Search results

Knowledge-intensive entrepreneurial firms (KIE) strongly rely on scientific and strategic research and development (R&D) capabilities to achieve higher performance levels. Hence, the purpose of this paper is to disentangle the effects of scientific capabilities and strategic R&D on KIE performance; and how the constituent elements of these dimensions can be configured to generate conditions for high performance.

The authors’ empirical setting involves companies that submitted projects to the Innovative Research in Small Businesses (PIPE) program in Brazil. The authors then run partial least square structural equation modeling to verify how scientific and strategic R&D capabilities influence the performance construct. Second, the authors apply fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to identify configurations that are equifinal in terms of generating superior performance.

Findings indicate a strong association between scientific capabilities and KIE performance. The configurational approach outlines the existence of multiple paths to success, but human capital stands as a core condition throughout estimations.

The authors’ assessment has implications for how KIE firms are managed according to their organizational profiles and trajectories. Also, it advances the authors’ comprehension on how entrepreneurship policies can better target these distinct profiles.

The authors’ analysis provides new evidence on the inherent complexity behind the generation of high performance in KIE when addressing their portfolios of knowledge-related capabilities. More than that, the authors were able to identify the existence of heterogeneous profiles that can equally lead to higher levels of performance.

The purpose of this paper is to reveal the distributional characteristics and evolutional patterns in source periodicals, topics, authors, funding, and institutes of research papers in Chinese Agricultural Economics so as to understand the current situations and developmental tendency of Chinese agricultural economics research over the past decade.

Using the citation analysis method, this paper analyzed the distributional characteristics and evolution of source periodicals, fields, authors and topics of 2,203 highly cited journal papers from the database of China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and 189 cited journal papers from database of Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) in agricultural economics first-authored by Chinese scholars from 2006 to 2015.

First, over the past decade, agricultural economics research in China has seen a rapid development. Specially, 103 scholars and 42 institutes have played key roles in the development, and 12 Chinese periodicals and 3 international journals have been the most influential outlets. Second, the coverage of the topics in Chinese agricultural economics research is broad and has expanded over the past decade. The rural land issue has been the most popular topic, while the issues regarding rural institutional arrangements and industrialization in rural areas have been explored extensively. However, issues in other fields, such as agricultural markets and trade, rural labor, food safety, etc. have to be further studied. Third, the improvements of economic theory and quantitative analytic techniques, the supports from research funding, and an increase in the collaboration between Chinese scholars and those from other countries have made great contribution to the rapid development of Chinese agricultural economics research over the past decade.

This paper is an original work that identifies the most influential journal papers including highly cited journal papers from CNKI and cited journal papers from SSCI, using citation frequency and standard Essential Science Indicators method. This is a contribution relative to the methods used by previous studies, which did not account for frequency of citation of a paper. Moreover, this study is based on data from two databases, CNKI and SSCI, suggesting that the coverage of sample papers is broader compared to those of previous studies.

Despite the general recommendation of using a combination of multiple criteria for research assessment and faculty promotion decisions, the raise of quantitative indicators is generating an emerging trend in Business Schools to use single journal impact factors (IFs) as key (unique) drivers for those relevant school decisions. This paper aims to investigate the effects of using single Web of Science (WoS)-based journal impact metrics when assessing research from two related disciplines: Business and Economics, and its potential impact for the strategic sustainability of a Business School.

This study collected impact indicators data for Business and Economics journals from the Clarivate Web of Science database. We concentrated on the IF indicators, the Eigenfactor and the article influence score (AIS). This study examined the correlations between these indicators and then ranked disciplines and journals using these different impact metrics.

Consistent with previous findings, this study finds positive correlations among these metrics. Then this study ranks the disciplines and journals using each impact metric, finding relevant and substantial differences, depending on the metric used. It is found that using AIS instead of the IF raises the relative ranking of Economics, while Business remains basically with the same rank.

This study contributes to the research assessment literature by adding substantial evidence that given the sensitivity of journal rankings to particular indicators, the selection of a single impact metric for assessing research and hiring/promotion and tenure decisions is risky and too simplistic. This research shows that biases may be larger when assessment involves researchers from related disciplines – like Business and Economics – but with different research foundations and traditions.

Consistent with the literature, given the sensibility of journal rankings to particular indicators, the selection of a single impact metric for assessing research, assigning research funds and hiring/promotion and tenure decisions is risky and simplistic. However, this research shows that risks and biases may be larger when assessment involves researchers from related disciplines – like Business and Economics – but with different research foundations and trajectories. The use of multiple criteria is advised for such purposes.

This is an applied work using real data from WoS that addresses a practical case of comparing the use of different journal IFs to rank-related disciplines like Business and Economics, with important implications for faculty tenure and promotion committees and for research funds granting institutions and decision-makers.

This register of current research in social economics has been compiled by the International Institute of Social Economics. The register does not claim to be comprehensive but is merely an aid for research workers and institutions interested in social economics. The register will be updated and made more comprehensive in the future but this is largely dependent on the inflow of information from researchers in social economics. In order to facilitate this process a standardised form is to be found on the last page of this register. Completed forms, with attached sheets as necessary, should be returned to the compiler: Dr Barrie O. Pettman, Director, International Institute of Social Economics, Enholmes Hall, Patrington, Hull, N. Humberside, England, HU12 OPR. Any other comments on the register will also be welcome.

This study aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the academic landscape in wine economics and business research over the past decades, capturing and analysing the literature through rigorous bibliometric methodologies. The study is intended as a foundational resource for academics, policymakers and industry stakeholders interested in the evolving scholarly discourse within the wine industry.

The authors analyse data from over 3,200 papers in the field of wine economics and business published between 1990 and 2022, sourced from Scopus. Various bibliometric indicators are applied, including publication and citation counts, and methods like keyword and co-citation analyses were used to map out the thematic and intellectual landscape.

The study reveals the escalating global relevance of wine economics and business research and identifies prominent papers and authors, influential countries and leading journals. The analysis reveals a dynamic shift in academic focus. Initially concentrating on foundational inquiries in the 1990s, research evolved to encompass complex themes such as e-commerce, wine tourism, sustainability and global crises. The study emphasises the adaptability and resilience of the wine supply chain and anticipates future research areas.

This study presents a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of the expanding body of research in wine economics and business, using data from over 3,200 documents published between 1990 and 2022. It uniquely combines different advanced bibliometric tools to provide a multifaceted overview of wine economics and business research.

This paper traces the timeline and milestones of Chinese graduate students in agricultural economics and related fields at foreign universities, with an emphasis on North American universities, since the early 1980s, and assesses the contributions of Chinese doctoral recipients from foreign universities to agricultural economic research and education in North America and China.

Data from department and college websites, associations of agricultural economics, university libraries and databases of theses and dissertations and selected agricultural economic journals in English and Chinese are used to attain the above purposes through graphical and bibliometric analyses.

First, the numbers of Chinese doctoral recipients and tenure-track and tenured faculty in agricultural economics at North American universities have increased steadily and significantly. Second, Chinese scholars in North America have achieved tremendous success in agricultural economic research via high-quality publications, prestigious awards, editorship of top journals, leadership in professional organizations, etc. Third, more Chinese doctoral recipients overseas have increasingly returned to China and are playing important roles in China’s agricultural economic research, education and international collaboration. Fourth, the publications of overseas Chinese scholars in Chinese journals and those of their counterparts working in China on topics beyond China are relatively limited and more collaboration may enhance the global impacts of Chinese agricultural economists.

This research is limited by data availability and quality and the data problems are discussed in the paper.

This is likely the first study to assess the contributions of Chinese doctoral recipients from foreign universities to agricultural economic research and education in China and abroad.

In the past 70 years since the founding of the People’s Republic of China, China’s economic studies have been constantly centered on major issues such as national modernization, social economic development and the establishment, reform and improvement of socialist economic system. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

It has experienced a process of transition from the establishment of traditional Soviet’s paradigm of political economics to that of modern economics, during which drastic changes have been observed in various aspects of China’s economics, including research content, scope and methods.

Based on that, a discipline system of economics in line with international economics has been initially established. Currently, under the guidance of Marxism, scholars in China’s economics actively draw on the beneficial knowledge system and analytical methods from modern economics, emancipate their minds, seek truth from facts and constantly fortify confidence in the socialist path, theory, system and culture, continuously enhance the discourse power of China’s economics in global economic governance system, so as to push forward to the building of a theoretical system of socialist economics with Chinese Characteristics in the new era.

Economics is a discipline that studies resource allocation and human’s behavior of making a choice based on rationality. Emerged in the industrial revolution and developed in the exploration of a large-scale socialized mode of production and resource allocation system, this discipline has gradually become a broadly explanatory force in social sciences which profoundly affects the economic decision-making behaviors of the government and various economic entities.

This article is looking to reflect on the various important touchstones of “grand theory” and “big thinkers” that can be framed when engaging empirical evidence in property economics research.

The paper is reflexive in nature, using experiential reflection to consider theory in property economics. The importance of “methodology” is emphasised rather than “method”.

Using reflexive mode, the paper does not have “findings” as such: if the views expressed are accepted, then a research agenda to better understand property economics research is implied.

The nature of reflection is that it follows from the writer's experiential processes and interpretations. The reader may come from a different stance. Broadly accepting the propositions, there is a call for property economics research to be formulated in reason and logic, particularly as humans do not reason from facts alone. Such reasoned thinking could for example be in the property economic concepts of space and place, contracts and justice, capital and financialisation.

To engage with such theory would provide some depth of philosophical roots for property as a discipline. Elevating property as a “real-world” discipline rather than simply an applied mathematics discipline.

The paper enables an understanding of how property economics research can benefit from more ontology and more inductive reasoning.

The paper reflects the views and experience of the author based on over 15 years of research in property economics.

Revisiting Carroll’s classic corporate social responsibility (CSR) pyramid framework, this paper aims to evolve a novel synthesis of ethics and economics. This yielded an “integrative CSR economics”.

This theory paper examined how to conceptually set up CSR theory, argue its ethical nature and establish its practical, social and empirical relevance. Economic analysis reached out from contemporary institutional economics to Smith’s classic studies.

The paper reconstructed all of Carroll’s four dimensions of CSR – economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic responsibilities – through economics. The paper discounted a core assumption of much CSR research that economic approach to CSR, including the instrumental, strategic “business case” approach to CSR, were unethical and lacked any foundations in ethics theory. Integrative CSR economics reframes research on viability and capability requirements for CSR practice; redirecting empirical research on links between CSP (corporate social performance) and CFP (corporate financial performance).

The paper focused on Carroll as the leading champion of CSR research. Future research needs to align other writers with integrative CSR economics. Friedman or Freeman, or the historic contributions of Dodd, Mayo, Bowen or Drucker, are especially interesting.

The paper set out how integrative CSR economics satisfies the “business case” approach to CSR and develops practical implications along: a systemic dimension of the market economy; a legal-constitutional dimension; and the dimension of market exchanges.

Integrative CSR economics creates ethical benefits for society along: a systemic dimension of the market (mutual gains); a legal-constitutional dimension (law-following); and the dimension of market exchange (ethical capital creation). Social benefits are not only aspired to but also are achievable as a business case approach to CSR is followed.

The paper’s main contribution is a new synthesis of economics and ethics that yields an “integrative CSR economics”.

Provides statistics on trends in the quantity of publications of Clem Tisdell, changing patterns of their joint authorship and variations in their interdisciplinary nature. The genesis of his publications, particularly his books, is explained, along with the interdependence between them, relationships which would be far from obvious to an independent casual observer. Those publications have had further academic and personal consequences and have given rise to surprising opportunities. A similar study is undertaken of his research projects. His consultancies are briefly discussed and it is demonstrated how they have benefited his academic research and teaching. He has found that economics provides tremendous scope for versatility and diversity in exploring the world around us.