The Status of International Ethnic Entrepreneurship Studies: A Co-citation Analysis

Abstract

This article examines the literature of international ethnic entrepreneurship research and explores its historical development over the past four decades. With citation data from Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), including 627 journal articles and 25,731 cited references, we conducted a co-citation analysis to explore the intellectual structure of international ethnic entrepreneurship studies. The results show that international ethnic entrepreneurship studies focus on Chinese ethnic entrepreneurs, followed by Cubans, Koreans and blacks. The results also show that contemporary international ethnic entrepreneurship studies have shifted their foci from exploring ethnic-immigrant enclaves to studying immigrant business and self-employment as well as social embeddedness in ethnic business over the past four decades. This study thus identifies the knowledge essentials of ethnic entrepreneurship research and profiles the most influential journals, publications and scholars and their relationships in this field. The results of this study also provide a useful tool for researchers to access the literature of international ethnic entrepreneurship research.

An overview of contemporary international human resource management studies

“…The ACA has been shown to be able to describe, from an empirical standpoint, the intellectual structure of one academic discipline using an objective method. It has been applied in many academic areas, such as management and social sciences (Neeley, 1981), information systems management (Culnan, 1986), organizational behavior (Culnan et al , 1990), consumer research (Hoffman and Holbrook, 1993), advertising (Pasadeos et al , 1998), information science (White and McCain, 1998), management (Tahai and Meyer, 1999), production and operations management (Pilkington and Liston-Heyes, 1999), strategic management (Ramos and Ruiz, 2004), knowledge management (Ponzi, 2002; Ma and Yu, 2010), international management (Acedo and Casillas, 2005), management of technology (Pilkington and Teichert, 2006), family business (Casillas and Acedo, 2007), R&D Management (McMillan, 2008), conflict management (Ma et al , 2008), international business (Griffith et al , 2008), human resource management (Mariluz and Antonio, 2009), electronic commerce (Ma, 2009a), business ethics (Ma, 2009b), decision analysis (Lee et al , 2010), international ethnic entrepreneurship (Ma et al , 2012), global branding (Chabowski et al , 2013), and expatriate studies (Wang et al , 2013). The use of such a bibliometric approach has contributed to the identification of research and future areas of study in these disciplines.…”

Are Migrants Agents or Instruments of Development? The Case of ‘Temporary’ Migration in Malaysia

“…There is a stark difference between the treatment of migrants in the 'ethnic economies' literature and the migration-development literature. The former understands migrants' agency in terms of their capacity to deploy various skills and resources to obtain upward social mobility in the sending country (Logan, Zhang, and Alba 2002;Ma, Wang, and Lee 2012), while the latter focuses predominantly on migrants' capacity to finance private entrepreneurship and public development in the sending society (Khadria 2007). Most studies on ethnic economies discuss male migrants' experiences, while development literature takes into account migrant women, predominantly domestic workers.…”

Disability Studies

“…The antecedents and consequences of firm-level entrepreneurship: State of the field. Entrepreneurship Theory &Practice, 24 (20) 45-66.ZhenzhongMa, Tangting Wang & Yender Lee, (2012). The status of ethnic entrepreneurship studies.…”