Scientific divides: research output and influence in East and West Germany
Research data bite: 15.
Takeaway:
Using GRID’s geolocation, we can retroactively classify research institutions by historical geography to analyse how political divisions shaped scientific output.
East Germany's loss of influence was driven by Soviet control, which slowed research expansion, restricted international collaboration, and limited its integration into global scientific networks.
Geolocation and institutional classification
Last week, I explored how the suppression of genetics research—and broader restrictions on scientific inquiry—affected the Soviet Union’s research output and influence. During that analysis, my colleague Juergen noted a related divide between what became East Germany (the German Democratic Republic, GDR) and West Germany (the Federal Republic of Germany, FRG) after World War II. To investigate this, we turned to GRID, our institutional research database, to classify institutions that published between 1920 and 1989 according to their postwar geographic alignment. This allows us to analyse how the eventual political separation of Germany influenced research production and impact over time. Note: we only include institutions strictly within today’s Germany. While there were additional institutions outside this area, their contributions were negligible—even compared to East Germany.
Below, we present two maps—one for Germany as a whole and one for Berlin—showing the institutional distribution across the two territories. Data available on figshare.
Publication volume: diverging trajectories
Using Dimensions on GBQ, I calculated the number of publications produced in each territory, leveraging GRID to categorise institutions as belonging to either East or West Germany. The trends reveal stark differences between the two territories.
While differences in population (fewer than 20 million in East Germany vs. approximately 50–70 million in West Germany) partly explain the publication gap, the most striking trend is the postwar divergence. Before WWII, institutions in what would become West Germany published about four times as much as those in the East. However, in the decades following the war, this gap widened dramatically: by the 1980s, West Germany was producing ten times the number of publications as East Germany.
This pattern closely mirrors what we observed in the Soviet Union, where research growth was slower in Soviet-aligned states after the war. East Germany’s integration into the Eastern bloc meant its research priorities, funding, and institutional structures were heavily influenced by Soviet policies, leading to a slower expansion of research output compared to its western counterpart.
Research influence: citation disparities
Beyond sheer publication numbers, we also examined research influence by looking at citation shares. The gap in influence between East and West Germany is even greater than the gap in publication volume.
As noted in our previous research data bite, West Germany never fully regained the global scientific dominance it held before WWII, as much of that influence shifted to the United States. However, unlike East Germany, it experienced a relatively rapid recovery, with its global citation share growing again within a decade. By contrast, East Germany—despite reaching about one-tenth of West Germany’s publication output—achieved only one-twentieth of its citation share by 1989.
This suggests that the scientific community in the West was more integrated into global networks, leading to greater recognition and visibility. The limited circulation of Eastern Bloc research in Western scientific discourse may have further reinforced this disparity.
Conclusion: research across the Iron Curtain
This analysis demonstrates that the political division of Germany after WWII had long-term consequences for research and its global impact. While West Germany benefited from international collaboration, greater funding opportunities, and a more open research environment, East Germany operated under the constraints of the Soviet system, which prioritised state-driven scientific agendas and limited interaction with the broader global research community.