Search results

Any kind of production flow is obtained not from individual production organizations but from a more or less widespread Production Network of interconnected production modules located in different places and times. All of these modules are, consciously or not, necessarily connected, interacting and cooperating in a coordinated way to combine and arrange, step by step, the factors, materials, components, manpower, machines and equipment to obtain flows of products’ final goods, in particular’ and to sell these where there is a demand for them. The purpose of this paper is to determine, in logical and formal terms, the minimum conditions that bring about the formation of production networks and to discover the laws that explain their dynamics over time.

At the global level, the continuous and accelerated economic progress of mankind is witnessed. There is an increase in the quantity and quality of satisfied and yet to be satisfied needs, of attained and yet to be attained aspirations. The increase in productivity and in quality has become unstoppable and appears to guide the other variables in the system. It is natural to ask who produces and governs these phenomena. It does indeed seem there is a Ghost in the “Production” machine whose invisible hand produces growing levels of productivity and quality, increases the quality and quantity of satisfied needs and aspirations and reduces the burden of work, thus producing increasingly higher levels of progress in the entire economic system. This conceptual framework gives a simple answer: there is nothing metaphysical about this evolution towards unstoppable and irreversible progress, and it is produced by the spontaneous genesis and activity of selfish nodes and governed by the rules and laws of the production networks.

The author has identified ten “rules of selfish behavior” on the part of the nodes, whose application necessarily and inevitably produces three evolutionary dynamic processes “which refer to the network as an entity” which the author has called the “rules of the production networks” to emphasize their cogency: continual expansion, elasticity-resiliency and continual improvement in performance. The cognitive and creative processes that characterize the nodes do not allow us to predict the actual evolution of production networks; nevertheless, if it is assumed that nodes “consciously or not” follow the 10 “rules of selfish behavior”, then several typical trends, or behavioural schema, can be deduced which the author has called as the “laws of networks”, to highlight their apparent inevitability and cogency.

More than any other structure, Production Networks display Holland’s features and Arthur’s properties as their modules, viewed as autonomous entities with cognitive functions, represent a collectivity of agents that interact and exchange information with their environment to maintain over time their internal processes through adaptation, self-preservation, evolution and cognition, making individual and collective decisions as part of a network of micro behaviours.

This new conception of production through production networks, which takes into account the “rules” and “laws” regulating their behaviour, also sheds new light on the development of networks and their natural tendency to become globalized.

Although the concept of a network is becoming more popular in economic and business studies, it is yet to see an interpretation of production as deriving exclusively from the actions of increasingly larger networks. This paper presents an integrated view of production that does not discard the notion that production is carried out by organizations and companies but introduces the broader concept of the integration among organizations, which must be interpreted as nodes of a broader network that produces the flows of all the components needed to obtain the flow of a specific product. This represents an innovative view that will help us in understanding the difficulties policymakers encounter in governing production and controlling the basic variables that characterize it, specifically productivity, quality, quantity, prices and value. This perspective also allows to derive rules and laws for the behaviour of production networks that appear to be cogent and unvarying over time.

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

This book is a policy proposal aimed at the democratic left. It is concerned with gradual but radical reform of the socio‐economic system. An integrated policy of industrial and economic democracy, which centres around the establishment of a new sector of employee‐controlled enterprises, is presented. The proposal would retain the mix‐ed economy, but transform it into a much better “mixture”, with increased employee‐power in all sectors. While there is much of enduring value in our liberal western way of life, gross inequalities of wealth and power persist in our society.

Learning behaviors related to quality improvement in manufacturing systems (i.e. reduction of defectiveness over production cycles) are widely investigated. Many different approaches have been introduced to describe the link between the learning mechanism and quality performance of a plant. In a previous study by the same authors, a set of learning “composition laws” for two basic structures were defined to provide a tool to forecast the behavior of complex manufacturing systems composed by a network of elementary processes. This paper presents an empirical investigation about these learning composition laws on a real case in the field of automotive exhaust‐systems manufacturing.

In recent years, much has been discussed about new consumer practices based on the sharing economy. In this context, the purpose of this paper is to map out the international scientific production on sharing economy.

The research adopted a descriptive qualitative approach. Based on a sample of 95 documents collected in the Scopus database, analyses of bibliometric and sociometric indicators were carried out, as well as content analyses were conducted to identify the main thematic categories in the field.

The results show that sharing economy is an emerging topic, and of late, the research in this field has grown rapidly. The study provides a mapping of top journals and authors, works of greatest impact and of co-authorship, co-citation and bibliographic coupling networks, which evidence the low intensity of researcher’s interactions and scientific production dispersion in the field. The main subjects found in the sharing economy literature are determinants, motivations and barriers, sharing economy impacts, regulation, models and frameworks, critical approach and entrepreneurship and sharing-based new businesses.

The analyses did not take into account the timing perspective. Further research could undertake a timeline-based approach in order to present direct citation networks and to relate works according to the year when they were published.

The study innovates by identifying the main subjects in the sharing economy literature, as well as by presenting network analysis for some bibliometric indicators, complementing previous research in the field.

Presents an updated version of a paper given by the author at an international conference in Athens 2000. Briefly outlines the development of the internet and e‐commerce and the effect of globalization. Considers the potential for the EU to standardize rules and advance its economic integration agenda. Looks at present EU laws in this area. Covers the unicitral model law on electronic commerce, its merits and its problems. Discusses personal jurisdiction under traditional rules and cyberspace transactions. Concludes that existing legislation must be re‐evaluated in the light of technological advances, the need for a more mobile kind of legal person and the worldwide nature of transactions across territorial boundaries, paperless contracts and digital signatures and the use of self‐regulation are also covered.

Looks at the 2000 Employment Research Unit Annual Conference held at the University of Cardiff in Wales on 6/7 September 2000. Spotlights the 76 or so presentations within and shows that these are in many, differing, areas across management research from: retail finance; precarious jobs and decisions; methodological lessons from feminism; call centre experience and disability discrimination. These and all points east and west are covered and laid out in a simple, abstract style, including, where applicable, references, endnotes and bibliography in an easy‐to‐follow manner. Summarizes each paper and also gives conclusions where needed, in a comfortable modern format.

The present study seeks to answer the following research question: what is the profile of the academic production related to the interorganizational networks in the period between 2006 and 2016? Thus, this study aims to characterize the academic production about the subject interorganizational networks available in national journals with Concept “A” (Qualis Capes), in the period between 2006 and 2016.

This paper uses national journals with Concept “A” of the Qualis classification (2016) for journal selection. In total, 12 “A” concept journals were identified. However, it was decided to analyze ten of them. The procedures suggested by Crossan and Apaydin (2010) for conducting bibliometric studies were adopted. It has been identified that 77 articles were published in eight journals. The R 3.3.2 and R Studio 1.0.136 software were used. The IGRAPH 0.5.5-2 extension (package) was used to analyze graphs and co-authorship networks (Csárdi and Nepusz, 2006). This extension is able to manipulate networks with millions of vertices and edges and provides a series of functions to analyze the properties of social networks, such as subnetworks, intermediation, centrality, among other characteristics (Csárdi and Nepusz, 2006). Correspondence analysis (CA) was also performed. CA is a multivariate exploratory technique that converts a data matrix into a graphical representation, so that rows and columns are represented by points in a graph (Greenacre and Hastie, 1987). This extension is dedicated to the multivariate analysis of data and allows the manipulation of different types of variables (quantitative or categorical). In the present research, multiple CA (MCA) was applied – indicated when the elements are described as categorical variables (Lê et al., 2008). The characteristics considered for carrying out MCA were the “main term”, “research approach”, “type of research”, “constructs” and “research strategies”. By using the FactoMineR 1.34 extension, the hierarchical clustering on principal components (HCPC) function was used (Husson et al., 2007; Lê et al., 2008). This function allows creating clusters from the characteristics of the articles analyzed and highlights the justifications for the groupings created. The function allows forming as many clusters the researcher wishes, being of its attribution to analyze a division that best represents the characteristics of the data (Husson, Josse, and Pagès, 2010). Husson et al. (2010) suggest that an analysis should be performed from the hierarchical tree, thus the number of clusters can be defined considering the overall appearance (or shape) of the tree formed. At last, a word cloud was created using the Wordcloud 2.5 extension (Fellows, 2013). The noticed advantage of using this extension is that it does not separate the terms that form a keyword when generating the cloud. It has been used for the keywords of the 77 articles analyzed; however, it has been decided to keep those that presented frequency greater than or equal to two. By avoiding occasional terms, a more intelligible cloud was obtained.

The present study was not able to verify if the journals analyzed by Andrighi et al. (2011) have influenced others to publish on the subject, as suggested by the Bradford’s Law. The standard “success breeds success”, suggested by the Bradford’s Law, was not confirmed. The so-called nuclear zone (Brookes, 1969; Novaretti et al., 2015) is composed of the journals Brazilian Administration Review (BAR), Revista de Administração Contemporânea (RAC), Revista de Administração Pública (RAP) and Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios (RBGN). The journal RAC stands out for having been the one that has increased its annual average of publication in relation to the theme, when compared with the findings of Andrighi et al. (2011). The journals BAR and RBGN stand out because they are in the nuclear zone, even though they were not considered in the work of Andrighi et al. (2011). It should be noted that all the analyzed journals have in common the fact of addressing the themes of management and administration and, more specifically, making room for the “competitiveness” and “cooperation” constructs. These constructs are related to the theme of networks and were the most recurrent in the articles analyzed. “Cooperation” (29), “competitiveness” (27), “knowledge” (12), “learning” (6) and “trust” (3) were the “constructs” used to compose the 77 articles analyzed. In turn, “network” (49), “alliance” (18) and “cluster” (9) were the “main term” most used in the articles. This implies that the topic of cooperation is more linked to a vision of strategy. As occurred in the research of Andrighi et al. (2011), the term “network” is the most recurrent; in addition, the growth of space obtained by the term “alliance” stands out. The terms “network” and “alliance” were the most used by the articles, being predominant in 87 per cent of the research. In the present research, the predominance of the term “network” may have occurred because its concept is broader and it is used in the literature in different ways, even in contradictory ways (Andrighi et al., 2011; Schommer, 2001). In turn, the term “alliance” may have been recurrent because it has a wide dispersion of published issues, such as governance structure, cooperation, knowledge transfer and trust (Lima and Campos Filho, 2009). By using the HCPC function of the FactoMineR extension, the articles were grouped according to their characteristics, and then three clusters were formed. By analyzing the generated results, it is assumed that the division into three clusters was the one that best represented the data. Cluster 1 is characterized by descriptive, quantitative, half documentary and half survey research studies, being “cluster” the main term. Cluster 2 is characterized by exploratory case studies with qualitative–quantitative analyzes. Cluster 3 is characterized by theoretical tests. The Zipf’s law points out that a small group of words occurs many times; however, when considering the most recurrent words Networks (9), Strategic Alliances (8), Cooperation (8), Interorganizational Networks (8) and Alliances (6) show that they were present in only about 10 per cent of the works. Lotka’s Law, which states that few authors publish much and many authors publish little, was not confirmed. The authors who presented the highest number of publications, T. Diana L. v. A. de Macedo-Soares (6); Jorge Renato Verschoore (6); Alsones Balestrin (5); Douglas Wegner (4); Humberto Elias Garcia Lopes (4), participated in less than 10 per cent of the works. Thus, the authorship was characterized by many researchers publishing few works, what can be an effect of the behavior of these authors, who prefer to publish in network. The centrality of the relations between the authors was analyzed and, in addition, the intermediation points of the network were identified. The present study also analyzed all the references used by the 77 articles that compose the study. The main author of each of the references used was identified. Among the 30 identified authors, Yin and Hair Jr. stand out for books related to fundamentals and research methodologies. Borgatti and Eisenhardt developed research on the topic of interorganizational networks and also created works for methodological foundations. Powell was the most frequently mentioned author (28) and had more different works referenced (9). Powell stands out for the production of articles published in periodicals, not books. Porter’s situation is the opposite. Most of the quotations made to the author come from his books, especially the work “Competitive strategy” (Porter, 1980). All authors identified are foreigners, with the exception of Balestrin. Marshall, Polanyi, Granovetter and Williamson are authors of works considered seminal, being them, respectively, “Principles of economics” (Marshall, 1890), “Personal knowledge: towards a post critical philosophy” (Polanyi, 1958) and “The strength of weak ties” (Granovetter, 1973) and “Markets and hierarchies, analysis and antitrust implications” (Williamson, 1975).

Like all research, it has limitations. The first one derives from the selection criteria of the periodicals to be analyzed. The cut referring to the journals of greater impact excludes most of the national articles. These studies may contain important contributions to the knowledge of the national publication profile. In addition, the choice to analyze the journals disregards other types of work, such as books, scientific events, dissertations and thesis and reports. The choice of articles published in journals is based on the fact that these are a “certified knowledge”, as the studies are peer-reviewed, and in the case of the Qualis “A” stratum, a review of exogenous quality is supposed on this production. Despite its flaws, this system can be considered reliable to evaluate scientific knowledge (Bedeian, 2004; Shugan, 2007). The analysis of the most recent articles may have been hampered by a temporal issue. In addition, the choice of keywords, a necessary step, leaves out other studies. Another limitation refers to the fact that the articles have been analyzed and classified by the authors, which presupposes the use of their value judgments, at least to some extent. Other limitations refer to the bibliometric techniques employed. The main authors referenced in the studies were demonstrated, that is, those authors who have been used as a theoretical reference for studies of interorganizational networks. However, the circumstances under which these citations occurred were not analyzed. For example, an author may be quoted to use the contribution of his/her study, to be criticized or just to be another reference in the text. The lack of this analysis can be considered a fragility of the study.

This text was started talking about the dispersion of the studies on networks in the country. Previous work has been used, theoretically and empirically demonstrating this fact. Zipf’s Law applied to bibliometrics, as described by Guedes and Borschiver (2005), Novaretti et al. (2015) and Pao (1978), was not confirmed in this study, which seems to be an indicative fact that the research on this theme in Brazil presents fragmentation as an intrinsic characteristic. That is, it must remain fragmented, as this would be its own way to evolve. This is evident especially when comparing the study of Andrighi et al. (2011) and its results. With several but continuous temporal cut-outs, and the same keywords, the maintenance of this dispersion is evident. This is also a contribution of this study.

The study contributed to updating the research profile, mainly after the triennium 2013-2015 of Qualis Capes’ evaluations. It also added to the mapping of recent Brazilian academic production related to interorganizational networks, completing studies by Alves et al. (2013), Andrighi et al. (2011), Balestrin et al. (2010), Cunha and Carrieri (2003) and Mascena et al. (2013). Thus, it is believed that the research reached the proposed objectives, despite its limitations.

The present research is also justified by helping to understand the subject being useful for researchers, educators and students, in general, in the task of demonstrating gaps and opportunities of future researches and collaborating with the elaboration of a research agenda (Baumgartner and Pieters, 2003). The work has updated bibliometrics on the subject and allows comparisons with previous bibliometric studies (Alves et al., 2013; Andrighi et al., 2011; Balestrin et al., 2010; Cunha and Carrieri, 2003; Ferreira et al., 2014; Lima and Campos Filho, 2009; Mascena et al., 2013). It is believed that the present study differs from the others because of the analysis performed, the way the data were treated, with techniques that are rarely used simultaneously, going beyond the descriptive statistics.

This paper aims to explore the pathways of carbon transfer in 200 US corporations along with the motivations that drive such transfers. The particular focus is on each firm’s embeddedness in the global value chain (GVC) and the influence of environmental law, operational costs and corporate social responsibility (CSR). The insights gleaned bridge a gap in the literature surrounding GVCs and corporate carbon transfer.

The methodology comprised a two-step research approach. First, the authors used a two-sided fixed regression to analyse the relationship between each firm’s embeddedness in the GVC and its carbon transfers. The sample consisted of 217 US firms. Next, the authors examined the influence of environmental law, operational costs and CSR on carbon transfers using a quantitative comparison analysis. These results were interpreted through the theoretical frameworks of the GVC and legitimacy theory.

The empirical results indicate positive relationships between carbon transfers and GVC embeddedness in terms of both a firm’s position and its degree. From the quantitative comparison, the authors find that the pressure of environmental law and operational costs motivate these transfers through the value chain. Furthermore, CSR does not help to mitigate transfers.

The findings offer insights for policymakers, industry and academia to understand that, with globalised production and greater value creation, transferring carbon to different parts of the GVC – largely to developing countries – will only become more common. The underdeveloped nature of environmental technology in these countries means that global emissions will likely rise instead of fall, further exacerbating global warming. Transferring carbon is not conducive to a sustainable global economy. Hence, firms should be closely regulated and given economic incentives to reduce emissions, not simply shunt them off to the developing world.

Carbon transfer is a major obstacle to effectively reducing carbon emissions. The responsibilities of carbon transfer via GVCs are difficult to define despite firms being a major consideration in such transfers. Understanding how and why corporations engage in carbon transfers can facilitate global cooperation among communities. This knowledge could pave the way to establishing a global carbon transfer monitoring network aimed at preventing corporate carbon transfer and, instead, encouraging emissions reduction.

This study extends the literature by investigating carbon transfers and the GVC at the firm level. The authors used two-step research approach including panel data and quantitative comparison analysis to address this important question. The authors are the primary study to explore the motivation and pathways by which firms transfer carbon through the GVC.