4.5 Article

Focus on China: the current status of entrepreneurship research in China

Journal

SCIENTOMETRICS
Volume 98, Issue 3, Pages 1985-2006

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-013-1114-5

Keywords

Entrepreneurship research; China; Collaboration; Theoretical foundation; Bibliometric analysis

Funding

  1. Chinese Scholarship Committee
  2. National Planning Office of Philosophy and Social Science [10YJA630188]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This review study is a first attempt to map the state of entrepreneurship research in China by focusing on the contributions of Chinese researchers. Leading contributors, research collaboration and theoretical underpinnings in both domestic-oriented and international-oriented research are discussed. The review comprises 508 articles published in domestic Chinese journals indexed by the Chinese Social Science Citation Index and 189 articles published in international journals indexed by the Social Science Citation Index between 2000 and 2011. Two bibliometric approaches, co-authorship analysis and co-citation analysis, were utilized. The results indicate that entrepreneurship research in China is characterized by a clear division, not only in terms of researchers in each community, collaborating network but also with regard to theoretical foundation. Domestic-oriented research is still in its infancy. The research community has attracted a majority of Chinese researchers who focus on inter-institutional collaboration based on mentorship and directing relationship. Scholars involved in international-oriented research engage in more open communication by collaborating not only with researchers from other Chinese institutions but also with those from foreign countries. At the same time, they contribute to the understanding of Chinese entrepreneurship by linking the entrepreneurship phenomenon in Chinese context to theoretical frameworks.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available