驾驭国际研究合作中的摩擦和驱动因素——以金砖国家为例

IF 12.9 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL ISSUES
Technology in Society Pub Date : 2026-09-01 Epub Date: 2026-01-21 DOI:10.1016/j.techsoc.2026.103241
Angelica Pigola , Bruno Fischer , Gustavo Hermínio Salati Marcondes de Moraes , Dirk Meissner , Zhou Yuan , Zhongzhen Miao
{"title":"驾驭国际研究合作中的摩擦和驱动因素——以金砖国家为例","authors":"Angelica Pigola ,&nbsp;Bruno Fischer ,&nbsp;Gustavo Hermínio Salati Marcondes de Moraes ,&nbsp;Dirk Meissner ,&nbsp;Zhou Yuan ,&nbsp;Zhongzhen Miao","doi":"10.1016/j.techsoc.2026.103241","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>International research collaboration plays an increasingly important role in shaping global scientific agendas. Yet limited empirical attention has been given to how these dynamics unfold in emerging economies. This paper investigates the effects of collaboration frictions, execution challenges, strategic incentives, and trust asymmetries on scientific outcomes in international research collaborations among BRICS academics. Drawing on transaction cost economics, organizational behavior, and process-based trust theory, we develop and test a structural model using survey data from 396 respondents engaged in international collaborative research. Scientific outcomes are defined as tangible and strategic outputs such as technological innovations, R&amp;D infrastructure, and institutional agreements. Contrary to expectations, execution challenges are positively associated with scientific outcomes, suggesting that operational complexity may reflect innovation ambition rather than dysfunction. Strategic incentives emerge as the strongest positive predictor of scientific outcomes. Trust asymmetries, though not directly associated with outcomes, significantly moderate collaboration mechanisms—attenuating the positive influence of strategic incentives and weakening the positive association between execution challenges and scientific outcomes under relational imbalance, while indicating that the relationship between collaboration frictions and scientific outcomes varies across trust conditions. These results challenge conventional assumptions that prioritize friction-free coordination, instead highlighting how relational imbalances can distort collaboration dynamics. The study contributes to a more context-sensitive understanding of research governance in the Global South and offers practical insights into designing resilient, equitable partnerships in complex environments.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47979,"journal":{"name":"Technology in Society","volume":"86 ","pages":"Article 103241"},"PeriodicalIF":12.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Navigating frictions and drivers in international research collaboration – the case of BRICS nations\",\"authors\":\"Angelica Pigola ,&nbsp;Bruno Fischer ,&nbsp;Gustavo Hermínio Salati Marcondes de Moraes ,&nbsp;Dirk Meissner ,&nbsp;Zhou Yuan ,&nbsp;Zhongzhen Miao\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.techsoc.2026.103241\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>International research collaboration plays an increasingly important role in shaping global scientific agendas. Yet limited empirical attention has been given to how these dynamics unfold in emerging economies. This paper investigates the effects of collaboration frictions, execution challenges, strategic incentives, and trust asymmetries on scientific outcomes in international research collaborations among BRICS academics. Drawing on transaction cost economics, organizational behavior, and process-based trust theory, we develop and test a structural model using survey data from 396 respondents engaged in international collaborative research. Scientific outcomes are defined as tangible and strategic outputs such as technological innovations, R&amp;D infrastructure, and institutional agreements. Contrary to expectations, execution challenges are positively associated with scientific outcomes, suggesting that operational complexity may reflect innovation ambition rather than dysfunction. Strategic incentives emerge as the strongest positive predictor of scientific outcomes. Trust asymmetries, though not directly associated with outcomes, significantly moderate collaboration mechanisms—attenuating the positive influence of strategic incentives and weakening the positive association between execution challenges and scientific outcomes under relational imbalance, while indicating that the relationship between collaboration frictions and scientific outcomes varies across trust conditions. These results challenge conventional assumptions that prioritize friction-free coordination, instead highlighting how relational imbalances can distort collaboration dynamics. The study contributes to a more context-sensitive understanding of research governance in the Global South and offers practical insights into designing resilient, equitable partnerships in complex environments.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47979,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Technology in Society\",\"volume\":\"86 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103241\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":12.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Technology in Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X26000308\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2026/1/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL ISSUES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technology in Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X26000308","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL ISSUES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

国际研究合作在形成全球科学议程方面发挥着越来越重要的作用。然而,对于这些动态如何在新兴经济体中展开,实证关注有限。本文研究了合作摩擦、执行挑战、战略激励和信任不对称对金砖国家学者国际科研合作成果的影响。利用交易成本经济学、组织行为学和基于过程的信任理论,我们利用参与国际合作研究的396名受访者的调查数据,开发并检验了一个结构模型。科学成果被定义为有形的和战略性的产出,如技术创新、研发基础设施和制度协议。与预期相反,执行挑战与科学成果呈正相关,这表明操作复杂性可能反映的是创新雄心,而不是功能障碍。战略激励是科学成果最有力的积极预测因素。信任不对称虽然与成果没有直接关系,但显著调节了合作机制——在关系不平衡的情况下,削弱了战略激励的积极影响,减弱了执行挑战与科学成果之间的正相关,同时表明合作摩擦与科学成果之间的关系在不同的信任条件下有所不同。这些结果挑战了优先考虑无摩擦协调的传统假设,而不是强调关系不平衡如何扭曲协作动态。该研究有助于对全球发展中国家的研究治理有更具体的理解,并为在复杂环境中设计有弹性、公平的伙伴关系提供了实际见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Navigating frictions and drivers in international research collaboration – the case of BRICS nations
International research collaboration plays an increasingly important role in shaping global scientific agendas. Yet limited empirical attention has been given to how these dynamics unfold in emerging economies. This paper investigates the effects of collaboration frictions, execution challenges, strategic incentives, and trust asymmetries on scientific outcomes in international research collaborations among BRICS academics. Drawing on transaction cost economics, organizational behavior, and process-based trust theory, we develop and test a structural model using survey data from 396 respondents engaged in international collaborative research. Scientific outcomes are defined as tangible and strategic outputs such as technological innovations, R&D infrastructure, and institutional agreements. Contrary to expectations, execution challenges are positively associated with scientific outcomes, suggesting that operational complexity may reflect innovation ambition rather than dysfunction. Strategic incentives emerge as the strongest positive predictor of scientific outcomes. Trust asymmetries, though not directly associated with outcomes, significantly moderate collaboration mechanisms—attenuating the positive influence of strategic incentives and weakening the positive association between execution challenges and scientific outcomes under relational imbalance, while indicating that the relationship between collaboration frictions and scientific outcomes varies across trust conditions. These results challenge conventional assumptions that prioritize friction-free coordination, instead highlighting how relational imbalances can distort collaboration dynamics. The study contributes to a more context-sensitive understanding of research governance in the Global South and offers practical insights into designing resilient, equitable partnerships in complex environments.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
17.90
自引率
14.10%
发文量
316
审稿时长
60 days
期刊介绍: Technology in Society is a global journal dedicated to fostering discourse at the crossroads of technological change and the social, economic, business, and philosophical transformation of our world. The journal aims to provide scholarly contributions that empower decision-makers to thoughtfully and intentionally navigate the decisions shaping this dynamic landscape. A common thread across these fields is the role of technology in society, influencing economic, political, and cultural dynamics. Scholarly work in Technology in Society delves into the social forces shaping technological decisions and the societal choices regarding technology use. This encompasses scholarly and theoretical approaches (history and philosophy of science and technology, technology forecasting, economic growth, and policy, ethics), applied approaches (business innovation, technology management, legal and engineering), and developmental perspectives (technology transfer, technology assessment, and economic development). Detailed information about the journal's aims and scope on specific topics can be found in Technology in Society Briefings, accessible via our Special Issues and Article Collections.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书