If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The purpose of this paper is to summarize and classify extant research and to better understand the past, present, and future state of the theory of value co-creation. Its main objectives are: to identify the different theoretical perspectives and research streams that characterize and define the co-creation literature, and to highlight the connections between them; to look for emerging trends and gaps in the literature by comparing the most recent papers with those representing the field's core. Design/methodology/approach -The paper relies on bibliometric data: co-citation techniques were employed to select, analyze, and interpret citation patterns within the co-creation literature. Findings -The paper identified two main clusters, as well as specific research streams and common themes, representing scholarly journals' publications on co-creation over the past years. These research streams and themes apply three different theoretical perspectives: service science, innovation and technology management, and marketing and consumer research. Data from the most recent publications has been used to verify if and how the original streams and themes are reflected in the contemporary debate. Research limitations/implications -Inevitably, the findings of the analysis have limitations related to the research design, the databases, and the applied bibliometric methods. Practical implications -From a practical perspective, the research impacts on theory building, management decision making, and teaching. Originality/value -This study depicts the remarkable development of the literature on co-creation and shows the latent structure underlying its different research streams. To the best knowledge, this study is the first to determine co-citation frequencies from both the SSCI and Scopus databases.

PurposeGiven the variety of approaches characterising the research area of anti‐consumption and consumer resistance, the purpose of this paper is to conduct a literature review to explore the structure of this interesting research domain and to better understand its origins, current state of development, and future trends.Design/methodology/approachAn author co‐citation analysis was performed using the SSCI of the Thomson‐ISI database. A sample of 48 authors was identified, and the co‐citation frequencies were analysed.FindingsThe study reveals the former and present structure of the anti‐consumption and consumer resistance field of inquiry. Two levels of analysis, five areas of interest, and nine theoretical approaches were acknowledged. These results are useful in providing future direction, particularly in terms of the research gaps and the expected topical areas of interest.Research limitations/implicationsAlthough quite rigorous, co‐citation analysis is subject to some limitations that can bias the results of the research: primarily, the inability to distinguish between good citations and bad citations.Originality/valueThe study contributes to a clear‐cut representation of the field of anti‐consumption and consumer resistance. From an academic perspective, it provides clear tools for researchers to identify potential new directions as well as to locate their work within the field. It also provides a useful approach for new researchers, as they can identify the main approaches and areas of interest. From a practical point‐of‐view, it can serve as an introduction to the field for students and managers.

This study presents a bibliometric review of creative tourism literature aimed at understanding the main research topics and approaches, theoretical foundations, and the most recent areas of investigation. Sixty-four articles on creative tourism were selected and analyzed using co-citation analysis, content analysis, and bibliographic coupling. Findings reveal that creative tourism is a well-defined field of studies with three main research topics; namely, Tourist Experience and Co-Creation, Creativity in Tourism, and Cultural Tourism and Events. Furthermore, several theoretical approaches can be applied to a different set of empirical contexts, among which co-creation and experience economy play a major role. An analysis of the most recent publications identifies five promising research trends and allows some conclusions about the opportunities for future research to be drawn.

No abstract

The purpose of this editorial is to point out two main issues: the role of the literature review in scientific research and the opportunity to perform it by bibliometric methods. I want to engage in this discussion because I agree with what Chiara Orsinger (2016: p.7) wrote in her editorial: "the marketing field has gathered a relevant body of knowledge" and "it is sometimes difficult for marketing scholars to gain a synthetic view" of the field or specific topic. My reasoning is inspired by two assertions: