Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Chinese and Russian universities are increasingly drawn into center-periphery repositioning, as they compete for symbolic, financial, and intellectual resources locally and globally. However, their strategies on national and institutional linkages differ with regards to the individual scientist’s powers in knowledge production. As global hierarchies of knowledge productivity benchmark prestigious publications, and national industries seek access to innovative products in global research and development labs, globally connected talents become essential for elevating local research performance. This article examines the undercurrents of center-periphery repositioning in Russia and China by comparing their research and development funding and performance data, as well as contrasting their global standing with Brazil, India, South Africa, and G7 members. A method of comparative multilayered patterning of mixed data sets is used to reflect on center-periphery dilemmas facing the Chinese and Russian scientists.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Anatoly Oleksiyenko (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: