IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i3p1708-d740504.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Visualized Analysis of the Research Current Hotspots and Trends on Innovation Chain Based on the Knowledge Map

Author

Listed:
  • Yarui Gao

    (Business School, Sias University, Zhengzhou 451150, China
    Business School, Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, China)

  • Runhui Lin

    (Business School, Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, China
    China Academy of Corporate Governance, Tianjin 300071, China)

  • Yanhong Lu

    (Business School, Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, China)

Abstract

The continued increase in global trade protectionism, refinement of labor division, high innovation cost, and development of information technology have led to many enterprises actively being engaged in innovation to improve their national economic competitiveness. Although significant research has been carried out on this by numerous academic institutions, little is known about innovation trends in Chinese enterprises. In the existing methods of literature research, the scientific knowledge map, which, based on bibliometrics, is an effective tool for management knowledge, can visually describe the knowledge resources and their carriers under the state of time series and provides a new way for literature analysis. In this paper, the CiteSpace tool was used to map knowledge domains. A total of 459 and 5645 studies published between 2010 and 2020 were downloaded from the CNKI and Web of Science databases. By analyzing the keywords “co-occurrence matrix”, “author cooperation networks”, and “high-frequency cited literatures”, we found the differences of the research current, hotspots, and trends both in China and the world, but we were not limited to these. The research results are as follows: In China: (1) There were 759 nodes in the map of key authors, which shows that innovation chain research in China is still in the early stages. In addition, the layout of author nodes was relatively scattered while density was low; therefore, it was hard to form clusters. There is a need to strengthen academic cooperation to improve research on innovation chains. (2) From the keyword network analysis map of the innovation chain, we found that the Chinese research hotspots were: innovation chain, industrial chain, collaborative innovation, scientific and technological innovation, innovation-driven, technological innovation, strategic emerging industries, innovation ecosystem, and integration of industry and education, among other fields. In the world: (1) Most academic studies on the innovation chain have been published in different fields; these journals are about production, operation, management science, and economy, among others. These findings show that the innovation chain has received attention from multiple disciplines, and, therefore, it belongs to an interdisciplinary research field. Studies from different fields have analyzed the innovation chain from their own research perspectives. Therefore, current research outcomes on the innovation chain are difficult to unify. (2) The most important authors and key studies were analyzed. According to the co-citation map, studies on the “innovation chain” with high co-citation frequencies were not studies on the innovation chain but had the innovation chain as a theme or a concept without in-depth research on the innovation chain. (3) Through co-citation and cluster analysis of keywords, we found that international studies on the “innovation chain” are more focused on the global value chain, blockchain technology, strategic analysis, sustainable development, and absorptive capacity among other fields. Research frontier themes were mainly communication technology, continuous operation management, technological change, ecological innovation, supply chain integration, Industry 4.0, logistics innovation, nanotechnology, circular economy, and supply chain innovation, among other fields. Therefore, international scholars focus more on: technological issues related to innovation, using advanced communication technology, blockchain technology, and nanotechnology to improve innovation abilities. Moreover, they insist on sustainable development in the process of innovation, advocating for green innovation and ecological innovation. Finally, results of the visualization show that current research is mainly focused on innovation, not the innovation chain. Therefore, experts in this field should pay more attention to the study of structural stability and knowledge mobility of the innovation chain.

Suggested Citation

  • Yarui Gao & Runhui Lin & Yanhong Lu, 2022. "A Visualized Analysis of the Research Current Hotspots and Trends on Innovation Chain Based on the Knowledge Map," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-14, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:3:p:1708-:d:740504
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/3/1708/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/3/1708/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chaomei Chen & Fidelia Ibekwe‐SanJuan & Jianhua Hou, 2010. "The structure and dynamics of cocitation clusters: A multiple‐perspective cocitation analysis," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(7), pages 1386-1409, July.
    2. Chaomei Chen & Fidelia Ibekwe-SanJuan & Jianhua Hou, 2010. "The structure and dynamics of cocitation clusters: A multiple-perspective cocitation analysis," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(7), pages 1386-1409, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yinjia Miao & Shahid Iqbal & Arslan Ayub, 2023. "The Road to Eco-Excellence: How Does Eco-Friendly Deliberate Practice Foster Eco-Innovation Performance through Creative Self-Efficacy and Perceived Eco-Innovation Importance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-16, February.
    2. Yuying Gao & Shanyue Jin, 2022. "Corporate Nature, Financial Technology, and Corporate Innovation in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-22, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wang Guizhou & Zhang Si & Yu Tao & Ning Yu, 2021. "A Systematic Overview of Blockchain Research," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 9(3), pages 205-238, June.
    2. Jiaxing Jiang & Lin Fan, 2022. "Visualizing the Knowledge Domain of Language Experience: A Bibliometric Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440211, January.
    3. Jiao Zhang & Qian Wang & Yiping Xia & Katsunori Furuya, 2022. "Knowledge Map of Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development: A Visual Analysis Using CiteSpace," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-24, February.
    4. Hu, Wen & Li, Chun-hua & Ye, Chun & Wang, Ji & Wei, Wei-wei & Deng, Yong, 2019. "Research progress on ecological models in the field of water eutrophication: CiteSpace analysis based on data from the ISI web of science database," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 410(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Zhibin Peng & Omid Khatin-Zadeh, 2023. "Research on metaphor processing during the past five decades: a bibliometric analysis," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    6. Rui Qiu & Shuhua Hou & Xin Chen & Zhiyi Meng, 2021. "Green aviation industry sustainable development towards an integrated support system," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(5), pages 2441-2452, July.
    7. Qi-Qi CHEN & Jun-Biao ZHANG & Yu HUO, 2016. "A study on research hot-spots and frontiers of agricultural science and technology innovation - visualization analysis based on the Citespace III," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(9), pages 429-445.
    8. Andrej Kastrin & Dimitar Hristovski, 2021. "Scientometric analysis and knowledge mapping of literature-based discovery (1986–2020)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1415-1451, February.
    9. Qiu, Rui & Hou, Shuhua & Meng, Zhiyi, 2021. "Low carbon air transport development trends and policy implications based on a scientometrics-based data analysis system," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 1-10.
    10. Abderahman Rejeb & Karim Rejeb & Steven J. Simske & John G. Keogh, 2022. "Blockchain technology in the smart city: a bibliometric review," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(5), pages 2875-2906, October.
    11. Mehdi Amirkhani & Igor Martek & Mark B. Luther, 2021. "Mapping Research Trends in Residential Construction Retrofitting: A Scientometric Literature Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, September.
    12. Mustak, Mekhail & Salminen, Joni & Plé, Loïc & Wirtz, Jochen, 2021. "Artificial intelligence in marketing: Topic modeling, scientometric analysis, and research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 389-404.
    13. Pinho, Celso R.A. & Pinho, Maria Luiza C.A. & Deligonul, Seyda Z. & Tamer Cavusgil, S., 2022. "The agility construct in the literature: Conceptualization and bibliometric assessment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 517-532.
    14. Zehra Taşkın, 2021. "Forecasting the future of library and information science and its sub-fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1527-1551, February.
    15. Jingwei Zheng & Ke Zhang & Boya Han & Jiayi Hou, 2023. "Research Interdisciplinarity and Citation Impact: A Network Analysis of Social Networking Sites Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, August.
    16. Chiemela Victor Amaechi & Idris Ahmed Ja’e & Ahmed Reda & Xuanze Ju, 2022. "Scientometric Review and Thematic Areas for the Research Trends on Marine Hoses," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-31, October.
    17. Maximilian Scheffler & Johannes Brunzel, 2020. "Destructive leadership in organizational research: a bibliometric approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 755-775, October.
    18. Ren, Yi-Shuai & Ma, Chao-Qun & Chen, Xun-Qi & Lei, Yu-Tian & Wang, Yi-Ran, 2023. "Sustainable finance and blockchain: A systematic review and research agenda," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    19. Worapan Kusakunniran & Amit Singh Dahal & Wantanee Viriyasitavat, 2018. "Journal Co-Citation Analysis for Identifying Trends of Inter-Disciplinary Research: An Exploratory Case Study in a University," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(04), pages 1-22, December.
    20. Floris Goerlandt & Jie Li & Genserik Reniers, 2021. "The Landscape of Risk Perception Research: A Scientometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-26, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:3:p:1708-:d:740504. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.