Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Nanjing Forestry University (China), a Silver-band university.  See a world-leading example (Oxford) →

The enhanced fact file

Your entire collaboration network, read like a strategist would.

Not a scorecard. A dossier that tells a university leader exactly where the strengths, the risks and the fundable opportunities are, every figure sourced from the open research record.

โ—‹ Silver standing · Research Collaboration Index
๐ŸŒ Asia-Pacific · 391 universities benchmarked
27,823
co-authored works, 5 years
877
partner universities
67
partner countries
558
sustained deep ties
3.06
collaboration impact (FWCI)
88%
of partners non-redundant

The one-screen strategic read

Where you stand, at a glance.

The first thing a leader needs is not more data, it is a verdict. Three strengths to lead with, three challenges to manage, three opportunities to act on, each drawn straight from the network below.

Strengths
  • Chemical Engineering is the standout field. Ranked #66 in the world for connected research, with Energy #69, Chemistry #138 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on impact and influence. Nanjing Forestry University sits in the 76th percentile for impact and the 67th for influence: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 124 of 141 partners (88%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Diversity is the softest pillar. At the 22nd percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Health & Medicine is the at-risk domain. World #1,009 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (China and United States) carry about 88% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win University of Oxford. World top-4. University of Oxford is top-28 globally in Life Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Win UCL. World top-5. University College London is top-22 globally in Life Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Nanjing University of Science and Technology returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 3.8). Formalise it into a funded consortium to compound impact, not just volume.

Scholarly weight

The impact behind the network

Collaboration only counts if the work lands. This is the citation weight of everything produced with partners, the substance under the network.

310
h-index of the joint research base
2.5M
citations to co-authored work
3.06
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
27,823
co-authored works, 2021-2025
42
collaboration efficiency, impact per tie

Visualisation 1

Your collaboration profile

Seven pillars, each shown as a global percentile. The dashed ring marks the top-decile benchmark; anything inside it is a genuine, defensible strength.

Influence67th pctReach39th pctDiversity22nd pctSustained50th pctImpact76th pctInternational32nd pctBrokerage27th pct

Nanjing Forestry University is strongest on impact (76th percentile), influence (67th) and sustained (50th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 124 of 141 partners (88%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Diversity (22nd percentile), the softest of the six and the clearest place to build.

Source: the open global research record, co-authored works 2021–2025, fractional counting

The anatomy of your standing

Exactly what your position is built from

Six pillars, each weighted, combine into one standing index. Nothing is hidden: this is the entire calculation, in a single bar.

InflImpaSustReacDiveEach block is a pillarโ€™s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the Silver band worldwide.
Influence22% weight67th pct+14.7
Impact18% weight76th pct+13.7
Sustained18% weight50th pct+9.0
Reach16% weight39th pct+6.2
Diversity16% weight22nd pct+3.5
International10% weight32nd pct+3.2

Brokerage is reported alongside as a diagnostic, not folded into the score, so a university cannot inflate its standing simply by publishing widely. It measures whether you connect communities that would otherwise stay apart.

Visualisation 2

Where you lead the world, by field

Each subject placed on a log scale of world rank (1 to 1,195). The further left, the more globally central. Gold marks a top-50 standout, blue a solid position.

#1#10#100#1000Chemical Engineering66Energy69Chemistry138Materials Science143Agricultural & Biologiโ€ฆ160Pharmacology, Toxicoloโ€ฆ180
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Nanjing Forestry University's strongest connected fields are Chemical Engineering #66, Energy #69, Chemistry #138. The portfolio leans on life sciences; Health & Medicine, at world #1,009 in the deep-dive below, is the clear at-risk area, exactly the gap this chart surfaces.

Source: subject-level indices, 26 fields, minimum 50-university gate

Discipline deep-dive

How you collaborate, faculty by faculty

The same network split into its four broad domains, each with its world rank for connected research and the five partners it leans on most. This is the view a dean or pro-vice-chancellor acts on.

Health & Medicine
World #1009 for connected research
16/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Central South Universโ€ฆ222
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Peking University205
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Sichuan University200
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Fudan University193
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Sun Yat-sen University191
Life Sciences
World #125 for connected research
90/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing Agricultural โ€ฆ359
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Peking University349
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Zhejiang University348
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Shanghai Jiao Tong Unโ€ฆ347
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Sichuan University339
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #176 for connected research
85/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Southeast University1,120
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing University529
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing Tech Universiโ€ฆ415
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing University ofโ€ฆ406
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing University ofโ€ฆ387
Social Sciences
World #968 for connected research
19/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Southeast University91
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Hohai University45
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing University ofโ€ฆ35
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing Normal Univerโ€ฆ32
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing University ofโ€ฆ32
Source: domain-level co-authorship, partner institutions 2021–2025

Visualisation 3

Which partnerships actually pay off

Every anchor partner plotted by collaboration volume against the citation impact of the joint work. The prize quadrant is top-right: high volume and high impact. The bottom-right is the trap: a lot of output, little impact.

Joint works (collaboration volume) →Impact (FWCI) →high yieldSoutheast UniversiNanjing UniversityPeking UniversityNanjing University
High yieldStandardLow yield

Nanjing University of Science and Technology returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 3.8): a consortium waiting to happen. Shanghai Jiao Tong University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.7: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Southeast University1,261 3.0Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing University754 3.2Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Zhejiang University558 2.7Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing Agricultural University497 3.3Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing Tech University494 2.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Shanghai Jiao Tong University474 1.7Low yield
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing Normal University460 3.1Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Chinese Academy of Sciences456 2.5Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Peking University454 1.3Low yield
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing University of Science and Technology449 3.8Standard
Source: institution-to-institution co-authorship ledger + field-weighted citation impact

Visualisation 4

Your global reach, and where it thins out

Top partner countries

๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 24,327
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 2,556
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 885
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 735
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 652
๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ Hong Kong SAR 533
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 360
๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท South Korea 349

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Southeast University 1,261
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing University 754
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Zhejiang University 558
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing Agricultural University 497
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing Tech University 494
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Shanghai Jiao Tong University 474
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing Normal University 460
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Chinese Academy of Sciences 456

The network spans 67 countries and 877 universities, but the top two carry about 88% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Europe white-space (0 of the region's 100 leading collaborators) is the clearest gap to close.

In Energy, the single strongest partnership is ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Qingdao University of Science and Technology, with 68 joint works: the natural anchor for a flagship consortium.
Source: co-authorship by partner-institution country, 2021–2025

Visualisation 6

The partners to win next

Not a generic wish-list. Globally central universities you are not yet deeply partnered with, each with the reason it matters and the specific programme that would fund the collaboration.

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Oxford United Kingdom · world top-4

University of Oxford is top-28 globally in Life Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Energy.

Funding route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University College London United Kingdom · world top-5

University College London is top-22 globally in Life Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Energy.

Funding route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Cambridge United Kingdom · world top-6

University of Cambridge is top-47 globally in Life Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Energy.

Funding route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Monash University Australia · world top-7

Monash University is top-121 globally in Life Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Energy.

Funding route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

Source: network white-space analysis + funder-programme mapping

The research base

The ecosystem behind the collaboration

A partnership does not plug into a name, it plugs into a base: the affiliated hospitals, presses, institutes and archives, and the research themes where the joint work concentrates.

EngineeringMaterials ScienceAgricultural and Biological Sciences

Context

Your competitive set, and your signature research

Benchmarked against

The named peer group your fact file compares you to, pillar by pillar and subject by subject.

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Birkbeck, University of LondonUnited Kingdom
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ South China Normal UniversityChina
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Marche Polytechnic UniversityItaly
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing Normal UniversityChina
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Mississippi State UniversityUnited States

Signature joint research

The most-cited work produced with partners, each verifiable.

Lignin and Wood ChemistryAdvanced Cellulose Research StudiesBiofuel production and bioconversionWood Treatment and PropertiesNatural Fiber Reinforced CompositesBamboo properties and applications

From insight to action

A 90-day plan, written from the data.

The dossier ends where a strategy meeting begins: three moves, sequenced, each pointing back to a specific finding above.

0-30 days
Name the target

Adopt University of Oxford and a Europe hub as formal partnership targets; brief the relevant deans with the joint white-space evidence.

30-60 days
Open the funding route

Scope the specific programme for each target, and turn the Nanjing University of Science and Technology tie into a consortium concept in Life Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the diversity gap and the health & medicine weakness; set a diversification target for the long tail; and secure an editorial feature in the reputation-survey window.

Your fact file

Claim the full fact file for Nanjing Forestry University.

Everything above is the open view. The full partner fact file goes further: every ranked subject and subfield, the complete partner ledger with yield, your named academics and their signature work, the funder-by-funder route map for each target, and this same dossier on up to ten named peers.

Partner fact file · locked

Unlocked for partners. Confirm before 12:00, Tuesday 25 August 2026 to be included at the 15 September launch.

See the full enhanced fact file → Claim & verify yours

Free to claim and verify your data. No obligation. Your ranking is unaffected by partnership, and always will be.

Exclusive to partners

Plus this same dossier on up to 10 of your peers.

Every partnership includes the full intelligence on your named competitive set, their strengths, their funders, their white-space, so you can see exactly where you lead and where to close the gap. Two peers with Recognition, five with Partnership, up to ten with Flagship.

Your research, in front of 170,000 academics, with full reporting.

Partnership also places your research as editorial features in the Research Network Report, our newsletter to a verified global academic audience, timed to the reputation-survey season. Every send comes with a full performance report: opens, clicks and geography, benchmarked against the edition.

The Research Network Report

170,000
verified academic subscribers worldwide
Nov–Jan
timed to the reputation-survey season
Full report
opens, clicks and geography on every feature

See your own dossier, built for your university.

Submit your data and we will build and review your enhanced fact file with you, then show exactly how a partnership turns it into advantage, before the index goes public on 15 September 2026.

Request a partnership conversation →
Global Research Partnerships · globalresearchpartnerships.com/rci · Built on the open global research record and the award data of the world's major funders. Methodology.