Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userResearch on innovation in China and Latin America: Bibliometric insights in the field of business, management and decision sciences
98
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Juli\\'an D. Cort\\'es
Publication date
2021
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Authors
Julian D. Cortes
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
China and Latin America (LATAM) are now key players in global research production. This study presents a comparative study on research on innovation in management and decision sciences based on data from Scopus and Web of Knowledge (WoS) between China and LATAM. Findings showed significant differences between regions regarding journals citation dependent measures, and between the number of authors and journal reputation, public universities have been leading producers, and China showed a particular interest in research topics such as commerce and industry, while LATAM in sustainable development and bio-technology.
rate research
Read More
This study aims to comprehend the structure of RIBM (research on innovation in business and management) in China and LAC (Latin America and the Caribbean) via co-word and institutional co-authorship networks using Scopus bibliographic data (1998- 2018). Multiple Correspondence Analysis and Social Network Analysis were applied. Public institutions are interconnected and generate most of the advances in RIBM. RIBM boards regional and national STi policies permeated by sustainability-related factors. China is focused on IT and knowledge management for supply chain and engineering, while LAC focuses on institutional perspectives for economic development.
Trade and investment between developing regions such as China and Latin America (LATAM) are growing prominently. However, insights on crucial factors such as innovation in business and management (iBM) about both regions have not been scrutinized. This study presents the research output, impact, and structure of iBM research published about China and LATAM in a comparative framework using Google Scholar, Dimensions, and Microsoft Academic. Findings showed i) that iBM topics of both regions were framed within research and development management, and technological development topics, ii) significant differences in output and impact between regions, and iii) the same case for platforms.
This study presents longitudinal evidence on the dissension of Management and Business Research (MBR) in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). It looks after intellectual bridges linking clusters among such dissension. It was implemented a coword network analysis to a sample of 12,000+ articles published by authors from LAC during 1998-2017. Structural network scores showed an increasing number of keywords and mean degree but decreasing modularity and density. The intellectual bridges were those of the cluster formed by disciplines/fields that tend toward consensus (e.g., mathematical models) and not by core MBR subjects (e.g., strategic planning).
Research on innovation and sustainability is prolific but fragmented. This study integrates the research on innovation in management and business and STEM fields for sustainability in a unified framework for the case of developing countries (i.e., the Global South). It presents and discusses the output, impact, and structure of such research based on a sample of 14,000+ articles and conference proceedings extracted from the bibliographic database Scopus. The findings reveal research output inflections after global announcements such as UN-Earth Summits. The study also reveals the indisputable leadership of China in overall output and research agenda-setting. Nonetheless, countries such as India, Mexico, and Nigeria are either more efficient or impactful. GS research published in highly reputable journals is still scarce but increasing modestly. Central topic clusters (e.g., knowledge management) remain peripheral to the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) research landscape. Finally, academic-corporate collaboration is in its infancy and limited to particular economic sectors: energy, pharmaceuticals, and high-tech.
The complexity of emergent wicked problems, such as climate change, culminates in a reformulation of how we think about society and mobilize scientists from various disciplines to seek solutions and perspectives on the problem. From an epistemological point of view, it is essential to evaluate how such topics can be developed inside the academic arena but, to do that, it is necessary to perform complex analysis of the great number of recent academic publications. In this work, we discuss how climate change has been addressed by social sciences in practice. Can we observe the development of a new epistemology by the emergence of the climate change debate? Are there contributions in academic journals within the field of social sciences addressing climate change? Which journals are these? Who are the authors? To answer these questions, we developed an innovative method combining different tools to search, filter, and analyze the impact of the academic production related to climate change in social sciences in the most relevant journals.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
