Colaboración internacional y redes científicas en los países andinos: Análisis de coautorías en Scopus (2000–2024)
International collaboration and scientific networks in Andean countries: Analysis of co-authorships in Scopus (2000–2024)Barra lateral del artículo
Contenido principal del artículo
La colaboración científica internacional se ha consolidado como un factor determinante para el desarrollo de la investigación en América Latina, particularmente en los países andinos. Este estudio analiza las tendencias de colaboración científica y las redes de coautoría en Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador y Perú durante el período 2000-2024, utilizando datos bibliométricos de la base Scopus. Se empleó un enfoque cuantitativo con análisis de redes sociales y técnicas bibliométricas para examinar la evolución de la producción científica, los patrones de colaboración internacional y la estructura de las redes de coautoría. Los resultados revelan un crecimiento exponencial en la producción científica regional, con Colombia y Ecuador liderando en términos de colaboraciones internacionales. Se identificó que el 40% de las colaboraciones extrarregionales corresponden a países europeos, principalmente España, mientras que el 38% involucra a América del Norte, especialmente Estados Unidos. Las áreas temáticas predominantes incluyen medicina, agricultura, ingeniería y ciencias ambientales. El análisis de redes muestra que Colombia presenta la mayor centralidad de grado (0.909), seguido por Perú (0.636) y Ecuador (0.545), mientras que Bolivia enfrenta desafíos significativos en su integración a las redes científicas internacionales. Estos hallazgos contribuyen a la comprensión de los patrones de colaboración científica regional y proporcionan evidencia empírica para el diseño de políticas de ciencia y tecnología orientadas al fortalecimiento de la cooperación internacional en la región andina.
International scientific collaboration has become a determining factor for research development in Latin America, particularly in Andean countries. This study analyzes scientific collaboration trends and co-authorship networks in Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru during the 2000-2024 period, using bibliometric data from the Scopus database. A quantitative approach was employed with social network analysis and bibliometric techniques to examine the evolution of scientific production, international collaboration patterns, and co-authorship network structure. Results reveal exponential growth in regional scientific production, with Colombia and Ecuador leading in terms of international collaborations. It was identified that 40% of extra-regional collaborations correspond to European countries, mainly Spain, while 38% involve North America, especially the United States. Predominant thematic areas include medicine, agriculture, engineering, and environmental sciences. Network analysis shows that Colombia presents the highest degree centrality (0.909), followed by Peru (0.636) and Ecuador (0.545), while Bolivia faces significant challenges in its integration into international scientific networks. These findings contribute to understanding regional scientific collaboration patterns and provide empirical evidence for designing science and technology policies aimed at strengthening international cooperation in the Andean region.
Descargas
Detalles del artículo
Álvarez-Muñoz, P., & Pérez-Montoro, M. (2015). Análisis de la producción y de la visibilidad científica de Ecuador en el contexto andino (2000-2013). Profesional de la Información, 24(5), 577-586. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2015.sep.07
Archambault, É., Campbell, D., Gingras, Y., & Larivière, V. (2009). Comparing bibliometric statistics obtained from the Web of Science and Scopus. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(7), 1320-1326. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21062
Burnham, J. F. (2006). Scopus database: A review. Biomedical Digital Libraries, 3(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-5581-3-1
Castells, M. (2000). The rise of the network society. Blackwell Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444319514.ch1
Castells, M. (2010). The rise of the network society: The information age: Economy, society, and culture. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444319514
Collazo-Reyes, F. (2014). Growth of the number of indexed journals of Latin America and the Caribbean: The effect on the impact of the region. Scientometrics, 98(1), 197-209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1036-2
Falagas, M. E., Pitsouni, E. I., Malietzis, G. A., & Pappas, G. (2008). Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: Strengths and weaknesses. The FASEB Journal, 22(2), 338-342. https://doi.org/10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF
Frame, J. D., & Carpenter, M. P. (1979). International research collaboration. Social Studies of Science, 9(4), 481-497. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631277900900405
Freeman, C. (1995). The 'National System of Innovation' in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19(1), 5-24. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a035309
Freeman, L. C. (1978). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215-239. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7
Gaillard, J. (1994). Scientists in the Third World. University Press of Kentucky. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt130jmvs
Gaillard, J. (1999). La coopération scientifique et technique avec les pays du Sud. Karthala. https://doi.org/10.3917/kart.gaill.1999.01
Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2004). Analysing scientific networks through co-authorship. En H. F. Moed, W. Glänzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 257-276). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2755-9_12
Greenacre, M. (2007). Correspondence analysis in practice. Chapman and Hall/CRC. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420011234
Gutiérrez-Sánchez, G., Álvarez-Muñoz, P., Galindo-Villardón, P., & Vicente-Galindo, P. (2025). Scientific Collaboration and Sustainable Development: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Andean Region, Panama, and Spain. Publications, 13(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications13010010
Hagberg, A., Swart, P., & Chult, D. S. (2008). Exploring network structure, dynamics, and function using NetworkX. Proceedings of the 7th Python in Science Conference, 11-15. https://doi.org/10.25080/TCWV9851
Hoekman, J., Frenken, K., & Tijssen, R. J. (2010). Research collaboration at a distance: Changing spatial patterns of scientific collaboration within Europe. Research Policy, 39(5), 662-673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.012
Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(96)00917-1
Lemarchand, G. A. (2012). The long-term dynamics of co-authorship scientific networks: Iberoamerican countries (1973–2010). Research Policy, 41(2), 291-305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.10.009
Leydesdorff, L., & Zhou, P. (2005). Are the contributions of China and Korea upsetting the world system of science? Scientometrics, 63(3), 617-630. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0231-0
López-López, W., Lucio-Arias, D., Díaz-Nova, A. M., García, A., & Acevedo-Triana, C. A. (2023). International collaboration in Latin American psychology through the analysis of co-authorship networks. Trends in Psychology, 31(2), 245-267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43076-023-00266-y
Lundvall, B. Å. (1992). National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. Pinter Publishers. https://doi.org/10.7135/UPO9781843318903
Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213-228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5
Newman, M. E. J. (2001). The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(2), 404-409. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.98.2.404
Onyancha, O. B., & Maluleka, J. R. (2011). Knowledge production through collaborative research in sub-Saharan Africa: How much do countries contribute to each other's knowledge output and citation impact? Scientometrics, 87(2), 315-336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0330-5
Ordóñez-Matamoros, G., Cozzens, S. E., & García, M. (2010). International co-authorship and research team performance in Colombia. Review of Policy Research, 27(4), 415-431. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.2010.00449.x
Royal Society. (2011). Knowledge, networks and nations: Global scientific collaboration in the 21st century. The Royal Society. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.104539
Russell, J. M., Ainsworth, S., del Río, J. A., Narváez-Berthelemot, N., & Cortés, H. D. (2007). Colaboración científica entre países de la región latinoamericana. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 30(2), 180-198. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2007.v30.i2.378
Santa, S., & Herrero Solana, V. (2010). Producción científica de América Latina y el Caribe: una aproximación a través de los datos de Scopus (1996-2007). Revista Interamericana de Bibliotecología, 33(2), 379-400. https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.rib.8952
Sebastián, J. (2007). Conocimiento, cooperación y desarrollo. Centro de Información y Documentación Científica. https://doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2007.i724.104
UNESCO. (2021). UNESCO Science Report: The race against time for smarter development. UNESCO Publishing. https://doi.org/10.54677/GIIC2456
Velho, L. (2004). Research capacity building for development: From old to new assumptions. Science, Technology and Society, 9(2), 171-207. https://doi.org/10.1177/097172180400900201
Wagner, C. S., Brahmakulam, I., Jackson, B., Wong, A., & Yoda, T. (2001). Science and technology collaboration: Building capacity in developing countries? RAND Corporation. https://doi.org/10.7249/MR1357.0
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815478
Zhou, P., & Glänzel, W. (2010). In-depth analysis on China's international cooperation in science. Scientometrics, 82(3), 597-612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0174-z