The state of research on technological uncertainties, social uncertainties and emerging markets: A multidisciplinary literature review

The objective of this research work is to study the progress of research on technological uncertainties, social uncertainties and emerging markets and outline and identify the key disciplines, journals, articles and authors. For this the author studied the existing literature from the various fields in which technological uncertainties, social uncertainties and emerging markets research work have been published using ISI Web of Knowledge database. The paper finds that there is increasing research work on technological uncertainties, social uncertainties and emerging markets and the bibliographical search resulted in ninety-one documents written by one-hundred-sixty-one authors in eighty-four journals in seventy-two disciplines. The five major disciplines and their underlying journals are business and economics, agriculture, psychology, public administration, and environmental sciences and ecology accounting for majority of publications. In journals the most prolific, measured by number of articles published are Harvard Business Review, Social Science and Medicine, World Development, and Higher Education; and most influential, measured by the global citation received, are Harvard Business Review, Social Science and Medicine and Sociological Review. The top 10% of the journals are responsible for 23% of all publications but 85% of all global citations received. This highlights that despite the high, diverse and increasing number of journals; only few are dominating and shaping the research arena of technological uncertainties, social uncertainties and emerging markets. Further, in the ten most cited articles, no author appears more than once.     

On the Market for Principles of Economics Textbooks: Innovation and Product Differentiation

Tabular data are provided on the journals that have published economic education articles, the topics covered, and the individual authors. Institutions are ranked by their contributions to the economic education literature.     

Authorship,Collaboration, Topics,and Research Gaps in Environmental and Resource Economics 1991–2015

Environmental and Resource Economics is one of the premier journals in the field of environmental economics. It was established with an aspiration to focus more on applied and policy relevant research compared to other established journals, and to establish better channels of communication and collaboration between researchers from Europe and other parts of the world. We present a text based exploratory analysis of 1630 articles published in the Journal from 1991 to 2015 that suggests the Journal has been somewhat successful in meeting both these aims. Perhaps more importantly, it shows the Journal continues to progress toward these goals. The European authors are the largest contributors to the Journal, which is in contrast to other prominent journals (such as Journal of Environmental Economics and Management and Ecological Economics). And while most of the collaboration has occurred within this geographic region (e.g., European authors collaborated with other European authors more frequently), this trend appears to be changing as the proportion of articles written by international collaborators is gradually increasing. Topic analysis reveals that almost all of the articles could be grouped under applied and/or policy relevant topics, and almost two-thirds of the articles are empirical in nature, which suggest that the journal has been able to fulfil both of its commitments. We also investigate trends in research foci over the last 25 years and what kind of research gaps can be discerned.     

The micro-geography of academic research: How distinctive is economics?

This study examines micro-geographic clustering in the production and recognition of academic research. Three U.S. ZIP codes are associated with over 40 percent of articles in the top five economics journals and those articles garnered one-half of all citations in these journals from 2000 to 2015. Such micro-geographic concentration is not apparent in other disciplines, even those like chemistry that rely on specialized laboratories. Concentration of citations to economics articles whose authors are associated with a few key ZIP codes has strengthened over time, even as it has weakened for other disciplines. This micro-geographic concentration may increase systemic risk by reducing the diversity of economics research that is published and cited and may lead to insufficient research attention to local context.     

A Machine Learning Analysis of the Recent Environmental and Resource Economics Literature

We use topic modeling to study research articles in environmental and resource economics journals in the period 2000–2019. Topic modeling based on machine learning allows us to identify and track latent topics in the literature over time and across journals, and further to study the role of different journals in different topics and the changing emphasis on topics in different journals. The most prevalent topics in environmental and resource economics research in this period are growth and sustainable development and theory and methodology. Topics on climate change and energy economics have emerged with the strongest upward trends. When we look at our results across journals, we see that journals have different topical profiles and that many topics mainly appear in one or a few selected journals. Further investigation reveal latent semantic structures across research themes that only the insider would be aware.

     

The Geography and Concentration of Authorship in the Top Five: Implications For European Economics

We study to what degree authors who publish in the five most prestigious journals in economics have previously published there and in which world region they are based. Although still high, the concentration of United States‐based and previously published top‐five authors has decreased. This trend is driven by increased co‐authorship between USA and non‐USA scholars and between scholars with and without previous top‐five articles. Only around 5% of all articles each year are written solely by first‐time authors from outside the United States, and this share has not increased since the mid‐1990s. Against this background, we argue that European institutions should be wary of putting too much emphasis on publishing in these five journals. Both the advancement and diversity of the economics discipline may otherwise suffer.     

AN EMPIRICAL NOTE ON CRITICAL COMMENTARY IN AUSTRALIAN ECONOMICS JOURNALS

A substantial empirical literature exists on ranking the published research output of individual academic economists and individual university Economics departments, including Australian work in Economics. However, very little corresponding effort has been directed at examining trends in the nature of published articles, and this embryonic literature is exclusively focused on a handful of top-ranked journals to the exclusion of Australian Economics journals. This note seeks to fill this gap by adopting the methodology developed by Coelho et al. (2005) in their analysis of the decline in critical commentary and applying it to Australian Economics journals for the period 1962 to 2005.     

公私合作伙伴关系（PPP）的文献计量与可视化分析

为了解国内PPP领域的研究现状和发展趋势,以CNKI数据库（2000-2015）收录的相关期刊论文为数据来源,运用SATI3.2和UCINET6.0软件,针对期刊、作者、机构和关键词字段进行文献计量和可视化分析,着重对关键词进行了社会网络分析、聚类分析和多维尺度分析。通过上述研究,得到了反映该领域研究的知识图谱,并由此发现该领域的主流期刊、高水平机构、代表性学者、知识特征和研究趋势。     

A ranking of journals for the aspiring health economist

This article identifies and ranks 104 journals that might logically serve as the core for the interdisciplinary field of Health Economics. These journals are identified by analysing approximately 15 000 articles contained in the current CVs of 100 top health economists. Of the nearly 1200 journals spanned by these CVs, 104 journals were outlets for more than five of these top health economists. The 104 journals are ranked using eigenfactor and article influence scores as well as the percentile rank for each journal within its Institute for Scientific Information category. The primary intention is to create a broad-based journal list that exposes possible research outlets for aspiring health economists and to report the relative rankings of such outlets using established metrics.     

A Guide for “JEE Content” Submissions

This is an update of a guide to the thinking of the editorial collective for the Content section of the Journal of Economic Education (JEE). The authors discuss the type of papers they are looking for, what in their view constitutes a good paper, and how their review process works. They specifically discuss their reviewing process, the content they are looking for, and their view of the structure of a good paper. Although they focus specifically on Content articles for the JEE, many of the general issues discussed may carry over to other sections of the JEE and to journals more generally.     

ASSESSING THE RELATIVE IMPACTS OF ECONOMIC EDUCATION SCHOLARSHIP: AN APPLICATION OF THE HARZING DATABASE

Despite the rising prominence of economic education scholarship, little work has been done to document how economic education scholarship is faring in the academic world. Unlike prior research in this genre, this study assesses the relative impacts of economic education scholarship by examining published research in (strictly) economic education journals. In order to do so, we use the Harzing database of citations to articles published in (strictly) economic education journals from 1990 to the present. Supporting some of the measures found in prior research, we find that the Journal of Economic Education (JEE) is unambiguously the dominant source of influential scholarship in the field of economic education. Interestingly, the JEE's closest competitors among active economic education journals are the International Review of Economics Education and Computers in Higher Education Economics Research, both of which are published under the auspices of the Economics Network, which is located in the UK. Following these two journals in our ranking is the Journal of Economics and Finance Education, a relatively new journal launch.     

扎根理论视角下工程创新研究脉络分析

工程创新研究涉及多层面、多参与方、多要素,呈现多元化格局。基于扎根理论,从ASCE、WOS等数据库中对国际重要期刊刊载的工程创新相关文献进行了系统梳理,分别从认知、组织、关系和经济4个视角进行了归纳,并对文献提及的未来研究方向进行整合,提出了未来可深化研究的3个主要方向,以期为后续研究提供参考。     

The CDM framework: knowledge recombination from an evolutionary viewpoint

ABSTRACT

Since Crepon, Duguet, and Mairesse published their ground-breaking article (‘Research, Innovation and Productivity: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level’, 1998), the CDM framework has known a large diffusion, despite being published in a non-indexed journal. The present study is an exploration of the spread and recombination of ‘knowledge’ in the ‘CDM universe’, comprising all papers in Scopus indexed journals citing CDM or/and CDM cited papers. We assess first the speed and range of diffusion of CDM and investigate next the ‘origins’ and further ‘genealogical’ make up of the knowledge recombinations within the CDM universe. We find that CDM is cited by a growing number of papers, which spread over a variety of fields, and that it compares very well with the most cited comparable articles in indexed journals in its domain of research. We further find that the CDM universe is mainly constituted of three large clusters and for each of them we are able to identify knowledge paths going from the CDM and earlier cited papers to the subsequent main citing papers. We intend to provide a detailed interpretation of these findings in future work.     

全球不信任研究文献计量分析与启示——基于Web of Science

文章采用文献计量分析方法,对发表于1918-2014年之间被Web of Science(即SCIE、SSCI和AHCI)收录的以"不信任"为主题的9938篇文献,从类型、年度发表情况、学科类别、研究领域、来源期刊统计、语种、国家与地区、机构、引用与被引用以及H指数进行统计分析;通过这一工作发现:不信任问题逐步成为包括心理学、哲学、社会学、经济学、法学、管理学、互联网科学、生理学等众多学科的学者关注和研究的热点以及焦点问题,发表在国外相关核心权威期刊的论文数逐年递增,专注不信任研究的学者(即发表论文多的学者)数量也不断增加,引用和被引用的文献数也逐年递增,不信任研究文献的H指数也不断提高;在不信任的研究领域中,针对在线信息、技术和商务系统方面的研究,呈现强劲的态势,McKnight研究团队占据研究的主导地位并且在电子商务不信任的研究中发挥引领作用,相关成果也较丰硕。文章的研究结果将为国内有关不信任研究尤其电子商务不信任研究提供借鉴和参考。     

Power and publications in Chinese academia

In power-oriented societies, academia may not be immune to the influence of power. This paper studies the power-publication link by applying an event-study strategy to a panel dataset of the publication and biographical information of deans of economics schools in Chinese universities. We find that (i) deanship increases an individual's publication by 0.7 articles per year; (ii) the increased publications stem from work coauthored with other researchers within the same university; (iii) the topics of the increased publications are more likely to deviate from the deans’ research area prior to becoming deans; and (iv) the power effect is smaller for top universities and leading journals, and for scholars with more pre-dean publications. These patterns appear consistent with the role of power in resource allocation rather than the impact of ability or reputation of the deans and thus have implications on distortions in knowledge production.     

学术杂志收费会导致质量下降吗

讨论了学术杂志为实现学术交流功能如何定价和控制文章质量。我们发现学术杂志对作者收费并不会影响文章质量。中国现有学术评价机制是影响学术杂志定价和质量控制的关键,过度关注研究数量的学术评价机制导致追求利润最大化的学术杂志丧失质量控制功能,造成乱收费、文章质量低下和读者流失。     

Works from Other Disciplines

This section includes articles and presentations from noneconomics journals and meetings that may be of interest and use to economic educators.     

21世纪以来国内组织行为学研究现状与趋势

基于科学文献计量的知识图谱理论,运用词频分析、共现分析、多维尺度分析、共被引分析等方法,对CSSCI（2000-2013）收录的8种权威期刊中关于组织行为学的779条文献数据进行统计分析,着力描绘21世纪以来我国组织行为学领域的研究进展,并在此基础上,探寻核心作者组成的学术共同体、高被引文献形成的学科基础理论、核心研究机构和核心期刊构成的学术平台对我国组织行为学发展的推动作用。结果表明,我国的组织行为学研究已经形成了包含工作生活质量、绩效、领导力、创新/创造力在内的若干热点前沿领域,涌现出一批有影响力的核心作者、科研机构和核心期刊,突显出多元化基础理论和跨学科整合的态势。通过对我国组织行为学14年来研究成果的深入、可视和全面分析,为我国组织行为学理论乃至管理学未来相关研究提供有益参考和借鉴。     

让学术研究回归社会需求是技术经济研究的努力方向

技术经济的研究有两个面向:面向学术和面向应用。面向学术有两个方面,一是面向国际,二是面向国内。面向国际,要在国际学术期刊发表论文,特别是在国际顶级期刊发表论文,必须有新发现、新结论,这很不容易,我们真正有原创性的研究还很少。面向国内的学术成果主要在国内发表,论文数量和水平在逐年提高,但相当多的文章是为了发表而发表。面向应用也有两个方面,一是面向政府,主要是为宏观的、战略决策和管理服务;二是面向企业,就是面向企业实际操作层面。这两个方面我们都做得很不够,存在越来越脱离实际的倾向。为此,我们要认真思考要不要改变,如何改变这种状况。