Obtaining interactions among science, technology, and research policy for developing an innovation strategy: A case study of supercapacitors
- PMID: 36193537
- PMCID: PMC9526165
- DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10721
Obtaining interactions among science, technology, and research policy for developing an innovation strategy: A case study of supercapacitors
Abstract
Comprehensive observations of science, technology, and research policy transactions are important for developing an innovation strategy. We propose a new method that combines the academic landscape and matrix analysis to understand the relationships among activities of three aspects of the technological landscape: science, technology, and research policy. First, we divided academic research into 28 knowledge domains by clustering a citation network of scientific papers. Next, we developed a new matrix classifying them into three groups: "mature technology," "intermediate technology," and "emerging technology." The results showed that research domains in "emerging technology" showed a high rate of patent increase, indicating that they were commercializing rapidly. Finally, we identified the group that each country focused on, and this result reflected the countries' research policies. China and Singapore showed high rates, whereas Japan, France, and Germany had low values. This result reflects countries' research policies and implies that specialty research areas differed by country. As above, our research result implies that academia, industry, and government have paid attention to knowledge domains in "emerging technology" and these are important for creating innovation. A supercapacitor, also known as an electric double layer capacitor or ultracapacitor, was selected as an example in our method. This research could help academic researchers, industrial companies, and policymakers in developing innovation strategies.
Keywords: Bibliometrics; Innovation strategy; Network science; Technology maturity.
© 2022 The Authors.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Figures




References
-
- Bornmann L., Haunschild R., Mutz R. Growth rates of modern science: a latent piecewise growth curve approach to model publication numbers from established and new literature databases. Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun. 2021;8(224)
-
- Mudrak B. AJE Scholar; 2016. Scholarly Publishing in 2016: A Look Back at Global and National Trends in Research Publication.https://www.aje.com/arc/scholarly-publishing-trends-2016/
-
- Peters D.P., Ceci S.J. Peer-review practices of psychological journals: the fate of published articles, submitted again. Behav. Brain Sci. 1982;5(2):187–195.
-
- Boyack K.W., Klavans R., Börner K. Mapping the backbone of science. Scientometrics. 2005;64(3):351–374.
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials