-year window. During the whole period Microbiology and Biochemistry & Biophysics were, in this order, the two fields with the largest number of publications. The distribution of papers per field did not change significantly during this period but it is worth to note some changes. While at the beginning there was a higher concentration in a reduced number of fields, at the end of the period the number of fields with international scientific output was higher and there were more fields with a relevant contribution to the total, i.e. more than the occasional paper. Possibly as a consequence, the highest producing fields have decreased their share of the total output, particularly the field of Pharmacology & Toxicology. The field of Biotechnology & Applied Microbiology increased its share to decrease again in the more recent years. The field of Food Science/Nutrition has registered the highest growth, increasing from virtually nothing to reach 11% in the last two years analysed. Other fields increasing more significantly their output were Agricultural Chemistry, Multidisciplinary and Chemistry & Analysis. 8

10 Table 3 - Distribution of the Papers per Field for 2-Year Windows CATEGORY Total MICROBIOLOGY BIOCHEMISTRY & BIOPHYSICS BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY PHARMACOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY & GENETICS ANIMAL & PLANT SCIENCES FOOD SCIENCE/NUTRITION NO CATEGORY AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTRY IMMUNOLOGY BIOLOGY PLANT SCIENCES CELL & DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY MULTIDISCIPLINARY CHEMISTRY & ANALYSIS CHEMICAL ENGINEERING ANIMAL SCIENCES EXPERIMENTAL BIOLOGY VETERINARY MEDICINE/ANIMAL HEALTH ENDOCRINOLOGY, NUTRITION & METABOLISM Total

11 4.1 - Regions The geographical concentration, in Portugal, of S&T resources and activities in the region of Lisboa e Vale do Tejo has been a characteristic of the national research system since the early implantation of a large number of government laboratories in the capital region. This has been reflected in different indicators, such as the regional distribution of GERD, with the regions of Lisboa e Vale do Tejo absorbing more than 57% of the total national expenditures in R&D during the year of 1997 (OCT, 1999b). Table 4 shows the share of the total number of papers which have the participation of each different region (since several papers entail collaboration between institutions in the different regions, the sum of the shares is greater than 100%). Table 4 - Distribution of Papers per Region REGION Publications Share LISBOA E VALE DO TEJO % NORTE % CENTRO % ALGARVE % ALENTEJO % AÇORES % MADEIRA % Total % Following the general characteristics of the system, the region of Lisboa e Vale do Tejo participates in more than half of the total publications in biotechnology produced by Portuguese institutions. Among these figures, the participation of institutions in the Norte region stands out as significantly higher than the corresponding share of expenditures, covering just above one third of the total publications while the share of expenditures is one fifth of the national total. While a direct parallel between the two figures should not be made, since the activities which each figure indicates are distinct publications being indicative of research activities of a more academic nature while GERD includes a much broader set of scientific and technical activities, the figures for this region stand out in comparison to the regions of Lisboa e Vale do Tejo and of Centro. This suggests both that the Norte has a strong scientific base and that this may be particularly so in the biotechnology related areas identified here. Even if there are no other publication figures at the regional level in Portugal from which to ascertain the strength of biotechnology in the Norte, the number of active institutions in this area (publishing more than 10 publications during the period studied) in the Norte (18) is similar to that of Lisboa e Vale do Tejo (22) and much higher than that of Centro (9). 7 Among the remaining regions, Alentejo has a 7 A list of the institutions according to regions can be found in the Annex in Table A1. 10

12 weak performance in comparison to the expenditure data and taking into account the relevance of biotechnology to the main activities of the region, in the agricultural sector Sectors Table 5 displays the distribution of papers according to type of institution and sector of performance. The total is higher than the sum of the output from the different sectors due to the collaboration between sectors. Table 5 also reveals the share of the participation of each sector in the total number of publications per year. Table 5 - Distribution of Publications per Sector SECTOR TOTAL SHARE UNIVERSITY % PRIVATE NON-PROFIT ORGANISATION % STATE % HOSPITAL % FIRM % OTHER % Total % The strong role of the university sector is evident, with the participation of higher education institutions in more than 80% of the publications in biotechnology produced with the participation of Portuguese institutions. The private non-profit sector is the second most active, followed by the state institutions, hospitals and finally firms, which participated in 25 publications, less than 1% of the total Portuguese output. Even if firms are not expected to be a very active participant in the scientific literature, these figures are considerably low when compared to a similar study on the Swedish biotechnology innovation system (Nilsson et al., 2000), where firms participated in 7% of the total Swedish output during a similar period, or with the British research system, where firms have participated in 8% of the total output (Hicks and Katz, 1997). The low participation of Portuguese firms also reflects wider characteristics of the Portuguese research system, which has a low participation of the private sector, as reflected in expenditure data, when compared to the European average. Nevertheless, the participation of firms in published scientific research has been more active in recent years. During this period the strength of the university sector has not decreased but rather slightly increased, contrary to the state institutions, which appear to have slightly decreased their share of the total Portuguese output, even if their total output has increased. The scientific output of the private non-profit institutions has oscillated more significantly throughout the period studied (Table A2 presents the yearly figures of the sector shares). The main institutional actors in the biotechnology research system (producing at least 20 papers during the period considered) are listed in Table 6, according to their total number of papers. The single most productive institution is the Instituto Superior Técnico (IST), an 11

13 engineering school from the Universidade Técnica de Lisboa (UTL), closely followed by the Instituto de Tecnologia Química e Biológica (ITQB), 8 mainly a research institute from the Universidade Nova de Lisboa (UNL). Table 6 Leading Portuguese Institutions in Biotechnology Research INSTITUTION Publications UNIV TECN LISBOA INST SUP TECNICO 284 UNIV NOVA LISBOA INST TECNOL QUIM BIOL 278 UNIV PORTO INST CIENCIAS BIOMED ABEL SALAZAR 229 UNIV NOVA LISBOA FAC CIENCIA TECNOL 212 INST GULBENKIAN CIENCIA 203 UNIV CAT PORT ESCOLA SUP BIOTEC 182 UNIV COIMBRA FAC CIENCIA TECNOL 172 UNIV LISBOA FAC CIENCIAS 170 UNIV PORTO FAC MED 148 UNIV TECN LISBOA INST SUP AGRON 124 UNIV PORTO 116 INST NACL ENGN TECNOL IND 105 INST NACL SAUDE 98 UNIV PORTO FAC FARM 94 UNIV MINHO 93 UNIV LISBOA FAC MED 90 CTR NEUROCIENCIAS COIMBRA 83 UNIV LISBOA FAC FARM 73 UNIV COIMBRA FAC FARM 72 UNIV PORTO FAC CIENCIAS 67 UNIV COIMBRA 65 UNIV PORTO FAC ENGN 58 UNIV NOVA LISBOA FAC CIENCIAS MED 48 HOSP STA MARIA 47 UNIV AVEIRO 44 INST BIOL MOL CEL 43 INST NACL INV AGRARIA 43 INST BIOL EXPT TECNOL 41 UNIV ALGARVE 40 UNIV COIMBRA FAC MED 40 UNIV TRAS MONTES & ALTO DOURO 31 UNIV NOVA LISBOA INST HIG MED TROP 28 UNIV NOVA LISBOA 26 INST GENET MED JACINTO MAGALHAES 21 However, if the unification of the addresses is made in relation to the university rather than to the individual schools (to account also for some publications which could not be 8 However, it must be noted that ITQB is a relatively new institution, and its scientific output only appeared in the SCI in 1990, i.e. two years after the beginning of the period analysed. 12

14 attributed to a particular school and were attributed only to the university), the picture slightly changes. The Universidade do Porto (UP) takes the lead with 591 publications, including the participation from 5 schools plus those unattributed to a particular school, followed now by the UNL with 484 publications, also with 5 schools represented. The UTL is third with 416 papers (4 schools) and the University of Coimbra (UC) follows with 283 papers (3 schools). The Instituto Gulbenkian de Ciência (IGC) is the first non-university institution, and with the significant scientific output of more than 200 publications during this period. The government laboratory with the highest scientific output in these fields is the Instituto Nacional de Engenharia e Tecnologia Industrial (INETI), publishing a total of 105 papers. The analysis of the yearly data shows that some institutions, namely private non-profit institutions, have become particularly active in the most recent years (see data in Table A3). For example, the Instituto de Biologia Molecular e Celular (IBMC) has published more than half of its total output for the period in the year of In this year, the Escola Superior de Biotecnologia of the Universidade Católica Portuguesa published the highest number of papers, showing that the system is under changes. At an institutional level, it is also relevant to note the importance of the regional cluster of institutions located at Oeiras (ITQB, IGC, Instituto de Biologia Experimental e Tecnológica (IBET), Estação Agronómica Nacional (EAN-INIA)) which have participated, either in collaboration or individually, in a total of 510 publications, showing it to be one of the central locations in the Portuguese biotechnology research system Participation of firms While scientific papers are not of central importance to firms, and can be expected to be even less so in the Portuguese case, taking into account their low level of R&D expenditures, it is important to analyse their possible participation as actors in biotechnology research system. Hicks (1995), in a study of corporate research strategies in Europe and Japan, analysed the motivations for firms to participate in scientific publications and therefore to make public knowledge of which they expect to gain private benefits. She found out that while in certain instances such paradox may be an outcome of indirect activities, such as double institutional affiliation of a researcher in a public research institution and a private firm, very frequently it is a decision which is taken by the firm itself or where the initiative of researcher within the firm is accepted. In such instances Hicks found that scientific publications are a mode for firms to signal the existence of specific scientific capabilities, often of a tacit nature, inside the firms. While such signalling can be directed to the corporate world, creating windows to possible technological alliances or indicating active presence in specific sectors, the reputation gained through these activities is often most important for firms as an entry ticket to the scientific research networks that have been seen traditionally as the world of academics. Even if in the Portuguese case, such mix of the public and the private is not expected to be very significant, it is nevertheless important to identify those firms that have been active in research activities and publishing outputs from those activities. 13

15 In the fields studied 25 publications were found with the participation of 13 Portuguese firms, representing less than 1% of the total national output. These 13 Portuguese firms were most active in the fields of Food/Nutrition (with 9 publications in this field), Pharmacology & Toxicology (7), Biotechnology & Applied Microbiology (6). Table 7 lists the firms which participated in the publications together with the fields in which they were active. CIPAN (pharmaceuticals) and RAR (food) were the most visible firms through their participation in 5 papers each in the fields analysed Scientific fields In addition to the analysis of the total output of each institution it is also useful for the characterisation of the system to identify the different fields of competence of the main institutional actors. While IST is the institution with the highest scientific production in this area, its competences appear to be well defined. Most of its output is concentrated in the field of Biotechnology & Applied Microbiology, where it is clearly the most active Portuguese institution with 130 publications (the institution with the second highest output in this area is the INETI with 51 publications, i.e. less than half of IST s output), supported by strong capabilities in the fields of Biochemistry & Biophysics, Microbiology and, to a lesser extent (but also the most active institution in this area) in Chemical Engineering. The output from ITQB reveals a different picture. Its main strength is in Biochemistry & Biophysics and Microbiology, areas in which it is the most active institution with 122 publications, and followed by areas such as Plant Sciences or Molecular Biology/Genetics. While the profile of IST reflects the fact this is primarily an engineering school, and therefore comparatively more active in the more applied fields, ITQB s profile is stronger in the more basic areas. The analysis of other institutional profiles provide similar characterisations, with ICBAS being particularly strong in the biomedical sciences, Escola Superior de Biotecnologia (ESB) very strong in Food Science/Nutrition and the Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa (FC-UL) particularly active in Plant Sciences. Table A4, presents the most active institutions in the different fields selected, reflecting the distribution of capabilities through the different institutions and, often, providing a window to characterise these institutions on a basic-applied spectrum of research. 14

16 Table 7 - Firms Participating in Scientific Publications INSTITUTION SCIENTIFIC FIELDS PUBLICATIONS BIAL BIOCHEMISTRY & BIOPHYSICS PHARMACOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY 2 CIPAN CO IND PROD ANTIBIOT SA BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY CHEMICAL ENGINEERING MICROBIOLOGY 5 COCKBURN SMITHES & CIA LDA AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTRY BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY FOOD SCIENCE/NUTRITION MICROBIOLOGY 3 CASO CTR ABATE SUINOS OESTE FOOD SCIENCE/NUTRITION 1 FARMATRA ACTIVID FARMACEUT PHARMACOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY 1 LDA FISIPE FIBRAS SINTET PORTUGAL SA PHARMACOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY 1 HOVIONE SA PHARMACOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY 1 RAR REFINARIAS ACUCAR REUNIDAS SA FOOD SCIENCE/NUTRITION 5 RHONE POULENC RORER PHARMACOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY 1 SIDUL SA FOOD SCIENCE/NUTRITION 1 SOPORCEL ANIMAL & PLANT SCIENCES PLANT SCIENCES 1 TECNIMEDE SA PHARMACOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY 1 UNICER UNIAO CERVEJEIRA SA FOOD SCIENCE/NUTRITION 1 15

17 5 - The Structure of Linkages Beyond the identification of the institutions most active in the research system, it is of particular importance to understand the existing linkages between the different actors. This has been at the heart of the national systems of innovation approach, with the work of Lundvall (1992) stressing the importance of the user-producer interactions in the innovation process and the analysis of Nelson (1993) providing further examples across countries of the importance of different institutional roles and institutional linkages. It is also the importance of such linkages that contributes to the systemic view of the innovation process. While here we are concerned with only a part of the innovation system, the interactions between the actors identified above are also of great importance. The growing number of interactions at various levels, between different institutions, institutional sectors, research areas or countries, have been characterised as a central feature of the changing research system, in what has led some to consider the existence of a new mode of knowledge production (Gibbons et al., 1994). Hicks et al. (1996) have provided the most robust evidence of such change in the British research system through the use of bibliometric methods, which provide a very useful tool to identify the existence of interactions at different levels. In this study the small Portuguese output creates certain limitations to this analysis but can still provide a useful description of the existence of linkages between the different institutions. By analysing the institutional addresses jointly listed it is possible to identify the existence of linkages between the different institutions. Although, as discussed above (and more extensively by Katz and Martin (1997)), different institutions can be listed for reasons other than research collaboration this is more frequently the reason behind it. On the other hand, institutions may collaborate without publishing their results together, and their collaboration will not be identified through the analysis of publications. Nevertheless, the existence of co-authorship provides strong evidence of the existence of collaborative activities between different researchers and institutions, and provides a comparable method for this purpose. The analysis of such linkages in this section will be divided in two main parts. The first part will analyses the collaborations and linkages within the national research system and this will be followed by a focus on the linkages external to the system National Collaborations Among the 2783 papers produced by Portuguese institutions selected for this study, 1866 only listed one national institution, 9 and therefore most papers did not entail national collaboration. The remaining 917 papers which were performed in national collaboration listed between two and nine different national institutions. However, among these a large variety of the inter-institutional linkages identified were the result of strong institutional affinities between the institutions, such as between different schools of the same university 9 They may have had more than one address listed, but this would only correspond to different internal departments. 16

18 or between a university and an affiliated non-profit organisation. Indeed, the highest number of linkages between any two institutions were such cases, as can be found in Table 8, which lists the number of collaborative papers between the main institutions. Table 8 distinguishes these collaborations, with strong institutional linkages, from others, where such institutional links are not so strong. While this is not to say that those cases of strong institutional linkages do not entail research collaboration, these data provide some indication of what might be more the result of double institutional affiliation rather than actual collaborative production of knowledge between distinct research groups. 17

19 Table 8 - National Collaborative Links Links between the following Institutions Number of collaborative papers UNIV NOVA LISBOA FAC CIENCIA TECNOL UNIV NOVA LISBOA INST TECNOL QUIM BIOL 67 UNIV PORTO UNIV PORTO INST CIENCIAS BIOMED ABEL SALAZAR 54 CTR NEUROCIENCIAS COIMBRA UNIV COIMBRA FAC FARM 33 UNIV NOVA LISBOA INST TECNOL QUIM BIOL UNIV TECN LISBOA INST SUP AGRON 32 CTR NEUROCIENCIAS COIMBRA UNIV COIMBRA FAC CIENCIA TECNOL 31 UNIV NOVA LISBOA INST TECNOL QUIM BIOL UNIV TECN LISBOA INST SUP TECNICO 29 INST BIOL EXPT TECNOL UNIV NOVA LISBOA FAC CIENCIA TECNOL 29 INST NACL ENGN TECNOL IND UNIV TECN LISBOA INST SUP TECNICO 27 UNIV COIMBRA UNIV COIMBRA FAC CIENCIA TECNOL 26 INST BIOL MOL CEL UNIV PORTO INST CIENCIAS BIOMED ABEL SALAZAR 23 UNIV LISBOA FAC CIENCIAS UNIV TECN LISBOA INST SUP TECNICO 23 INST NACL SAUDE UNIV PORTO INST CIENCIAS BIOMED ABEL SALAZAR 23 UNIV PORTO UNIV PORTO FAC CIENCIAS 21 UNIV PORTO FAC FARM UNIV PORTO INST CIENCIAS BIOMED ABEL SALAZAR 21 UNIV NOVA LISBOA FAC CIENCIA TECNOL UNIV NOVA LISBOA FAC CIENCIAS MED 20 UNIV COIMBRA FAC CIENCIA TECNOL UNIV COIMBRA FAC FARM 19 UNIV NOVA LISBOA UNIV NOVA LISBOA INST TECNOL QUIM BIOL 19 INST NACL INV AGRARIA UNIV NOVA LISBOA INST TECNOL QUIM BIOL 17 UNIV LISBOA FAC CIENCIAS UNIV NOVA LISBOA INST TECNOL QUIM BIOL 15 INST GULBENKIAN CIENCIA UNIV NOVA LISBOA INST TECNOL QUIM BIOL 15 CTR NEUROCIENCIAS COIMBRA UNIV COIMBRA 15 CTR NEUROCIENCIAS COIMBRA UNIV COIMBRA FAC MED 15 UNIV NOVA LISBOA FAC CIENCIA TECNOL UNIV TECN LISBOA INST SUP TECNICO 14 UNIV COIMBRA FAC CIENCIA TECNOL UNIV COIMBRA FAC MED 13 UNIV COIMBRA FAC CIENCIA TECNOL UNIV TECN LISBOA INST SUP TECNICO 11 UNIV CAT PORT ESCOLA SUP BIOTEC UNIV PORTO FAC ENGN 9 UNIV PORTO FAC MED UNIV PORTO FAC MED DENT 9 INST GULBENKIAN CIENCIA UNIV TECN LISBOA INST SUP AGRON 9 HOSP STA MARIA INST NACL SAUDE 9 INST NACL ENGN TECNOL IND UNIV LISBOA FAC CIENCIAS 8 INST GULBENKIAN CIENCIA UNIV LISBOA FAC MED 8 UNIV MINHO UNIV TECN LISBOA INST SUP TECNICO 8 HOSP STO ANTONIO UNIV PORTO INST CIENCIAS BIOMED ABEL SALAZAR 8 UNIV LISBOA FAC FARM UNIV NOVA LISBOA FAC CIENCIAS MED 8 INST GULBENKIAN CIENCIA UNIV PORTO INST CIENCIAS BIOMED ABEL SALAZAR 8 UNIV PORTO FAC ENGN UNIV PORTO INST CIENCIAS BIOMED ABEL SALAZAR 7 INST NACL INV AGRARIA UNIV TECN LISBOA INST SUP AGRON 7 INST MAR UNIV PORTO INST CIENCIAS BIOMED ABEL SALAZAR 7 UNIV ALGARVE UNIV TECN LISBOA INST SUP AGRON 7 INST BIOL MOL CEL UNIV PORTO FAC CIENCIAS 7 INST NACL ENGN BIOMED UNIV PORTO FAC ENGN 7 UNIV MINHO UNIV PORTO FAC ENGN 7 HOSP STO ANTONIO INST NACL SAUDE 7 18

20 The analysis of Table 9 also suggests that there is a strong regional affinity fostering collaborative links. The importance of the regional dimension is known to be important for the development of collaboration, and this is not less so in the case of scientific collaboration (Katz, 1994). The analysis of the regional distribution of the linkages in the cases analysed here shows that most linkages are intra-region rather than inter-regional. Of course, the discussion of the data in Table 8 regarding the possible influence of the institutional linkages in the collaboration data also suggests that such influence may extend for the regional data. Nevertheless, among the 2783 publications analysed only 159 entail collaboration between institutions in two different Portuguese regions, which is less than 10% of the cases, and, as will be shown in the next section, much below the number of international collaborative papers. Such lack of national interactions has also been suggested by others, namely the Portuguese Minister of Science and Technology (Barata et al., 1999; Pereira, 2000), and suggests that the regional dimension of the system may be actually stronger than the national one. Table 9 - Regional Collaborative Links Links between Institutions from the following Regions Number of collaborative papers LISBOA E VALE DO TEJO LISBOA E VALE DO TEJO 653 NORTE NORTE 352 CENTRO CENTRO 196 LISBOA E VALE DO TEJO NORTE 120 CENTRO LISBOA E VALE DO TEJO 60 CENTRO NORTE 59 ALGARVE LISBOA E VALE DO TEJO 18 ALENTEJO LISBOA E VALE DO TEJO 12 ALENTEJO CENTRO 3 ALENTEJO ALENTEJO 3 AÇORES LISBOA E VALE DO TEJO 2 CENTRO MADEIRA 2 LISBOA E VALE DO TEJO MADEIRA 2 MADEIRA MADEIRA 1 AÇORES NORTE 1 AÇORES MADEIRA 1 ALGARVE NORTE 1 ALENTEJO NORTE 1 Finally, the analysis of the sectoral linkages, presented in Table 10, shows the importance of the university sector in fostering the dynamics of the system, being the most important collaborator of the other sectors. It also reflects the intense linkages, in Portugal, between the private non-profit sector and the university sector, with the number of collaborations between these two sectors representing more than two-thirds of the total output of the private non-profit sector. Contrary to the government institutions, which have a relatively 19

21 lower level of collaboration, the hospital sector also has a strong interaction with all the other sectors in these fields, with the collaborations with the other sectors (with the exception of firms) all accounting for more than 10% of the output of the hospital sector. Table 10 - Collaborative Links between Sectors Links between Institutions from the following Sectors Number of collaborative papers UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY 718 PRIVATE NON-PROFIT ORGANISATION UNIVERSITY 318 STATE UNIVERSITY 172 HOSPITAL UNIVERSITY 88 HOSPITAL HOSPITAL 66 HOSPITAL STATE 47 HOSPITAL PRIVATE NON-PROFIT ORGANISATION 21 PRIVATE NON-PROFIT ORGANISATION STATE 15 STATE STATE 13 FIRM UNIVERSITY 11 PRIVATE NON-PROFIT ORGANISATION PRIVATE NON-PROFIT ORGANISATION 5 HOSPITAL OTHER 3 OTHER STATE 2 FIRM PRIVATE NON-PROFIT ORGANISATION 1 FIRM HOSPITAL 1 FIRM OTHER 1 OTHER OTHER 1 FIRM STATE 1 OTHER UNIVERSITY 1 OTHER PRIVATE NON-PROFIT ORGANISATION 1 Among the 25 publications with the participation of firms, 8 were produced individually by the firms, without the collaboration of any external institution, thus reflecting more explicitly 10 the existence of internal research activities which are signalled through publication. The remaining publications entailed international collaborations (in 5 publications) and national collaborations in 14 publications, mostly with universities. In the 11 cases where there was evidence of university-industry relationships the participation of universities was varied, and although the IST participated in 4 publications these were the result of the collaboration with one particular firm, and not the result of a greater success in involving industrial partners. These data suggest that research collaborations between university and industry in Portugal, even in an a science-based sector such as 10 Nevertheless, it is possible that the publication may result of research performed by an individual researcher prior to moving into the firm, although in these particular publications these seem the result of activities internal to the firms. 20

22 biotechnology, are still occasional events and do not reflect an existing network of relationships between the two sectors. Finally, Figure 2 displays graphically the distribution of the linkages between the main institutions of the system. 11 It makes clear, on one hand, the polarised organisation of the system, with the three poles corresponding to the three most active regions, and, on the other hand, the close linkages between universities and the private non-profit institutions to which they are associated or the close interactions between different schools within a university. Figure 2 Distribution of Institutional Linkages at the National Level International Collaborations While the national collaborations are particularly important to assess the level of interactions of the actors of a national research system, international collaborations are also important to characterise the existence of linkages developed by the different actors. In fact, international collaborations can be of particular importance for small research systems. 11 This was elaborated through multi-dimensional scaling, with the use of the software Bibexcel and Alscal. 21

23 Bibliometric studies have found that small countries tend to be much more collaborative at an international level than larger countries. This stems particularly from the lack of national resources or critical mass to address specific problems individually (Luukkonen et al, 1992). More widely, the international collaborative activities are also frequently developed as a way for researchers to reach external resources not available internally and to develop avenues for learning at an institutional level (Pereira, 2000). The data obtained here suggests that international collaboration is the most important mode of knowledge production for Portuguese researchers in these areas. Although the 1229 papers published in international collaboration do not reach 50% of the total output (but they represent more than that in the last two years of the period studied, 1997 and 1998) they are nevertheless more than the 997 papers produced by individual institutions or the 917 papers produced through national collaboration. Table 11 below summarises the distribution of papers according to the types of collaborative relationships registered. Table 11 - Distribution of Papers according to Collaborative Relationships 997 Non-collaborative Papers 2783 Papers 869 Papers with International Collaboration Only 1229 Papers with International Collaboration 360 Papers with Joint National and International Collaboration 917 Papers with National Collaboration 557 Papers with National Collaboration Only The distribution of international collaborative links presented in Table 12 shows that the Portuguese researchers have collaborated most with the United States, followed by England, Spain, France, Germany and the Netherlands. This structure of collaboration follows very closely the national patterns although, in all fields together, the United Kingdom appears as the first partner country and France comes third. In this case of 22

24 biotechnology, the US lead may be the result of the greater strength of American institutions in this area that thus become more sought after for collaboration. 12 Table 12 - Number of Portuguese Collaborations per Country (Main) US 349 UK 316 SPAIN 173 GERMANY 168 FRANCE 167 NETHERLANDS 117 BELGIUM 76 ITALY 73 SWEDEN 68 SWITZERLAND 39 DENMARK 38 BRAZIL 38 CANADA 27 JAPAN 20 GREECE 19 FINLAND 16 THAILAND 15 IRELAND 14 ISRAEL 14 RUSSIA 13 NORWAY 13 AUSTRIA 11 The different international linkages developed with the participation of Portuguese research institutions, and their main collaborators, are displayed in Figure 3. The participation of each country is proportionately represented. It is clear from this figure that the European countries create a cluster of collaboration, which is relatively independent from non- European countries. Among the cultural ties between Portugal and Brazil are reflected in the position of Brazil as the second non-european country with whom Portuguese researchers collaborate the most. 12 However, the data for collaborations with the US are highly influenced by one particularly prolific collaboration that places one individual American author among the researchers with the highest output in the publications with the participation of Portuguese institutions. 23

25 Figure 3 Mapping International Collaborations with Portugal Preliminary analysis of the foreign institutional addresses also appear to confirm that the international collaborations are an important source of learning for Portuguese research institutions, providing other resources not easily found at home. The identification of foreign firms collaborating with Portuguese institutions reveals that Portuguese research institutions in biotechnology have a larger number of interactions with foreign firms than with national ones, having collaborated with foreign firms in approximately 70 publications. Two points are important to stress in relation to these figures. Firstly, this shows that the European research policy approach, based on European-wide collaborations and on the creation of links between the different sets of actors, seems to be seeding its fruits and fostering linkages that are possibly overcoming existing barriers. Secondly, in relation to the Portuguese context, the data show that there are foreign firms which find capabilities in Portuguese research institutions worthy of their collaboration and which are, possibly, taking benefits from such collaborations. If the Portuguese research institutions have not been able to interact adequately with industry until a recent past, they seem to be learning to do so with the help of firms from research systems with greater experience of such linkages. The extent to which such experiences will contribute to the development of the inter-sectoral collaborations at a national level seems now to be also dependent on the capabilities of Portuguese firms to absorb the knowledge that Portuguese research institutions are producing and making available to their foreign counterparts. Nevertheless, the benefits from such experiences are also being introduced within the national innovation system through the knowledge acquired by the different researchers who participate in such 24