Paper detail

Convergence and Inequality in Research Globalization

The catch-up effect and the Matthew effect offer opposing characterizations of globalization: the former predicts an eventual convergence as the poor can grow faster than the rich due to free exchanges of complementary resources, while the latter, a deepening inequality between the rich and the poor. To understand these effects on the globalization of research, we conduct an in-depth study based on scholarly and patent publications covering STEM research from 218 countries/regions over the past four decades, covering more than 55 million scholarly articles and 1.7 billion citations. Unique to this investigation is the simultaneous examination of both the research output and its impact in the same data set, using a novel machine learning based measure, called saliency, to mitigate the intrinsic biases in quantifying the research impact. The results show that the two effects are in fact co-occurring: there are clear indications of convergence among the high income and upper middle income countries across the STEM fields, but a widening gap is developing that segregates the lower middle and low income regions from the higher income regions. Furthermore, the rate of convergence varies notably among the STEM sub-fields, with the highly strategic area of Artificial Intelligence (AI) sandwiched between fields such as Medicine and Materials Science that occupy the opposite ends of the spectrum. The data support the argument that a leading explanation of the Matthew effect, namely, the preferential attachment theory, can actually foster the catch-up effect when organizations from lower income countries forge substantial research collaborations with those already dominant. The data resoundingly show such collaborations benefit all parties involved, and a case of role reversal can be seen in the Materials Science field where the most advanced signs of convergence are observed.

preprint2021arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.