Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

International trade negotiation analysis: network and semantic knowledge infrastructure

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study utilizes the social network analysis technique to analyze and better understand the semantic and knowledge networks that are associated with the field of international trade and more specifically international free trade agreements. This study builds on the research that currently exists in the field of international trade negotiation by using the SNA technique to construct, visualize, and investigate the International Trade networked knowledge infrastructure by analyzing 3074 publications, 1054 journal sources, 4047 authors, 1516 organizations, 87 countries and keywords associated with this field of research. The network and ego level properties—such as, degree centralities, density, components, structural holes, and degree distribution—suggest that the international trade co-authorship network analyzed is relatively fragmented. The knowledge and sematic networks exhibit power law distribution in which the incoming nodes and links prefer to attach to the nodes that are already well connected. The study also sheds light on the emerging and fading themes in the domain.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Notes

  1. Please refer to the provided electronic supplementary material.

  2. Please refer to the provided electronic supplementary material.

References

  • Acedo, F. J., Barroso, C., Casanueva, C., & Galán, J. L. (2006). Co-authorship in management and organizational studies: An empirical and network analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 43, 957–983.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adar, E. (2006). GUESS: A language and interface for graph exploration. CHI. http://graphexploration.cond.org/

  • Ahn, Y. H. (2002). Domestic institution and politics of international negotiation: Analysis on agricultural negotiation under the two-level game. Asian Research, 45, 167–189. (in Korean).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahn, S. H., & Kim, J. (2007). A political economic analysis of free trade agreements: Temporal and distribution effects. Korea Development Institute.

  • Baldwin, R. E. (1996). The Poltical economy of trade policy: Integrating the perspectives of economists and political scientists. In R. C. Feenstra, B. M. Grossman & D. A. Irwin (Eds.), Political Economy of Trade Policy: Paper in Honor of Jagdish Bhagwati (pp. 147–173). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barabási, A.-L., & Albert, R. (1999). Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science, 286, 509–512.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Barabási, A.-L., Jeong, H., Neda, Z., Ravasz, E., Schubert, A., & Vicsek, T. (2002). Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 311, 590–614.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capling, A., & Low, P. (2010). Government, non-state actors and trade policy making. Negotiating preferentially or multilaterally. New York: CUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cattell, J. M. (1906). A statistical study of American men of science. II. The measurement of scientific merit. Science, 24, 699–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty, D., & Mukherjee, S. (2013). How do trade and investment flows affect environmental sustainability? Evidence from panel data. Environmental Development, 6, 34–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. (2006). Citespace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57, 359–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H. (2009). A literature review on the relationship between foreign trade and economic growth. International Journal of Economic and Finance, 1, 127–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C., Chen, Y., Horowitz, M., Hou, H., Liu, Z., & Pellegrino, D. (2009). Towards an explanatory and computational theory of scientific discovery. Journal of Informetrics, 3, 191–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, J., Yi, S., & Lee, K. C. (2011). Analysis of keyword networks in MIS research and implications for predicting knowledge evolution. Information & Management, 48, 371–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Congcong, W. (2010a). A social network analysis of international trade of copper ore. 2010 International conference on future information technology and management engineering (FITME) (pp. 464–467). 9–10 Oct 2010.

  • Congcong, W. (2010b). A social network analysis of international wheat trade. 2010 International conference on information management, innovation management and industrial engineering (ICIII) (pp. 413–416). 26–28 Nov 2010.

  • Cooper, W., & Manyin, M. (2011). The US–South Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA): Looking ahead—Prospects and potential challenges. International Journal of Korean Studies, 15, 127–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copeland, B., & Taylor, M. S. (2005). Free trade and global warming: A trade theory view of the Kyoto protocol. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 49, 205–234.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, C. L. (2004). International institutions and issue linkage: Building support for agricultural trade liberalization. American Political Science Review, 98, 153–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, C. L. (2005). Food fights over free trade: How international institutions promote agricultural trade liberalization. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ding, Y., Chowdhury, G., & Foo, S. (2000). Journal as markers of intellectual space: Journal co-citation analysis of information retrieval area, 1987–1997. Scientometrics, 47, 55–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dur, A., & De Bievre, D. (2008). The question of interest group influence. Opening EU-governance to civil society gains and challenges. Mannheim: Connex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutt, P., & Mitra, D. (2005). Political ideology and endogenous trade policy: An empirical investigation. Review of Economic and Statistics, 87, 59–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, P. B., Jacobson, H. K., & Putnam, R. D. (1993). Double-edged diplomacy: International bargaining and domestic politics. Oakland: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E. (1955). Citation indexes for science: A new dimension in documentation through Association of Ideas Science. Science, 122, 108–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garriaga, A. C. (2009). Regime type and bilateral treaty formation: Do too many cooks spoil the soup? The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 53, 698–726.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, P., & Maggi, G. (1999). Protection for sale: An empirical investigation. Amercian Economic Review, 89, 1135–1155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griswold, G. (2010). Unions, protectionism, and U.S competitiveness. Cato Journal, 30, 191–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guo, H., Weingart, S., & Borner, K. (2011). Mixed-indicators model for identfying emerging research areas. Scientometrics, 89, 421–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hafner-Burton, E. M., Kahler, M., & Montgomery, A. H. (2009). Network analysis for international relations. International Organization, 63, 559–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamulic, I., & Bijedic, N. (2009). Social network analysis in virtual learning community at faculty of information technologies (fit), Mostar. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 2269–2273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanneman, R. A., & Riddle, M. (2005). Introduction to social network methods. Riverside, CA: University of California. Published in digital form at http://faculty.ucr.edu/~hanneman/

  • Harris, R., & Li, Q. C. (2005). Review of the literature: The role of international trade and investment in business growth and development. UKTI 05/01, 1–95.

  • Hug, S. (2009). Models of multilateral negotiations and ratification. Department of Political Science, University of Geneve.

  • Hwang, C. H. (2011). Analysis of negotiation with the theoretical game model and its implications. Social Research, 21, 95–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, G. S., & Lee, I. W. (2009). Analysis of Korea–US beef negotiation under the two-level game model. The Korea Association for Policy Analysis and Evaluation, 19, 153–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ishikawa, J., & Kiyono, K. (2006). Greenhouse-gas emission controls in an open economy. International Economic Review, 47, 431–450.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Ishikawa, J., & Okubo, T. (2008). Greenhouse-gas emission controls and international carbon leakage through trade liberalization. Hitotsubashi COE/RES Conference on International Trade and FDI.

  • Kandogan, Y. (2014). The effect of foreign trade and investment liberalization on spatial concentration of economic activity. International Business Review, 23, 648–659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan, G. F., & Park, H. W. (2013). International collaboration within electronic government research domain: A triple helix network analysis of collaboration at the Regional, Country, and Institutional levels. Government Information Quarterly, 30, 182–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S., & Shin, E. (2002). A longitudinal analysis of globalization and regionalization in international trade: A social network approach. Special Forces, 81, 445–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinsella, D. T. (2004). Mapping the small arms trade: Insights from social network analysis. Political Science Faculty Publications and Presentations (Paper 21).

  • Kleinberg, J. (2003). Bursty and hierarchical structure in streams. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 7, 373–397.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Komolavanji, S., Jeenamunta, C., Ammarapala, V., & Chongphaisal, P. (2008). Thailand regiona l free trade agreements and the effect of industrial clustering. The formation of industrial clusters in Asia and regional integration. IDE.

  • Krystallis, A., Ormond, R., & Christensen, K. V. (2011). Patterns and regularities in the European marketing academic community: A social network analysis of the EMAC annual conferences 2000–2010. In Proceedings of the 2011 EMAC conference. Ljubliana, Slovenia.

  • Laband, D. N., & Tollison, R. D. (2000). Intellectual collaboration. The Journal of Political Economy, 108, 632–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lesser, E., & Prusak, L. (2004). Creating value with knowledge: Insights from the IBM Institute for business value. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L. (2006). The knowledge-based economy: Modeled, measured, simulated. Boca Raton: Universal Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, E. Y., Liao, C. H., & Yen, H. R. (2013). Co-authorship networks and research impact: A social capital perspective. Research Policy, 42, 1515–1530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liesch, P., Håkanson, L., McGaughey, S., Middleton, S., & Cretchley, J. (2011). The evolution of the international business field: A scientometric investigation of articles published in its premier journal. Scientometrics, 88, 17–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, X., Bollen, J., Nelson, M. L., & Van de Sompel, H. (2005). Co-authorship networks in the digital library research community. Information Processing and Management, 41, 1462–1480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, J., & Lu, Y. (2011). Free trade or protection: A literature review on trade barriers. Research in World Economy, 2, 69–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahutga, M. C. (2006). The persistence of structural inequality? A network analysis of international trade, 1965–2000. Social Forces, 84, 1863–1889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mail, F., Kronegger, L., & Ferligo, A. (2010). Co-authorship trends and collaboration patterns in the Slovenian Sociological Community. Corvinus Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 1, 29–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mane, K., & Borner, K. (2004). Mapping topics and topic bursts in PNAS. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of Americas (PNAS), 101, 5287–5290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, E. D., & Milner, H. V. (2012). Votes, vetoes, and the political economy of international trade agreements. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsden, P. V. (2008). Network data and measurement. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milner, H. V., & Judkins, B. (2004). Partisanship, trade policy and globalization: Is there a left–right divide on trade policy? International Studies Quarterly, 48, 95–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moody, J. (2004). The structure of a social science collaboration network: Disciplinary cohesion from 1963 to 1999. American Sociological Review, 69, 213–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morel, C. M., Serruya, S. J., Penna, G. O., & Guimar E. S. (2009). Co-authorship network analysis: A powerful tool for strategic planning of research, development and capacity building programs on neglected diseases. PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, 3, 99–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nooy, W. D., Mrvar, A., & Batagelj, V. (2005). Exploratory social network analysis with Pajek. Structural analysis in the social sciences (Vol. 27). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oh, C. H., Travis Selmier, W., & Lien, D. (2011). International trade, foreign direct investment, and transaction costs in languages. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 40, 732–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pahre, R. (1997). Endogenous domestic institutions in two-level games and parliamentary oversight of the European Union. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 41, 147–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pahre, R. (2001). Divided government and international cooperation in Austria–Hungary, Sweden–Norway and the European Union. European Union Politics, 2, 131–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pahre, R. (2006). Democratic foreign policy making: Problems of divided government and international cooperation. Palgrave: MacMillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Price, D. S. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149, 510–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D. (1988). Diplomacy and domestic politics: The logic of two-level games. International Organization, 42, 427–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ren, S., Yuan, B., Ma, X., & Chen, X. (2014). International trade, FDI (foreign direct investment) and embodied CO2 emissions: A case study of Chinas industrial sectors. China Economic Review, 28, 123–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy, P., Martínez, A. J., Miscione, G., Zuidgeest, M. H. P., & van Maarseveen, M. F. A. M. (2012). Using social network analysis to profile people based on their e-communication and travel balance. Journal of Transport Geography, 24, 111–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santa-Cruz, A. (1997). Domestic politics and international negotiations: NAFTA’s two-level games. Journal of International and Area Studies, 4, 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarigol, E., Pfitzner, R., Scholtes, I., Garas, A., & Scheitzer, F. (2014). Predicting scientific success based on coauthorship networks. Working paper to appear in EPJ Data Science.

  • Sci2team. (2009). Science of science (Sci2) TooI Indiana University and SciTech strategies. http://sci2.cns.iu.edu.

  • Sen, S. (2010). International trade theory and policy: A review of the literature. Levy Economics Institute of Bard College, working paper no. 635.

  • Smith, M., Milic-Frayling, N., Shneiderman, B., Mendes Rodrigues, E., & Leskovec, J. (2010). NodeXL: A free and open network overview, discovery and exploration add-in for Excel 2007/2010. The Social Media Research Foundation.

  • Smith, D. A., & White, D. R. (1992). Structure and dynamics of the global economy: Network analysis of international trade 1965–1980. Social Forces, 70, 857–893.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sofia Pereira, C., & Soares, A. L. (2007). Improving the quality of collaboration requirements for information management through social networks analysis. International Journal of Information Management, 27, 86–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsay, M.-Y., Xu, H., & Wu, C.-W. (2003). Journal co-citation analysis of semiconductor literature. Scientometrics, 57, 7–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84, 523–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vidgen, R., Henneberg, S., & Naude, P. (2007). What sort of community is the European Conference on Information Systems? A social network analysis 1993–2005. European Journal of Information Systems, 16, 5–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vymětal, D., & Šperka, R. (2014). MAREA—from an agent simulation application to the social network analysis. Procedia Computer Science, 35, 1416–1425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Watts, D. J., & Strogatz, S. H. (1998). Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature, 393, 440–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willging, P. A. (2009). Using social network analysis techniques to examine online interactions. US-China Education Review, 2(9), 46–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, B. R., Manyin, M. E., Jurenas, R., & Platzer, M. D. (2014). The U.S.–South Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA): Provisions and implementation. Congressional Research Service Reports, 1–50.

  • Worrell, J., Wasko, M., & Johnston, A. (2013). Social network analysis in accounting information systems research. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 14, 127–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WTO. (2011). Wo rld trade report. World Trade Organization.

  • Yi, S., & Choi, J. (2012). The organization of scientific knowledge: The structural characteristics of keyword networks. Scientometrics, 90, 1015–1026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, B., & Park, Y. (2005). A systematic approach for identifying technology opportunities: Keyword-based morphology analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 72, 145–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by a Korea University of Technology and Education Research Fund in 2014.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial Management, Korea University of Technology and Education, 1600 Chungjeol-ro, Byeongcheonmyeon, Dongnam-gu, Cheonan City, Chungnam Province, 330-708, Republic of Korea

    Jacob Wood & Gohar Feroz Khan

Authors
  1. Jacob Wood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gohar Feroz Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gohar Feroz Khan.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 56 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wood, J., Khan, G.F. International trade negotiation analysis: network and semantic knowledge infrastructure. Scientometrics 105, 537–556 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1651-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1651-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation