Editorial: Review and roadmap from the last 10 years (2010-2020)

Nestor U. Salcedo (Editor-in-Chief)

Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Science

ISSN: 2218-0648

Article publication date: 13 July 2021

Issue publication date: 13 July 2021

405

Citation

Salcedo, N.U. (2021), "Editorial: Review and roadmap from the last 10 years (2010-2020)", Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Science, Vol. 26 No. 51, pp. 2-6. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEFAS-06-2021-271

Publisher

:

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2021, Nestor U. Salcedo.

License

Published in Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Science. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence maybe seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode


In this 51st issue, the Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Science (JEFAS) is on the eve of its 30th anniversary since its birth in 1992 as Cuadernos de Difusión by ESAN Graduate School of Business in Peru. Since its creation, the aims and scope have sought to share knowledge on economics and administrative sciences from developing countries to the world (Guillén Uyén, 2020; Lukacs de Pereny, 2018; Yamakawa, 2017). As of December 2009, the journal takes its current name. By June 2010, it is part of the SciELO citation index (currently one of the Web of Science collections), and it makes up Scopus since December 2012. From that moment, the journal offers publications twice a year with double-blind reviews, being one of the most relevant journals of empirical research from Ibero-America in the economics, econometrics and finance categories, according to SCImago Journal Rank. For these reasons, with the editorial responsibility (Aguinis et al., 2013; Aguinis and Vaschetto, 2011) and the scope of literature review (Aguinis et al., 2020; Paul and Rialp Criado, 2020), this editorial has been offering a brief systematic review and roadmap based on a bibliometric analysis (Aria and Cuccurullo, 2017) since the past ten years (2010-2020).

Review

The journal has published 165 articles with 327 authors considering 653 keywords and 6,480 references in the past decade. Regarding the authorship, 47 articles have a simple one, whereas 280 co-authors make up the other 118 papers. The articles have a collaboration rate of 2.24 co-authors/article. Likewise, the five authors accounting most publications have a range of 3 to 6 articles, as it is shown in Table 1.

As shown in Table 2, Manrai, A.K. and Manrai, L.A. have one of the five most cited articles co-authored with Jayaram, D., and Jarboui, A. has another with Ezzi, F. In these five tops, the topics focus on the digital economy, intellectual capital, innovation and corporate governance.

Regarding the most frequent journals used by the authors, as it can be seen in Table 3, these come from economics and business fields, being the articles of economics journals with the most influence over the business (Azar, 2009).

Indeed, the five top most cited references in JEFAS (Table 4) are seminal articles focused on topics such as firm theory, market theory, resource-based theory, financial models and econometric models.

From the bibliometric analysis, a keyword thematic map (Figure 1) shows basic themes: economic growth, corporate governance, stock markets, emerging markets, industrial policies and banking. Also, motor themes are behavioral finance, performance and inflation. On the other hand, the niche themes are the international financial reporting standards and pension funds. At the same time, corporate investment and disclosure, real options and credit scoring are themes for reconsideration.

Roadmap

From this review, some theoretical and practical implications outline the roadmap. Future research should deepen literature reviews clearly and consistently through theories, conceptualizations and models. Theories such as the firm, agency, information asymmetry, market, financial, options, resource-based are widely studied and shared. However, motor and niche themes require expanding theories such as contracts (The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, 2016), economic behaviour (The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, 2017) or the inequality gaps (The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, 2019). On the other hand, future publications should widen the field of administrative sciences by reviewing theories and robust empirical methods from management science, marketing science, operation research or information systems research.

In addition, if micro-level analyses must consider current trends, macro-level analyses must as well. A look at long-term macroeconomic analysis involving innovation and climate issues (The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, 2018), trade (The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, 2008) or more branches of neo-institutional economics (The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, 2009) is needed. Likewise, micro–macro analyses should be considered, for instance, toward comparative institutional analyses (Aoki, 2001). Furthermore, when designing longitudinal studies, the authors should consider the impacts of global crises (e.g. financial 2008, Covid-19), such as regional or local ones. Finally, research should encourage the discussion of policy contributions at the firm, industry and country levels, depending on the analysis unit and study level. In that sense, this issue presents part of the roadmap spirit and invites us to contribute to the following issues based on these aims and scope.

Figures

Keyword thematic map

Figure 1.

Keyword thematic map

Five top most productive authors

Author NP PY start PY last
Manrai, A.K. 6 2011 2020
Manrai, L.A. 6 2011 2020
Jarboui, A. 3 2013 2016
Manhas, P.S. 3 2010 2016
Peña-Vinces, J.C. 3 2011 2017
Note:

JEFAS had 6 authors with 3 articles. The most cited were selected for this editorial

Five top most cited papers

Authors (Year) Title Scopus/SciELO
citation
Google Scholar
citation
(Moghaddam et al., 2016) Stock market index prediction using artificial neural network. JEFAS, 21(41), 89-93 141 225
(Jayaram et al., 2015) Effective use of marketing technology in Eastern Europe: Web analytics, social media, customer analytics, digital campaigns, and mobile applications. JEFAS, 20(39), 118-132 41 112
(Boujelbene and Affes, 2013) The impact of intellectual capital disclosure on cost of equity capital: A case of French firms. JEFAS, 18(34), 45-53 39 158
(Shawtari et al., 2016) Corporate governance characteristics and valuation: Inferences from quantile regression. JEFAS, 21(41), 81-88 31 44
(Ezzi and Jarboui, 2016) Does innovation strategy affect financial, social, and environmental performance? JEFAS, 21(40), 14-24 30 87

Five top most frequent journals

Economic Journals Articles Business Journals Articles
Journal of Financial Economics 168 Strategic Management Journal 40
The Journal of Finance 156 Management Science 34
Journal of Banking and Finance 102 Academy of Management Journal 33
American Economic Review 62 Journal of Business Research 30
Journal of Econometrics 61 Academy of Management Review 28
Note:

The Journal of Business had 37 cited articles in JEFAS. However, founded in 1928, it ceased publication in November 2006

Five top most cited references

Most Cited
Seminal References
Title JEFAS
Citation
WoS
Citation
Scopus
Citation
Google Scholar
Citation
(Jensen and Meckling, 1976) Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360 11 20,910 24,578 100,315
(Arellano and Bond, 1991) Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. The Review of Economic Studies, 58(2), 277-297 7 10,865 12,321 32,975
(Fama, 1970) Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work. The Journal of Finance, 25(2), 383-417 6 6,144 n. a. 30,716
(Sharpe, 1964) Capital asset prices: A theory of market equilibrium under conditions of risk. The Journal of Finance, 19(3), 425-442 6 5,884 7,200 27,578
(Grant, 1991) The resource-based Theory of Competitive Advantage: Implications for strategy formulation. California Management Review, 33(3), 114-135 6 3,079 4,438 17,167

References

Aguinis, H. and Vaschetto, S.J. (2011), “Editorial responsibility: managing the publishing process to do good and do well”, Management and Organization Review, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 407-422.

Aguinis, H., Ramani, R.S. and Alabduljader, N. (2020), “Best-practice recommendations for producers, evaluators, and users of methodological literature reviews”, Organizational Research Methods, pp. 1-31.

Aguinis, H., Gottfredson, R.K., Culpepper, S.A., Dalton, D.R. and de Bruin, G.P. (2013), “Doing good and doing well: on the multiple contributions of journal editors”, Academy of Management Learning and Education, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 564-578.

Aoki, M. (2001), Toward a Comparative Institutional Analysis, in Aoki, M., Greif, A. and Milgrom, P. (Eds), 1st ed., The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Aria, M. and Cuccurullo, C. (2017), “Bibliometrix: an R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis”, Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 959-975.

Azar, O.H. (2009), “The influence of economics articles on business research: analysis of journals and time trends”, The Journal of Industrial Economics, Vol. 57 No. 4, pp. 851-869.

Guillén Uyén, J. (2020), “Editorial”, Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Science, Vol. 25 No. 49, pp. 3-4.

Lukacs de Pereny, M. (2018), “Editorial”, Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Science, Vol. 23 No. 45, pp. 126-127.

Paul, J. and Rialp Criado, A. (2020), “The art of writing literature review: what do we know and what do we need to know?”, International Business Review, Elsevier, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 1-7.

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (2008), “Trade and geography: economies of scale, differentiated products and transport costs”, Scientific Background on the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, pp. 1-24.

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (2009), “Economic governance”, Scientific Background on the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, pp. 1-21.

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (2016), “Contract theory”, Scientific Background on the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, pp. 1-49.

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (2017), “Integrating economics with psychology”, Scientific Background on the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, pp. 1-39.

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (2018), “Economic growth, technological change and climate change”, Scientific Background on the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, pp. 1-52.

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (2019), “Understanding development and poverty alleviation”, Scientific Background on the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, pp. 1-43.

Yamakawa, P. (2017), “Editorial”, Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Science, Vol. 22 No. 43, p. 130.

Acknowledgements

I greatly appreciate the constructive advice I have received on early drafts of this editorial from the Vice Presidency for Research of Universidad ESAN, the Executive Editorial, the Editorial Advisory and Publisher of the Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Science (JEFAS). I have also benefited from the authors’ robust and highlighting published articles in JEFAS of the past ten years. Thus, I would also like to thank the former editors, authors and anonymous reviewers for their insights and invaluable comments.

Related articles