ST&I PUBLIC POLICIES: A BIBLIOMETRIC STUDY OF SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTION

Objective: Carry out a bibliometric study of the scientific production on Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation (ST&I), in the Web of Science database, in the period from 2013 to 2022. Theoretical framework: Is based on the literature on Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation and the history of Public Policies for Innovation in Brazil. Method: This research is classified as descriptive and quantitative. Data were collected from the Web of Science database by accessing the Journal Portal of the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel, with a time frame between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2022. They were used for data analysis. RStudio® and VOSviewer® software and bibliometric packages Bibliometrix and Biblioshiny. Results and conclusion: 94 documents were identified, with the largest scientific productions on the subject coming from Brazil, China, Spain and Japan. In 2021, it was the year with the most cited documents, followed by 2020. The most cited sources are: Research Policy followed by Technological Forecasting and Social Change. The main co-occurrences of keywords are: science; innovation; technology; innovation policy; and, public policy. With regard to co-authorship between countries, there is a prevalence with China. The most relevant authors on the subject are: [Anonymous] A.; and Alvarez I. Regarding co-citation between authors, there was a prevalence of(e): Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development; Lundvall, B.A.; and, Borras, S. As for the most cited studies globally on the subject in the last ten years at the international level, there are: Padilla-Pérez, R. (2014); Amankwah-Amoah, J. (2016); and Ozkaya, G. (2021). Finally, it is concluded that this study aims to improve the knowledge base on Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation and the field of related studies. Search Implications: The main limitation of this search is that it was restricted to the Web of Science, where most of the documents were articles. Therefore, it would be interesting to consider a broader line of research that includes other databases, such as Scopus or Google Scholar, in addition to other types of publications, such as books or conference proceedings. Originality/Value: This study aims to improve the knowledge base on Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation and the field of related studies.


INTRODUCTION
Developments in science and technology and strategies based on innovation have become the basic elements of increased productivity and competition, both at the country and at the company level.Science, Technology and Innovation (CT&I) are very important for all countries due to their effect of sustainable growth and solutions for energy, food security and climate change.
From this perspective, Ozkaya, Timor & Erdin (2021) highlight that STI is a significant topic for both sustainable growth and the achievement of policy goals.STI has been on the agenda of both developed and developing countries in recent years.
Policy makers in nations, states, regions and cities have implemented a variety of initiatives with the hope of strengthening existing regional innovation systems or driving new ones to improve economic growth and regional development (Brenner & Schlump, 2011;Gault, 2011).
Science, Technology and Innovation (CT&I) Public Policies are a set of government initiatives aimed at supporting basic research, innovation and the commercialization of inventions (Chaminade & Lundvall, 2019;Woolley & Rottner, 2008).In the meantime, the policy of S&T can increase the speed and level of product and industrial emergence and the economic growth of an area (Toole, 2012).
Such policies face challenges due to the long time horizons required for their effects to materialize and the complex sets of interactive actors that are endemic to innovation and economic systems.However, in emerging technological areas with high uncertainty, the challenge is even greater.In the early stages of technological evolution, policymakers must also decide when to enact STI policies (Korenik & Węgrzyn, 2020).
For Woolley & MacGregor (2022), if a country acts early by adopting initiatives while a scientific discovery or technology is still underway, funding to support these activities can promote discovery, accelerate the resolution of technological uncertainty, and increase the legitimacy of new industries and businesses in its economy.At the same time, acting too early is risky, because the funding can be wasted during the tumultuous years of training the development of a technology, which sometimes fails to materialize.
For Korenik & Węgrzyn (2020), creating policies too late can cause the country to miss opportunities.So for countries, regions or cities that are trying to build entrepreneurial ecosystems in emerging domains, the moment of implementing the STI policy is crucial.
Taking these considerations into account, the investigative question that guided the production of this study was: Why is it necessary to identify research on the theme of Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation (CT&I) over the last ten years?In order to answer the investigative question, this work aims to carry out bibliometric study of scientific production on Public Science, Technology and Innovation (CT&I) Policies, in the Web of Science database, in the period from 2013 to 2022.
The article is divided into sections, which deal sequentially with this introduction, a contextualization of the Public Policies of Science, Technology and Innovation and the history of Public Policies of Innovation in Brazil; material and methods adopted in the study, analysis and discussion of the data, and, finally, outline the final considerations, bringing the limitations and pointing the directions for future research.

Public Science, Technology and Innovation Policies
Science, Technology and Innovation (CT&I) Policies gained considerable relevance in the public agendas of governments, mainly from the 1980s onwards.Through the conceptual landmarks of the Innovation System (SI) and the Triple Helix, the dialogs between the different players in the societies take place as stages prior to the policies for S&T.
Through the promulgation of Law No. 13,243, of January 11, 2016, known as the New Legal Innovation Framework, regulated by Decree No. 9,283, of February 7, 2018, it provided, among other points, new possibilities for ICTs and NITs, in an attempt to increase the levels of maturity in relation to innovation, mainly regarding the relations between ICT, government and company (Brazil, 2016a).
In this scenario, a variety of actors may be involved, from companies and public sector bodies to universities, research centers and civil and social sectors (Alvarez, Juan & TorrecillaS, 2018).For Etzkowitz, Mello & Almeida (2005), within the Triple Helix approach, the (neo)institutional perspective considers the university to be the key player in the structure, while the (neo)evolutionary perspective considers the university, industry and government as a subset of the evolving social system.
It should be pointed out that sustainable issues led to the eminence of the Five-Propeller, which has the Environment proposal and can be seen as a transdisciplinary structure that analyzes development sustainable and ecology social policy.THE model points to a sustainable balance between the paths of the development of society and economy for the further progress of human civilizations (Carayannis & Campbell, 2011;Casaramona, Sapia & Soraci, 2015) To do so, S&T goes through a process of continuous globalization, where systems of open innovation and collaborations are spreading and new technologies increase the speed of the dissemination of knowledge.In a world where competition is increasing rapidly and STI is the most decisive factor, countries need to shape their policies according to this need (Ozkaya, Timor & Erdin, 2021).
In view of this, the policies for S&T must undoubtedly be approved when the government believes that the necessary infrastructure to support these policies exists.In addition, the evolutionary nature of innovation systems means that the effectiveness of various STI policy instruments also changes over time (Edmondson, Kern & Rogge, 2019).
For Freeman (1995) andTeubal (2002), successful S&T&I policies build infrastructure that require long-term horizons or the development of strong market relations.This suggests that countries or regions that adopt innovation policies during the formation of a new technology or innovation earlier than other countries or regions may be more likely to build a successful innovation system in a nascent domain.While this pattern is important globally, emerging economies are moving faster with the goal of becoming technology leaders rather than followers (Watanabe & Salmador, 2014).
For Nelson (2006), this has a great impact, since a strong scientific base provides important tools that allow the design and invention process to be more productive and powerful than it would be if this base were fragile, and, more specifically, in the case of emerging countries like Brazil, it means that fewer demands from society can be developed and met by institutions.
From this perspective, Peng, Zhong & Sun (2008) highlight that the policy of S&T can guarantee the effective implementation of various innovation activities and the rational allocation of innovation resources.Its reasonable formulation will help to improve the performance of innovation, so as to promote the construction of national innovation systems.As a key fatora for strengthening the national scientific and technological strategic force and for boosting the development of S&T, the policy on S&T has attracted great attention in academic circles and has become an important theme for research.
For Chilvers (2010), among the analyzes of dialogs between actors for the construction of STI policies, five actors are recognized in the dialog around STI policies: practitioners of dialog, academics and social scientists, dialog commissioners and policymakers, scientific institutions, participation institutions and civil society organizations.
In this sense, Alvarez, Juan & Torrecillas (2018) differentiate three levels of dialog in the field of STI policy.The first includes that dialog developed at the highest level of policy, such as the ministerial level, given its involvement in the definition of a national strategy for S&T.The second level is the technical dialog, and this refers to the dialog of the advisors of policies in the drawing up of the policy on S&T.The last level refers to the dialog on the implementation of the policy itself.
Finally, Cevallos & Moreno (2020) highlights that governments have tried to steer and promote the development of Science, Technology and Innovation (CT&I) for many years and through many mechanisms, to improve directly or indirectly the well-being of their constituents.These efforts are commonly framed as scientific policy, technology policy, or innovation policy.

History of Public Innovation Policies in Brazil
According to Dilascio et al. (2021), Brazil started to concern itself late with public policies aimed at Innovation, having as a landmark the creation of the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq), by means of Law No. 1310/1951, as a specific organ to "promote and stimulate the development of scientific and technological research in any field of knowledge" (Brazil, 1951).The creation of the CNPq in 1951 meant the incorporation of science into the area of state control (Kornis, 2010).
Important governmental bodies were created, such as the National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI), federal autarky, through the promulgation of Law No. 5648/1970, with the purpose of implementing, in Brazil, the norms that regulate industrial property (Brazil, 1970).In 1985, through Decree No. 91,146, the Ministry of Science and Technology was created as the central organ of the federal system of science and technology (Brazil, 1985).
The Federal Constitution in 1988 gave broad protection to the theme in its Article 5, paragraph XXIX, as follows: The law will guarantee authors of industrial inventions temporary privilege for their use, as well as protection for industrial creations, trademark ownership, company names and other distinctive signs, in view of the social interest and technological and economic development of the country (Brazil, 1988).
By means of Law No. 9,279/96, the rights and obligations inherent to industrial property considered the technological and economic development of the country, as well as to the social and common interest (Brazil, 1996) were disciplined.With this law, it was intended to grant authors of industrial inventions temporary privileges for their use, which can be achieved by the repression of false geographical indications and unfair competition, the granting of trademark registration, industrial design and patents (Dantas, 2016).
For Arbix et al. (2017), only in 1999 did innovation begin to be placed at the center of government concerns, through the creation of the Sectorial Funds, coordinated by the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MCTI) and legally implemented by the Financier of Studies and Projects (Finep).These funds had the objetive of implanting a new policy of financing in the country, destined to research, development and innovation projects inherent to Science and Technology.It was an integrated program, with the participation of universities, research centers and the private sector.
Since the edition of Law No. 10,973/2004, regulated by Decree No. 5,563/2005, Brazil has been directing the innovation process, the Law on Technological Innovation establishes measures to encourage innovation and scientific and technological research in the productive environment, with a view to technological training, the attainment of technological autonomy and the development of the country's national and regional production system (Brazil, 2004;2005a).
Also in 2004, it was approved at the 2nd National Conference of Science, Technology and Innovation in Health -the National Policy for Science, Technology and Innovation in Health (PNCTIS), an instrument that guides all the actions carried out by the Secretariat for Science, Technology and Strategic Inputs (SCTIE) of the Ministry of Health.PNCTIS is an integral part of the National Health Policy.Its main objective is to contribute to national development in a sustainable way, stimulating the production of new knowledge directed to the needs of the SUS (Brazil, 2008).
Law No. 11,196/2005, known as the Law of the Good, allowed the granting of tax incentives to companies that carry out research and development of technological innovation (Brazil, 2005b).According to Dehnhardt (2013), by means of this Act, tax incentives for innovative activities have started to be granted, as such a regulation allows companies to create projects and automatically apply tax incentives, without the need for prior consent of the MCTI.
Also for Dilascio et al. (2021), with the aim of defining the initiatives, actions and programs that would make it possible to make the role of CT&I in the sustainable development of the country more decisive, the Action Plan of S&T for National Development for the period 2007-2010 was launched.According to Prete (2018), after this period, the Action Plan for the National Science, Technology and Innovation Strategy (ENCTI) 2015-2017 and the National Strategy in Science, Technology and Innovation 2016-2019 were launched, which was revised and updated to cover the period 2016-2022.However, the standards and policies created up until then proved insufficient and it was necessary to make changes to the Law on Technological Innovation.For this reason, there was the need for the approval of the Constitutional Amendment No. 85, of February 26, 2015(Brazil, 2015), in order to insert provisions in the Federal Constitution that would allow the articulation between public and private entities, as well as the financing and transfer of public resources to private research entities (Garcia, 2017).
In 2016, Law No. 13,243 was promulgated, also known as the New Legal Framework of CT&I (Brazil, 2016a).This law, besides modifying the Law on Technological Innovation, also amended other laws related to the theme, all with the purpose of clarifying and offering legal certainty to the actors of the innovation system (Dilascio et al., 2021).
For Gomes Muraro & Castro-Lucas ( 2021), the Brazilian Government has been preparing official documents on public policy on Science, Technology and Innovation -CT&I in the Country.For the period 2016 to 2022, where was published the document entitled National Science, Technology and Innovation Strategy -ENCTI, containing several forecasts, among them five challenges.The five national challenges for S&T are: (I) to position Brazil among the countries with the greatest development in S&T; (II) to improve the institutional conditions for raising productivity from innovation; (III) to reduce regional asymmetries in production and access to S&T; (IV) to develop innovative solutions for productive and social inclusion; (V) to strengthen the bases for promoting sustainable development (Brazil, 2016b).
It is important to note that through the promulgation of Complementary Law No. 182 of June 1, 2021, the legal framework of startups and innovative entrepreneurship was established (Brazil, 2021).This law became known as the Startups Legal Framework, which brought important changes and new rules for this type of company, with the objetive of improving innovative entrepreneurship in Brazil and leveraging the modernization of the business environment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS
The methodology employed in this study will then be discussed, by means of the bibliometric analysis of scientific production on Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation (CT&I).To do so, the research passes through three moments: collecting data; bibliometric analysis and visualization of the information; and, finally, discussion of the results and final considerations.

Bibliometric Analysis
Bibliometric analysis is a quantitative methodology to identify the volume and growth pattern of the literature for a given emerging area.Gives a retrospective view of published literature that evaluates academic contributions in a focal field (Guleria & Kaur, 2021).Along the same lines, Gutiérrez-Salcedo et al. (2018), stresses that bibliometry is a science that involves the quantitative and statistical study of the production, publication, use and dissemination of scientific knowledge from bibliographic databases.
The study adopted two effective techniques: performance analysis and scientific mapping.The performance review assessed the publications' performance in terms of production of publications by countries, authors, affiliated institutions and growth trends over the years.The other relational technique of bibliometric analysis or scientific mapping identified relationships between publications and explored the structure and evolution of the field of research.For this cocitation analysis, co-authorship analyzes, co-word analysis and thematic evolution analysis were performed.The analysis of citations helps to understand the predominant publications and authors of a research area with the help of citations.Researchers carry out the analysis of evolution to understand the process of development of the research field over the years and its future trends (Ding & Yang, 2020).

Data Source
The data source considered for the study was the main Web of Science (WoS) collection on August 4, 2023.WoS is one of the world's most famous scientific citation index databases (Clarivate, 2022).From then on, they researched "Science, Technology and Innovation Policies", in the English language, this approximate expression that were included in the title and key words.To this end, the time lapse of the last ten years, from 2013 to 2022, was considered.The steps for retrieving the article and further analysis are shown in Board 1.

Board 1.
Steps in scientific research.

Source: The authors (2023).
In Step 1, 94 documents were obtained, the selection of which occurred after searching for topics using Boolean logic.The logic was "Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation" OR "Public Policy for Science, Technology and Innovation" OR "Science, Technology and Innovation Policies".Among the total publications, the four main types of documents were article (n=57, 60.64%), conference article (n=22, 23.40%), editorial material (n=5, 5.31%) and literary criticism (n=3, 3.19%), and others such as meeting summary and review articles.Records exported for all 94 documents contained complete information (authors, countries, year of publication, document types, source journal, title, subject categories, and references), including abstract and cited references.Thus, these comprehensive data derived from Step 1 were effectively used to perform bibliometric analysis and visualization of the information in Step 2. In Step 2, the free bibliometric analysis software VOSviewer® (version 1.6.18),widely used internationally, was used to analyze and visualize the relationships between authors, countries, journals, quotes and terms.As it is difficult to identify clusters in the mapping and derive themes from them, VOSviewer® has an attractive graphical user interface that quickly examines these maps (Cobo et al., 2011).To perform the bibliometric analysis, in interface to RStudio® (version 4.2.1), the Bibliometrix and Biblioshiny packages were installed, free software developed by Massimo Aria and Corrado Cuccurullo (Aria & Cuccurullo, 2017).It is important to note that Bibliometrix for RStudio® has a built-in Biblioshiny utility with a graphical interface for non-encoders, resulting in a comprehensive analysis with improvised plotting representation.It combines bibliometric techniques such as co-word analysis, cocitation network analysis, collaborative network generation and Sankey chart generation to analyze the evolution of a research field (Guleria & Kaur, 2021).VOSviewer® mainly analyzes the collaboration network by co-authoring, co-occurrence and cocitation using keywords.In Step 3 of this study, using the above mentioned software, it was possible to obtain the expected bibliometric results, according to the objective of the research.
For the layout and presentation of the results, the final stage of the bibliometric method, the choice was made to use the figures generated by the cited packages, at the discretion of the researchers.As this is a study that uses secondary data and is available free of charge in a data repository, there was no need for submission to the Research Ethics Committee (CEP).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Through the Web of Science database, scientific productions were identified in the period from 2013 to 2022, which addressed the theme Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation (CT&I).These data included review articles, early access, open access, and enriched cited references.The number of documents in the dataset is 94, while the number of references is 2,703.The single authored documents have a total of 29, while the multi-authored documents are 65.Table 1 details and summarizes this information.Figure 1 shows the average number of citations of articles per year, both single and multiple authorship.2021 has the most cited documents followed by 2020.As of 2018, it has the least cited documents.A measure of how often the average article is cited for a given year in a journal can be defined as the source impact factor.It is used to evaluate the importance or classification of a journal by counting the number of times articles are cited (Oyewola & Dada, 2022).In this study, we used three different measurements that are often used to measure the impact factors of the ten main sources on the subject, such as h-index, g-index and m-index (see Tab. 10 index and g-index of 3, followed by Science & Collective Health and Research Policy with a h-index and g-index of 2. However, Asian Journal of Technology Innovation ranked first using the m-index with an impact of 1,000.This shows that the articles published in the Asian Journal of Technology Innovation had more repercussion than other periodicals.It is also important to highlight the Brazilian periodical "Ciência & Saúde Coletiva", from the Brazilian Association of Collective Health, whose publications have incentives from the National Policy on Science, Technology and Innovation in Health.Figure 4 shows the scientific production by country in the subject in question, in terms of publication.The geographical distribution of articles based on affiliations of all authors is concentrated in Brazil (44 publications), first, followed by China (36 publications), Spain (20 publications), Japan (15 publications), Mexico and Russia (14 publications each), besides the other countries.2014) ranked first with 62 total citations followed by Amankwah-Amoah J. ( 2016), from Technological Forecasting and Social Change, with 48 total citations.Of the ten most cited global documents, the journal Research Policy has two documents.It is also important to note that the United Kingdom has two papers from the ten most cited global documents.12 words "challenges", "forecast", "industry", "knowledge" and "performance" had 3 occurrences each (7%).This shows the relevance of the data about the theme in question.Figure 6 shows the keyword co-occurrence network.In this sense, the analysis of the keyword cooccurrence network helps researchers identify the fundamental topics discussed in a given area of research.In this regard, Zupic and Čater (2015) state that co-occurrence of keywords is a useful scientometric technique that allows visualizing and displaying the similarities present between frequently co-occurring keywords or topics in the literature.Thus, out of the 348 keywords found, the cooccurrence limit of at least three in VOSviewer was defined, with a return of 18 keywords.Of these, three clusters emerged, with 75 nodes appearing on the network.Each node in the view constitutes a keyword, and the node size is proportional to the occurrence of the keyword in the revised literature.In other words, higher nodes indicate a higher frequency of keyword cooccurrence.The five main co-occurrences are: science (15); innovation (10); technology (8); innovation policy (7); and public policy (6).  Figure 8 shows the five countries with the largest co-authorships in two clusters, where the minimum number of documents for a country is set to three, while the minimum number of citations for a country is set to two.In this sense, the co -authored analysis of the countries reflects the collaborative relationship between the countries in this thematic area, as well as the degree of collaboration.The larger nodes represent the most productive countries in the area of Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation (CT&I), and the thickness and length of the links between the nodes represent the cooperation relationship between the countries.The country with the largest co-authorship was China with 14 documents, 27 citations and 3 link strength.Figure 9 shows the network of authors cocitation network.The citation of articles allows researchers to interpret the nature of the articles cited in the cluster and the interconnections between the clusters (Chen, Ibekwe-Sanjuan & Hou, 2010).Findings from the cocitation network, extracted from VOSviewer, show that the pair of highly cocited articles are those connected with thick arcs.A pair of quoted articles occurs when two articles are quoted together in a single article.The thick arcs indicate a strong relationship between these articles and suggest similarities in relation to specific topics within the field of Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation (CT&I).On the other hand, thin arcs signify a weak association of cocitation between cocitation articles and the lack of similarities of content.Thus, it is possible to identify the frequency with which two or more authors were most cited together in the same article (cocitation).The premise of this measure is that the more certain items are cited together, the more likely the content between them is to be related.In view of this, of the 1,999 authors found, the minimum number of five quotes was defined in VOSviewer, with a return of 27 authors.Thus, the five main authors  Therefore, through this panorama of the last ten years of scientific production on Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation (CT&I), between 2013 and 2022, this study brings possible contributions regarding the focus of research and the identification of existing gaps.In addition, the importance of international collaboration between countries on the subject is highlighted.

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS
This study aims to improve the knowledge base on Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation (CT&I) and the field of related studies.To this end, a bibliometric analysis was performed using VOSviewer® and the RStudio® Bibliometrix package.The relational technique for bibliometric studies applied five main methods: co-authoring analysis, citation analysis, cocitation mapping analysis, keyword cooccurrence analysis, and bibliographic analysis.These methods were conducted in 94 documents taken from the Web of Science database.
It is important to highlight that, in the last ten years, between 2013 and 2022, there has been a decrease of -3.97% in the number of publications on Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation (CT&I).In this scenario, the United Kingdom is amongst the countries most cited when referring to researches on the theme, with a great global influence.It is also worth pointing out that the four countries that are the leaders in publications on the subject are Brazil, China, Spain and Japan, which may infer investments in the area.
However, the results of the study often show a lack of national and international cooperation to address the challenges associated with the subject.In this sense, it is essential to increase international collaboration and research.The results also showed that Brazilian universities are engaged in carrying out research on the theme, highlighting: the Federal University of Rio Grande (FURG); the State University of Campinas (UNICAMP); and the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ).
In order to study the most relevant periodicals, in this bibliometric research, both quantitative indicators (volume of publications) and qualitative indicators (number of citations) were analyzed.Therefore, based on the number of publications, H-index and G-index, Technological Forecasting and Social Change and Current Scientific were considered the most influential journals and Asian Journal of Technology Innovation the most impact factor, based on the m-index index.
The keyword analysis also highlighted the research areas related to the theme of Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation (CT&I), namely: Business Economics; Public Administration; Science and Technology; and Social Sciences.
The main limitation of this research is that it was restricted to the Web of Science, where most of the documents were articles.Therefore, it would be interesting to consider a broader line of research that includes other databases, such as Scopus or Google Scholar, as well as other types of publications, such as books or conference proceedings.
Topic research = "Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation" OR "Public Policy for Science, Technology and Innovation" Note* Default values used in all filter settings for WoS search, including output and growth trend; (II) Co-authoring analysis; (III) Analysis of co-occurrence of keywords; (IV) Analysis of citations; (V) Cocitation mapping analysis; (VI) Bibliographic coupling analysis.STEP 3: RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS Publication trends, geographical contributions, main contributors and their links with other authors and documents, etc.

Figure 2
Figure 2 shows the ten local sources cited, highlighting the Research Policy with 135 citations of the reference lists followed by Technological Forecasting and Social Change with 62 citations.Of the ten sources, the minimum were Science, Technology & Human Values, and Science & Technology Program, with 9 each.

Figure 3
Figure 3 presents the ten most active authors in research on Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation (CT&I) in the period 2013-2022.[Anonymous] A. and Alvarez I.were in first place among all authors, with three publications each, followed by the other authors who had 2 publications each.

Figure 5
Figure5is the twenty words of frequency in the summaries of the scientific publications on "Science, Technology and Innovation (CT&I) Public Policies", shown in a TreeMap.The word "systems" was the word most used in the summaries with 6 occurrences (13%), while the
Figure9shows the network of authors cocitation network.The citation of articles allows researchers to interpret the nature of the articles cited in the cluster and the interconnections between the clusters(Chen, Ibekwe-Sanjuan & Hou, 2010).Findings from the cocitation network, extracted from VOSviewer, show that the pair of highly cocited articles are those connected with thick arcs.A pair of quoted articles occurs when two articles are quoted together in a single article.The thick arcs indicate a strong relationship between these articles and suggest similarities in relation to specific topics within the field of Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation (CT&I).On the other hand, thin arcs signify a weak association of cocitation between cocitation articles and the lack of similarities of content.Thus, it is possible to identify the frequency with which two or more authors were most cited together in the same article (cocitation).The premise of this measure is that the more certain items are cited together, the more likely the content between them is to be related.In view of this, of the 1,999 authors found, the minimum number of five quotes was defined in VOSviewer, with a return of 27 authors.Thus, the five main authors cited are: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development -OECD (26); Lundvall, B. A. (12); Borras, S. (12); Consejo Nacional de Política Econômica y Social (12); and finally Freeman, C. (11).

Table 1 .
Key Data Information.

Table 3 .
Documents most cited globally about the theme.