ABSTRACT

Since 1990 there has been remarkable growth and diversification of worldwide capacity and output in science, and a distinctive global science system has emerged, primarily grounded in research universities, fostered by Internet-mediated communication and publication in English, cross-border authorship and researcher mobility. While global science overlaps with and is affected by national science systems, it is constituted by pan-national knowledge flows and collegial collaboration and has partial autonomy. Four different interpretive frameworks (narratives) have evolved to explain global science: science as an expanding cross-border network; science as an arms race between competing nations; science as a global market of competing ‘World-Class Universities’; and science as a centre-periphery hierarchy in which emerging countries are permanently constrained by Euro-American dominance. The paper reviews each narrative in relation to the literature, especially in scientometrics, and empirical tendencies in global science, tracked in secondary data derived from bibliometric collections. While each narrative contains at least a grain of truth, each also conflicts with the others and each is radically insufficient. A better explanation of the drivers of global science combines (1) flat open networked relations with (2) the inequalities and closures shaped by global hegemony, arbitrarily modified by (3) national governments and specific resources.

摘要

自 1990 年以来，全球科学能力和产出显着增长和多样化，形成了一个独特的全球科学体系，该体系主要以研究型大学为基础，由以互联网为媒介的英语交流和出版、跨境作者身份和研究人员流动性促进. 全球科学虽然与国家科学体系重叠并受其影响，但它由泛国家知识流动和学院协作构成，具有部分自主权。四种不同的解释框架（叙述）已经演变为解释全球科学： 科学作为一个不断扩大的跨境网络；科学是竞争国家之间的军备竞赛；科学作为竞争“世界级大学”的全球市场；科学作为一个中心-边缘的等级制度，新兴国家永久地受到欧美主导地位的限制。本文回顾了与文献相关的每一种叙述，特别是在科学计量学方面，以及全球科学的经验趋势，这些叙述在来自文献计量集合的二手数据中进行了跟踪。虽然每个叙述都至少包含了一些真理，但每个叙述都与其他叙述发生冲突，而且每个叙述都根本不够。对全球科学驱动因素的更好解释将（1）开放的网络关系与（2）由全球霸权塑造的不平等和封闭，由（3）国家政府和特定资源任意修改。和全球科学的经验趋势，在来自文献计量收集的二手数据中进行跟踪。虽然每个叙述都至少包含了一些真理，但每个叙述都与其他叙述发生冲突，而且每个叙述都根本不够。对全球科学驱动因素的更好解释将（1）开放的网络关系与（2）由全球霸权塑造的不平等和封闭，由（3）国家政府和特定资源任意修改。和全球科学的经验趋势，在来自文献计量收集的二手数据中进行跟踪。虽然每个叙述都至少包含了一些真理，但每个叙述都与其他叙述发生冲突，而且每个叙述都根本不够。对全球科学驱动因素的更好解释将（1）开放的网络关系与（2）由全球霸权塑造的不平等和封闭，由（3）国家政府和特定资源任意修改。