Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Northeast Forestry University (China), ranked in the global index.  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.

β—‡ Ranked in the Research Collaboration Index
🌍 Asia-Pacific · 391 universities benchmarked
16,834
co-authored works, 5 years
688
partner universities
56
partner countries
359
sustained deep ties
2.36
collaboration impact (FWCI)
83%
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
  • Agricultural & Biological Sciences is the standout field. Ranked #309 in the world for connected research, with Arts & Humanities #338, Energy #474 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on influence and impact. Northeast Forestry University sits in the 44th percentile for influence and the 41st for impact: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 85 of 103 partners (83%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Diversity is the softest pillar. At the 5th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Social Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #1,080 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 93% 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. Beijing Forestry University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 3.0). 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.

291
h-index of the joint research base
1.8M
citations to co-authored work
2.36
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
16,834
co-authored works, 2021-2025
18
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.

Influence44th pctReach12th pctDiversity5th pctSustained20th pctImpact41st pctInternational13th pctBrokerage4th pct

Northeast Forestry University is strongest on influence (44th percentile), impact (41st) and sustained (20th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 85 of 103 partners (83%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Diversity (5th 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.

InflImpaSustReacEach block is a pillar’s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight44th pct+9.7
Impact18% weight41st pct+7.4
Sustained18% weight20th pct+3.6
Reach16% weight12th pct+1.9
Diversity16% weight5th pct+0.8
International10% weight13th pct+1.3

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#1000Agricultural & Biologi…309Arts & Humanities338Energy474Materials Science482Chemical Engineering489Nursing585
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Northeast Forestry University's strongest connected fields are Agricultural & Biological Sciences #309, Arts & Humanities #338, Energy #474. The portfolio leans on life sciences; Social Sciences, at world #1,080 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 #1002 for connected research
16/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Chinese Academy of Me…184
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Huazhong University o…181
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Fudan University175
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University174
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Sun Yat-sen University163
Life Sciences
World #271 for connected research
77/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ University of Chinese…353
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University344
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University344
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Sichuan University335
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Fudan University332
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #349 for connected research
71/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Harbin Institute of T…725
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ University of Chinese…212
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Jilin University188
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Harbin Engineering Un…128
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Beijing Forestry Univ…123
Social Sciences
World #1080 for connected research
10/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Harbin Institute of T…50
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University17
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Huazhong University o…17
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University17
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Capital Medical Unive…16
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 yieldHarbin Institute oUniversity of ChinBeijing Forestry UFudan University
High yieldStandardLow yield

Beijing Forestry University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 3.0): a consortium waiting to happen. Peking University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 0.5: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Harbin Institute of Technology818 2.9Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ University of Chinese Academy of Sciences481 2.8Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University413 0.5Low yield
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Jilin University400 1.7Low yield
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College348 1.1Low yield
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Beijing Forestry University338 3.0Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University314 1.4Low yield
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Fudan University311 0.3Low yield
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Central South University302 1.6Low yield
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Northeast Agricultural University293 2.7Standard
Source: institution-to-institution co-authorship ledger + field-weighted citation impact

Visualisation 4

Your global reach, and where it thins out

Top partner countries

πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China 14,646
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ United States 1,558
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦ Canada 278
πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ United Kingdom 261
πŸ‡­πŸ‡° Hong Kong SAR 206
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Australia 190
πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ Germany 190
πŸ‡ΈπŸ‡ͺ Sweden 163

Anchor partner institutions

πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Harbin Institute of Technology 818
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ University of Chinese Academy of Sciences 481
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University 413
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Jilin University 400
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College 348
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Beijing Forestry University 338
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University 314
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Fudan University 311

The network spans 56 countries and 688 universities, but the top two carry about 93% 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.

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.

πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ 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 your strongest field.

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

πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ 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 your strongest field.

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

πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ 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 your strongest field.

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

πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί 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 your strongest field.

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.

State Key Laboratory of Tree Genetics and Breeding
Agricultural and Biological SciencesEngineeringMaterials ScienceEnvironmental Science

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.

πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡Έ Universidad de CΓ‘dizSpain
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Kunming Medical UniversityChina
πŸ‡ΉπŸ‡­ Kasetsart UniversityThailand
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Uniformed Services University of the Health SciencesUnited States
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Qingdao University of Science and TechnologyChina
Plant Molecular Biology ResearchPlant Stress Responses and ToleranceSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsLignin and Wood ChemistryAdvanced Cellulose Research StudiesForest ecology and management

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 Beijing Forestry University tie into a consortium concept in Life Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the diversity gap and the social sciences 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 Northeast 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.