Digital Science in Latin America: scope and benefits

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2021.799008

Keywords:

Digital science, diffusion, impact, collaboration, bibliometrics, Latin America

Abstract


The use of digital tools is transforming scientific production processes and their impacts. In this article we evaluate to what extent digitalization in science has reached Latin American scientific activity and what have been its effects. For this purpose, we use bibliometric data from three medium-sized Latin American countries that have an important scientific trajectory: Argentina, Chile, and Colombia, focusing the analysis on four disciplines: biological and agricultural sciences, earth and planetary sciences, environmental sciences, and decisional sciences. We find that digitalization has been growing for the past 25 years, but the gap with leading countries has only narrowed slightly. Likewise, the incidence of digitalization varies by discipline. In terms of benefits associated with digitalization, our results show that articles that use digital science practices or tools have greater academic impact (have more citations), more collaboration (more co-authors), and more internationalization (authors from a larger number of countries). In other words, in these disciplines and in these countries, digitalization has managed to increase the visibility of research, potentially its quality and, thus, the social returns of the resources invested. Networks have also been expanded, thus promoting a better use of collective intelligence and the integration of local research problems into a global agenda, potentially increasing the resources devoted to research in these countries.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alonso-Gamboa, José Octavio y Russell, Jane M. (2012). Latin American scholarly journal databases: a look back to the way forward. Aslib Proceedings, 64 (1): 32-45. https://doi.org/10.1108/00012531211196693

Andronico, Giuseppe; Ardizzone, Valeria; Barbera, Roberto; Becker, Bruce; Bruno, Riccardo; Calanducci, Antonio; Carvalho, Diego; Ciuffo, Leandro; Fargetta, Marco; Giorgio, Emidio; La Rocca, Giuseppe; Masoni, Alberto; Paganoni, Marco; Ruggieri, Federico y Scardaci, Diego (2011). e-Infrastructures for e-Science: A Global View. Journal of Grid Computing, 9 (2): 155-184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10723-011-9187-y

Arcila, Carlos; Piñuel, José-Luis y Calderín, Mabel (2013). La e-investigación de la Comunicación: actitudes, herramientas y prácticas en investigadores iberoamericanos. Comunicar: Revista Científica de Comunicación y Educación, 20 (40): 111-118. https://doi.org/10.3916/C40-2013-03-01

Arza, Valeria; Fressoli, Mariano; Actis, Guillermina y del Castillo, Martín (2019). La Ciencia Digital en América Latina. Manuscrito. Washington D.C.: Banco Interamericano Desarrollo (BID).

Atkins, Daniel E. et al., (2003). Revolutionizing science and engineering through cyberinfrastructure. Report of the National Science Foundation blue-ribbon advisory panel on cyberinfrastructure. Virginia: National Science Foundation. Disponible en: https://www.nsf.gov/cise/sci/reports/atkins.pdf [Consultado en junio de 2019].

Balassa, Bela (1965). Trade Liberalisation and "Revealed" Comparative Advantage. The Manchester School, 33 (2): 99-123. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9957.1965.tb00050.x

Chavarro Bohórquez, Diego Andrés (2016). Universalism and Particularism: Explaining the Emergence and Growth of Regional Journal Indexing Systems. SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research Unit. Brighton: University of Sussex.

Comisión Europea (2013). Digital science in Horizon 2020: Concept paper of the Digital Science vision, and its integration in the Horizon 2020 programme: Disponible en: https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/digital-science-horizon-2020 [Consultado en junio de 2019].

Confraria, Hugo y Vargas, Fernando (2017). Scientific systems in Latin America: performance, networks, and collaborations with industry. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 44: 874-915. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9631-7

Dougherty, Deborah y Dunne, Danielle D. (2012). Digital science and knowledge boundaries in complex innovation. Organization Science, 23 (5): 1467-1484. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1110.0700

Dutton, William H. y Meyer, Erick T. (2008). E-social science as an experience technology: distance from, and attitudes toward, e-research. 4th International Conference on e-Social Science, Manchester (UK).

Emiliozzi, Sergio; Lemarchand, Guillermo A. y Gordon, Ariel (2009). Inventario de instrumentos y modelos de políticas de ciencia, tecnología e Innovación en América Latina y el Caribe. Working Paper 9. Washington: Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo (BID) y REDES.

Galindo-Rueda, Fernando (2020). How are science, technology and innovation going digital? The statistical evidence. En: OECD (eds.). The Digitalisation of Science, Technology and Innovation: Key Developments and Policies. Paris: OECD Publishing.

Grudin, Jonathan (1994). Computer-supported cooperative work: History and focus. Computer, 27 (5): 19-26. https://doi.org/10.1109/2.291294

Hey, Tony; Tansley, Stewart y Tolle, Kristin M (eds.) (2009). The Fourth Paradigm: Data-Intensive Scientific Discovery. Redmond: Microsoft Research.

Hey, Tony y Trefethen, Anne (2002). The UK e-science core programme and the grid. Future Generation Computer Systems, 18 (8): 1017-1031. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-739X(02)00082-1

Hey, Tony y Trefethen, Anne (2008). E-Science, Cyberinfrastructure, and Scholarly Communication. En: Gary M Olson, Ann Zimmerman y Nathan Bos (eds.). Scientific Collaboration on the Internet: The MIT Press, pp. 15 - 31. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262151207.003.0002

Holmberg, Kim y Thelwall, Mike (2014). Disciplinary differences in Twitter scholarly communication. Scientometrics, 101: 1027-1042. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1229-3

Kennedy, Helen; Moss, Giles; Birchall, Christopher y Moshonas, Stylianos (2015). Balancing the potential and problems of digital methods through action research: Methodological reflections. Information, Communication & Society, 18 (2): 172-186. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.946434

Morán-Mariños, Cristian; Pacheco-Mendoza, Josmel; Metcalf, Tatiana; De la Cruz Ramirez, Walter y Alva-Diazd, Carlos (2020). Collaborative scientific production of epilepsy in Latin America from 1989 to 2018: A bibliometric analysis. Heliyon, 6 (5): e05493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05493 PMid:33241154 PMCid:PMC7674303

Nentwich, Michael (2003). Cyberscience: Research in the Age of the Internet. Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences Press.

Olson, Gary M. y Olson, Judith S. (2012). Collaboration technologies. En: Julie A Jacko (eds.). Human Computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies, and Emerging Applications. Boca Ratón: CRC press, pp. 549-564. https://doi.org/10.1201/b11963-ch-24 PMid:22830539 PMCid:PMC3490769

Olson, Gary M.; Zimmerman, Ann y Bos, Nathan (eds.) (2008). Scientific collaboration on the Internet. Cambridge: The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262151207.001.0001

Pacheco, Roberto C.S.; Nascimento, Everton R. y Weber, Rosina O. (2018). Digital science: cyberinfrastructure, e-Science and citizen science. En: Klaus North, Ronald Maier y Oliver Haas (eds.). Knowledge Management in Digital Change. Cham: Springer, pp. 377-388. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73546-7_24

Packer, Abel Laerte y Meneghini, Rogerio (2007). Learning to communicate science in developing countries. Interciencia, 32 (9): 643-647.

Persson, Olle; Glänzel, Wolfgang y Danell, Rickard (2004). Inflationary bibliometric values: The role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies. Scientometrics, 60 (3): 421-432. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000034384.35498.7d

Rogers, Richard (2013). Digital methods. Cambridge, MA: MIT press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/8718.001.0001

Rogers, Richard (2015). Digital methods for web research. En: R A Scott y S M Kosslyn (eds.). Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. London: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118900772.etrds0076

Ruiz-Patiño, Alejandro et al., (2020). Scientific publications in cancer: in Latin America, strong scientific networks increase productivity (the TENJIN study). Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 126: 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.05.033 PMid:32540384

Sagasti, Francisco y Araoz, Alberto (1976). Science and technology policy implementation in less - developed countries: methodological guidelines for the STPI project. Ottawa, Canada: IDRC. Sargent, Mike (2006). An Australian e-research strategy and implementation framework. Final Report of the e-Research Coordinating Committee. Canberra, Australia: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. Disponible en: https://apo.org.au/node/15777 [Consultado en junio de 2019].

Schotten, Michiel; el Aisati, M'hamed; Meester, Wim J.N.; Steiginga, Susanne y Ross, Cameron A. (2017). A Brief History of Scopus: The World's Largest Abstract and Citation Database of Scientific Literature. En: Francisco J. Cantu-Ortiz (eds.). Rearch Analytics: Boosting University Productivity and Competitiveness through Scientometrics. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315155890-3

Tsatsou, Panayiota (2016). Digital technologies in the research process: Lessons from the digital research community in the UK. Computers in Human Behavior, 61 (August): 597-608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.053

Wulf, William A. (1993). The collaboratory opportunity. Science, 261 (5123): 854-855. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.8346438 PMid:8346438

Published

2021-04-13

How to Cite

del Castillo, M. ., & Arza, V. . (2021). Digital Science in Latin America: scope and benefits. Arbor, 197(799), a595. https://doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2021.799008

Issue

Section

Varia