Scholarly Collaboration in Regional Science in Developing Countries

Abstract

The Regional Economics Applications Laboratory (REAL) celebrated its twenty-fifth anniversary in 2014. Since then, REAL has become one of the leading research centers of regional science worldwide. In this article, we describe the scholarly network involving REAL’s alumni working in academia in Brazil. We analyze the patterns of research collaboration among around fifty Brazilian researchers whose main activities are related to academic institutions in Brazil. The Brazilian REAL network has shown to be an interesting case study that reflects the pattern of evolving collaboration networks in scientifically emerging economies. The expansion of the REAL scientific collaboration network in Brazil emerges as a relevant mechanism for both a qualitative leap in national scientific production in regional science and for the dissemination of knowledge in peripheral regions of the country. Conducted under the leadership of Geoffrey J. D. Hewings, it has helped to develop regional science in the country still further. This case study serves as an example of knowledge diffusion and of the role played by key researchers in the evolution of this network, providing a contribution to the science of research and innovation.

Keywords

regional science history social networks in regional science scholarly collaboration regional science in developing countries Geoffrey J. D. Hewings

Introduction

Regional science has developed and flourished in the developed world. However, as recognized by Chatterji (2014), it has many more potential applications for developing countries, as these countries have stronger socioeconomic spatial diversity. Despite important developments in the field in countries such as Brazil, India, Indonesia, and lately China, its main journals have always been dominated by authors and themes from developed countries (Rey and Anselin 2000; Suriñach et al. 2003; Royuela, Suriñach, and Duque 2006; Royuela, Duque, and Suriñach 2008). More recently, nonetheless, institutional efforts have been directed toward strengthening the presence of the field in the developing world (Pyke et al. 2007; Capello 2013). Recognition of the broader international standing of regional science is especially important for its future development.

A great deal of attention has always been directed in this journal (Isserman 1995; Rey and Anselin 2000; Donaghy 2014; Markusen 2015) and in other scholarly journals of the field (Pyke et al. 2007) to reflections on the establishment, evolution, and progress of regional science. Increasing attention has also been directed lately to the identification of patterns of publication in the field (Rey and Anselin 2000; Suriñach et al. 2003; Royuela, Suriñach, and Duque 2006; Royuela, Duque, and Suriñach 2008). However, very little empirical evidence has been collected to inform the scientific community of successful experiences in broadening the presence of regional science in the developing world.¹ In this article, we focus on the Brazilian case, describing recent developments in regional science in the country through the establishment of a network of scholars closely related to the Regional Economics Applications Laboratory (REAL) at the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign (UIUC). By focusing on the role played by the Brazilian REAL network in recent developments in regional science, we do not mean to neglect other important developments in the country. Regional and urban studies have been important areas of research in Brazil since the 1960s, led by researchers related to economics, geography, and planning. Nonetheless, Brazilian actors who have followed more closely methodological approaches more often found in the leading regional science journals have predominantly been related to the field of economics.

This case study serves as an example of knowledge diffusion and of the role played by key researchers in the evolution of this network, providing a contribution to the science of research and innovation. We claim that the growing presence of the discipline in Brazil, measured by the number of scientific publications by Brazilian scholars, is heavily influenced by proximity mechanisms embedded in the network. Moreover, studies that have benefited most from the development of such network are primarily focused on applied economic research, maintaining a long-lasting tradition of regional science research in Brazil.

From a broader perspective, the rapid growth of the world’s scientific production is closely linked to increased collaborative interaction among researchers, that is, the typical organizational unit of science has changed from single individuals to the establishment of research groups in all areas of knowledge. Understanding and identifying the operating patterns of scientific networks is becoming increasingly important for the formulation of science and technology (S&T) policies. One of the biggest challenges faced by S&T policymakers in Brazil is the diffusion of scientific excellence from research centers in the southeast to research centers in other less privileged regions (Cruz and Chaimovich 2010). This challenge could be addressed more properly and efficiently by evaluating the perceptions that are inextricably linked to the establishment and operation of scientific collaboration in Brazil. Research collaboration is one of the main mechanisms for the dissemination of knowledge and is closely associated with a higher quality of scientific production.

Social network theory provides the background necessary to understand various facets of human interactions from a broader perspective than individualistic social theory (Wasserman and Faust 1994). In the context of diffusion of innovation theory (Rogers 2003), which explores social networks and their role in influencing the spread of new ideas and practices—stressing the importance of communication and peer networking within the adoption process—we can analyze collaboration structures in science (Otte and Rousseau 2002). Accordingly, change agents and opinion leaders often play major roles in spurring the adoption of innovations, although factors inherent to the innovations also play a part (Cragun and Cragun 2008).

The importance of geography in knowledge production and diffusion, primarily its role in mediating interactions among Brazilian researchers in scientific collaborations, has been explored by Sidone, Haddad, and Mena-Chalco (2015). The authors provide evidence that geographic proximity plays an important role in determining interregional collaboration. While geographic proximity facilitates face-to-face interactions that enhance collaboration, other forms of proximity are also important.² For instance, while cognitive proximity is reflected in a shared knowledge base that is fundamental to interactive learning, organizational proximity helps foster knowledge creation through organizational arrangements that reduce transaction costs. Institutional proximity allows actors of a network to share the same institutional framework, both formal (laws and rules) and informal (values, norms, and cultural habits), potentially fostering collaboration. Social proximity, in turn, can be defined by the intensity with which two researchers have friendly relations with each other. The intensification of friendly relations can facilitate interaction by creating trust between researchers, which is essential for the continuity of complex research projects (Frenken, Hardeman, and Hoekman 2009). We argue in this article that the recent development of the field of regional science in Brazil has benefited, to different degrees, from these different forms of proximity. We illustrate how these different facets of proximity have successfully operated in the process of building a network of regional scientists in a developing country.

We use as our case study the transnational experience related to the REAL, which celebrated its twenty-fifth anniversary in 2014. That was twenty-five years to the day since Philip Israilevich and Geoffrey J. D. Hewings started a cooperative venture between the Federal Reserve Bank in Chicago and UIUC. Since then, REAL has become one of the leading research centers in regional science worldwide.³

REAL was created to operate as a science laboratory—with students and faculty together in one space, promoting interaction and collaboration on regional science research. This format has been very successful in terms of its intended outcome to create a global network of researchers generating high standard scholarly collaboration and social interactions. Throughout the twenty-five years of its existence, REAL has received over 500 scholars from more than forty different countries:

Since its inception, REAL has provided at least two years (and usually more) support for 38 doctoral students from agricultural economics, economics, geography and urban and regional planning, welcomed 10 ‘Bolsa Sandwich’ PhD students from Brazil who spent one year at REAL working on their doctoral dissertations and hosted over 100 international visitors (visiting students, visiting scholars and visiting professors) who stayed three months or more. Several experiences of foreign scholars coming informally to the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign demonstrated that a period of one or two semesters resulted in a major contribution to the thesis of these young researchers, as well as to their personal enhancement. At any one time, from 15 to 30 visitors and students will be in residence …. Foreign visitors appreciate more especially the exposure to the challenges, issues and opportunities in another country because it provides them an important perspective that cannot be ‘taught’ effectively by distance learning. Residence in another country, coupled with engagement with other students and faculty involved in their work provide them with an invaluable learning opportunity. In addition, the mass of students and the profound respect of REAL’s director for the various techniques of regional science allow foreign visitors to build quickly partnerships for their work and receive sound feedback. (http://www.real.uiuc.edu/)

In what follows, we describe the scholarly network involving REAL’s alumni working in academia in Brazil. We analyze the patterns of research collaboration among around fifty Brazilian researchers, whose main activities are related to academic institutions in Brazil. We first define, in the second section, the core of the network through the genealogy of Geoffrey J. D. Hewings’ Brazilian PhD students. In the third section, we provide a brief description of the database on Brazilian REAL’s alumni scientific production and collaboration. We then present the main characteristics of the endogenous and exogenous scientific collaboration networks involving those alumni in the fourth section. Concluding remarks follow in the fifth section, in which we summarize the key factors driving the high productivity of the Brazilian scholarly collaboration, and also look briefly at the kinds of research that have been developed, taking stock of some of the network’s contributions.

Genealogy: The Brazilian Branch

It is fair to say that the Brazilian branch of Geoffrey J. D. Hewings’ academic tree is heavily rooted in the perennial influence of Professor Werner Baer in the shaping of economics graduate studies in Brazil. The partnership between the two scholars has been fundamental to the maintenance of a regular flow of Brazilian visitors to REAL.

As confirmed by Azzoni (2010), in the early years of institutional development of graduate studies in Brazil, “[Werner Baer] was instrumental in (…) choosing young professors to be trained abroad, arranging scholarships in the USA and influencing American universities to accept Brazilian students (…)” (p. 295). Since then, he has continually generated a flow of Brazilian and Latin American scholars to graduate programs in the United States (especially at UIUC), accepting and sponsoring students from the region. According to Azzoni (2010, 295), “he must be responsible for at least 20% of all PhD degrees in economics in Brazil, at UIUC and other universities.”

The constant and increasing flow of PhD students from Brazil and Latin America to the Department of Economics at UIUC in the late 1980s and early 1990s, together with the creation of REAL in 1989, provided the opportunity for a fruitful partnership between Werner Baer and Geoffrey J. D. Hewings. Even before REAL, academic interactions between Baer’s students and Hewings’ created the roots of the Brazilian REAL network. Initial collaboration with Eduardo Martins, Joaquim Guilhoto, and Manuel Fonseca (see Hewings et al. 1989) in the second half of the 1980s triggered the network.

Brazilian scholars have a prominent role in Geoffrey J. D. Hewings’ academic genealogy, accounting for six of the forty-eight of his PhD students over the years (as of October 2014). His first PhD student from Brazil, Eduardo Martins, defended his dissertation in 1993.⁴ He was Hewings’ eleventh PhD student. Since then, he has advised five other Brazilian PhD students: Ricardo Gazel (number 14), Eduardo Haddad (21), André Magalhães (23), Mônica Haddad (28), and Carlos Eduardo Lobo e Silva (37).

Multiplier Effect: The Sandwich Program

Over the years, Hewings’ academic sons and daughters have developed their careers, some of them in academia back in Brazil. As they became advisers to their own PhD students in their home institutions, stronger ties with REAL started to be created. Through a special program sponsored by the Brazilian government, the so-called Sandwich Scholarship Program, PhD students from Brazil would spend one year at REAL working on their doctoral dissertations. Since 2000, REAL has welcomed ten such “Sandwich” scholars from Brazil, who have already successfully defended their dissertations with Geoffrey J. D. Hewings as their coadviser.

It is interesting to note that, after the group of first-generation participants in the program (Hewings’ academic grandchildren), a group of second-generation students (academic great grandchildren) followed immediately (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Academic genealogy of Geoffrey J. D. Hewings’ Brazilian PhD students. There are four “Sandwich Scholars” currently pursuing their PhD degrees, three of them advised by Edson Domingues—Luiz Carlos Ribeiro (2014), Glaucia Possas da Motta (2015), and Debora Freire (2015)—and one advised by Raul Silveira-Neto (visiting scholar in 2013–2014)—Alvaro Furtado Coelho, Jr. (2014).

Brazilian REAL Scientific Collaboration Database

The data used in our analysis were extracted from information available in the Lattes curricula vitae (CV), a part of the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) Lattes Platform, which consists of an information system deployed and maintained by the Brazilian government for managing information related to researchers, institutions, and research activities across the country (CNPq 2014).⁵ The public availability of the CV information and research groups via the web and the use of such information by universities stimulate the correct insertion and veracity of published data, which have become the national standard system for the registration of academic and professional activities by the scientific community. Therefore, the establishment of a real incentive mechanism to complete and accurately update the information provided will give credibility and international recognition to the Lattes system, a successful model to be followed internationally (Lane 2010).

The CVs are publicly available on the Lattes Platform web portal (CNPq 2014), although, despite giving immediate access to individual information, the portal does not enable systematic access to the entire database. Thus, the effort in gathering information is the main obstacle to the analysis of a large amount of data, making it necessary to automate this process.

We have used scriptLattes (Mena-Chalco and Cesar-Jr 2009) to extract automatically the information from forty-eight REAL’s alumni registered in the platform (see Table A1 in the Appendix).⁶ For our purposes, scriptLattes was also used to establish links between pairs of researchers, checking for shared scientific production between them publicized in their CVs. The procedure is based on a search for similarities from the direct comparison between the titles of publications registered in the CVs.⁷ More precisely, the identification and counting of coauthorship were performed using information contained in only two specific fields of the CV: papers published in peer-reviewed journals and chapters of published books (Figure 2), amounting to the analysis of 1,061 distinct academic outputs published between 1989 and 2013.⁸

Figure 2.

Number of papers in peer-reviewed journals and chapters in books by Brazilian Regional Economics Applications Laboratory’s alumni, 1989–2013.

After the identification of coauthorship, the links among researchers were established by means of the full-counting process, in which each unit of analysis (authors) receives one unit of collaboration for its participation in publications (Scherngell and Barber 2011). This procedure generated the database to create the endogenous collaboration network. We then extended the database by including the collaborations with other REAL researchers not registered in the Lattes Platform. Thus, an extended endogenous collaboration network was created. Finally, we ran scriptLattes to look at the collaborations involving REAL’s alumni with all their coauthors—those registered in the Lattes Platform—generating the exogenous collaboration network. In what follows, we characterize the three networks derived from the database.

Networks

Barabási et al. (2002) consider collaboration networks as prototypes of evolving networks. In their view, the coauthorship network continuously expands through the addition of new authors to the database as well as the addition of new internal links representing papers coauthored by authors already part of the database. Thus, we can define a coauthorship or collaboration network that is a reflection of the professional links between the researchers.⁹ In this network, the nodes are the researchers and two researchers are linked if they have written a paper together. As for our strategy for investigating the social structure embedded in the Brazilian REAL network, we consider three different sets of researchers: (i) we start by considering only REAL’s alumni working on research activities in Brazil (endogenous network), (ii) we then include other REAL affiliates elsewhere (extended endogenous network), and (iii) we finally expand the endogenous network by considering all coauthors of REAL’s Brazilian alumni registered in the Lattes Platform (exogenous network).

Endogenous Collaboration Network

We have identified fifty-one Brazilian REAL alumni, forty-eight of whom are registered in the Lattes Platform. Over time, the number of new REAL members from Brazil increased from six in the period 1989–1998 to eleven in 1999–2003 and 2004–2008, reaching twenty-three in 2009–2014 (Figure 3). The increasing number of Brazilian researchers associated with REAL is reflected in the temporal evolution of the endogenous network, as the network grows through the addition of new nodes (researchers) and new edges (coauthorship). Figure 4 depicts the noncumulative network edges in different periods. REAL’s alumni are represented in blue, and REAL researchers not registered in the Lattes Platform are represented in red.¹⁰ It is clear that the network has become denser over the years, signaling a process of increasing interaction among its members. Note that collaboration among Brazilian researchers did not take off until 1999, ten years after the creation of the Lab. In the first years, collaborations involving international REAL researchers were fundamental to kicking off the network, suggesting that the process of the establishment of a scientific network requires a long period of maturation.

Figure 3.

Number of Brazilian scholars at Regional Economics Applications Laboratory, by period of initial affiliation.

Figure 4.

Evolution of the endogenous network, noncumulative links by period.

Figure 5 reveals the structure of the endogenous network over the period 1989–2013. Nodes are sized based on AuthorRank ¹¹ (Liu et al. 2005), considering the number of endogenous collaborations produced; edges are sized based on the number of collaborations between authors. Coauthorship among REAL’s alumni involves twenty-seven of the forty-eight members of the network. While there are two isolated links (Cavalcante–Uderman and Mattos–Menezes), the remaining twenty-three researchers form an integrated network. The two main clusters are associated with the nodes Domingues–Haddad–Perobelli and Azzoni–Guilhoto–Haddad. The former is closely related to social proximity—Haddad was the adviser of both Domingues and Perobelli (see Figure 1), and the latter is related to geographic and organizational proximities—the three scholars are based in the same department (Economics) at the University of Sao Paulo. The intersection of the two clusters is heavily influenced by institutional proximity as the five researchers are associated, to different degrees, with the activities of the University of São Paulo Regional and Urban Economics Lab (NEREUS) and the Institute of Economic Research Foundation (FIPE).

Figure 5.

Endogenous collaboration—papers in peer-reviewed journals and chapters in books, 1989–2013.

This case study provides a clear example of the possibility of interaction among different dimensions of proximity over time. Initial geographic proximity at REAL has favored the development of a broader cognitive and social proximity that has allowed researchers to continue to work effectively even when they have moved to other institutions in their home country. Thus, while geographic proximity is necessary in many forms of scientific interactions, it is expected that it will become less important in cases in which researchers build stronger social networks.

Extended Endogenous Collaboration Network

Figure 6 presents the extended endogenous collaboration network among REAL’s researchers. New “additions” to the network—REAL researchers outside Brazil—are represented in red nodes. The central role played by Geoffrey J. D. Hewings is evident. The collaboration among the nodes Guilhoto–Hewings–Sonis is also noteworthy and brings us back to the early years of REAL.

Figure 6.

Extended endogenous collaboration—papers in peer-reviewed journals and chapters in books, 1989–2013.

We have also highlighted REAL’s alumni using different colors to identify their current institutional affiliations. In addition to scholars currently at REAL, usually at the early stages of their academic careers, four institutions were considered: University of São Paulo (USP), where NEREUS and FIPE are hosted, Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG) and Federal University of Juiz de Fora (UFJF), both in the state of Minas Gerais, and Federal University of Pernambuco (UFPE), located in northeast Brazil. With Geoffrey J. D. Hewings at the center of the network, there is an immediate first-order collaboration cluster, identified with researchers at NEREUS (Azzoni–Guilhoto–Haddad), responsible for subsequent strong interactions with three second-order clusters, UFMG and UFJF, which also collaborate between themselves, and UFPE. It seems that the Brazilian REAL network has evolved following hierarchical steps, from initial localized international collaboration involving researchers from a center of national excellence (i.e., USP), followed by a gradual expansion of domestic collaboration networks that have relied on social, geographical, organizational, and institutional proximities.

Exogenous Collaboration Network

In the Lattes Platform, we have identified 501 collaborators with REAL’s alumni in Brazil.¹² The exogenous collaboration network (an open-system network) is an order of magnitude larger than the endogenous collaboration network (a sociocentric network). This suggests meaningful connections outside the Brazilian REAL network, signaling its potential long-term intellectual strength as innovation and creativity are known to be enriched by the multiplication of connections and intellectual intersections.¹³

Figure 7 shows the coauthor network generated from their publications. Nodes are sized based on the AuthorRank measure (impact in collaboration) and colored to highlight whether the researcher is a Brazilian REAL alumnus (blue), another REAL researcher (red), or a collaborator (green). Similarly, edges are sized and colored based on the number of collaborations between authors. A brief inspection reveals the important role played by Geoffrey J. D. Hewings (larger red node) and a group of REAL scholars in the whole network, suggested by the prominence of larger blue nodes. It is important to note that the average number of collaborators per REAL member is 15.94.

Figure 7.

Exogenous collaboration—papers in peer-reviewed journals and chapters in books, 1989–2013. Blue nodes refer to Brazilian Regional Economics Applications Laboratory (REAL) alumni, red nodes refer to REAL researchers outside Brazil, and green nodes refer to external collaborators.

We can also redesign the network to identify its main clusters more clearly. According to Belter (2012), a visual representation, or “map,” of the entire network can be created once the network is constructed. In laying out the map, each node is positioned between other nodes to which it is connected by edges. This means that the absolute position of a node on the map is not meaningful, but its relative position is. Nodes that are more closely related are placed near each other, while nodes that are less related are placed farther away. In Figure 8, three main clusters emerge: (i) a cluster identified with three strong nodes (Domingues–Haddad–Perobelli) that includes Hewings’ academic grandchildren and great grandchildren from Haddad’s heritage—located at the center of the network; (ii) a cluster identified with the nodes Azzoni–Guilhoto, with the prominence of Guilhoto’s node clustering many external collaborators—center-right part of the network; (iii) a cluster involving ten different alumni, most of them based on institutions located in the northeast of Brazil, whose main link with the core network is given by interactions with Azzoni’s node—bottom right of the network.

Figure 8.

Clusters in the exogenous collaboration network, papers in peer-reviewed journals and chapters in books, 1989–2013. Blue nodes refer to Brazilian Regional Economics Applications Laboratory (REAL) alumni, red nodes refer to REAL researchers outside Brazil, and green nodes refer to external collaborators.

Finally, we can examine the geographical aspects of the Brazilian REAL network.¹⁴ We adopted the same procedure as in Sidone, Haddad, and Mena-Chalco (2015). We considered the Brazilian municipalities as our geographical unit of analysis. However, instead of locating the coauthors from their addresses as given in the publications (or with the aid of complementary databases), we used the direct information on the professional addresses of researchers reported in each CV.¹⁵ Figure 9 shows the map with the collaborative flows for the complete period (1989–2013), revealing a relatively widespread geographical coverage, despite the polarization in the southeast.

Figure 9.

Geographical distribution of exogenous collaboration, 1989–2013. Blue nodes refer to Brazilian Regional Economics Applications Laboratory alumni, and green nodes refer to external collaborators—including all types of publication.

Final Remarks

In scientifically emerging economies with large territorial extensions, such as Brazil, it is expected that an expansion of domestic collaboration networks from nodes located in centers of national excellence will take place, parallel to an increase in international scientific collaboration. It is a different situation from that of smaller or less-developed European countries for which international collaborations are practically unavoidable and relate, in some cases, to more than 90 percent of the scientific output. In such economies, the accelerated growth in production is directly associated with the intensification of domestic collaborative efforts (Royal Society 2011). Because the size of these countries allows some scale advantages related to the existence of specialized research institutes, national researchers have more opportunities to collaborate with local partners (Glänzel and Schubert 2005; Chinchilla-Rodríguez et al. 2010).

The Brazilian REAL network has been shown to be an interesting case study that reflects this pattern of evolving collaboration networks in regional science in scientifically emerging economies. The expansion of the REAL scientific collaboration network in Brazil emerges as a relevant mechanism for both a qualitative leap in national scientific production in regional science and for the dissemination of knowledge in peripheral regions of the country. Conducted under the leadership of Geoffrey J. D. Hewings, it has helped to develop regional science in the country still further, triggering a second cycle of academic development of the field in Brazil.¹⁶

Initial links in the network were more strongly related to international collaboration involving Geoffrey J. D. Hewings, Michael Sonis, and Werner Baer from the “foreign” side, and Joaquim Guilhoto and Eduardo Haddad from the “domestic” side. By the time the network was already established, its own dynamics generated a pattern of hierarchical integration in which NEREUS, a REAL-like lab founded by REAL alumni at the University of São Paulo, served as the key institutional node in Brazil to foster the spread of the network across the country. What have we learned so far? A partial qualitative assessment of the publication patterns associated with the network may clarify part of the sense of the scientific aspect embedded in the research outcomes.¹⁷ Table 1 summarizes the main features of articles published in international peer-reviewed publications.

Table 1.

Summary of Papers in International Peer-reviewed Journals Published by Brazilian Regional Economics Applications Laboratory Scholars.

Authors	Focus	Approach	Method	Main results
Azzoni (2001), Azzoni and Servo (2002), Azzoni and Silveira-Neto (2005), Cravo and Resende (2013) Ferreira (2000), Laurini, Andrade, and Pereira (2005), Lima and Resende (2007), Magalhaes, Hewings, and Azzoni (2005), and Mossi et al. (2003)	Economic	Evolution of regional inequality with special attention to spatial effects	Econometrics	Persistence of regional dualism, in which spatial spillovers are very important
Barufi, Haddad, and Paez (2012), Gonçalves and Almeida (2009), Menezes, Silveira-Neto, and Azzoni (2012), and Schettini, Azzoni, and Paez (2011)	Socioeconomic	Spatial spillovers as an important dimension to understand socioeconomic processes	Econometrics	Geography has been shown to play an important role in the drivers of regional growth
Guilhoto and Fonseca (1998), Haddad, Domingues, and Perobelli (2002, 2005), and Vieira, Haddad, and Azzoni (2014)	Economic	Assessment of the impacts of trade liberalization policies and trade agreements	CGE analysis and econometrics	The interplay of market forces in the Brazilian economy tends to favor the more developed regions of the country
Amann et al. (2007), Guilhoto, Hewings, and Sonis (2002), Haddad and Hewings (1999), Perobelli et al. (2007), and Porsse, Haddad, and Ribeiro (2007)	Economic	Structural analysis of interregional systems	Input–output analysis and CGE analysis	Regional dualism in Brazil is also associated with a strong productive dependence of the less developed regions on the more developed regions
Azzoni and Kalatzis (2008), Kalatzis, Azzoni, and Achcar (2008), Kalatzis, Bassettoa, and Azzoni (2011), and Silva and Hewings (2012)	Economic	Implication of investors’ rationale to location of investments in Brazil	Theoretical models and econometrics	There are significant differences across regions in the importance of investment determinants
Haddad and Haddad (2010) and Haddad, Porsse, and Rabahy (2013)	Economic	In-depth studies to assess the impacts of the tourism sector on the regional economies	Input–output analysis and CGE analysis	Domestic tourism seems to play a nondistortionary role to improve regional inequality in Brazil
Goeschl and Igliori (2006)	Economic	Investigation of the connections between property rights, conservation and development in the context of tropical forests	Theoretical models	The distribution of property rights and rents on natural resources in Brazil need to be better understood
Almeida, Haddad, and Hewings (2010), Haddad and Hewings (2005), and Haddad et al. (2010, 2011)	Economic	Applications for transportation policies and impact assessment of projects of spatially connective infrastructure	Large-scale integrated modeling systems	In general, there is a clear tradeoff between efficiency and regional equity—projects that tend to produce higher impacts on gross domestic product growth also tend to contribute more to regional concentration in Brazil
Carvalho, Santiago, and Perobelli (2013), Perobelli and Oliveira (2013), and Santos, Haddad, and Hewings (2013)	Economic	Energy policies and their relations with the patterns of sectoral and regional consumption of energy in the country	Input–output analysis and CGE analysis	Heterogeneity of energy-intensity and the differentials of energy substitution drive the spatial impacts of changes in electric power prices
Chagas, Toneto, and Azzoni (2012), Costa, Burnquist, and Guilhoto (2006), and Martínez et al. (2013)	Economic	Evaluation of the economic, social, and environmental impacts of sugarcane expansion, both on the country as a whole and on the growing regions	Econometrics and input-output analysis	Nonconclusive about the risks associated with diverting farmland or crops for biofuels production to the detriment of food supply
Silveira-Neto and Azzoni (2011, 2012)	Economic	Regional impacts of strategies of socioeconomic inclusion	Econometrics	Seemingly nonspatial government policies in the form of spatially blind social programs played an important role in the recent decline in regional income inequality
M. A. Haddad and Nedović-Budić (2006), Haddad and Teixeira (2015), Menezes et al. (2013), Silveira-Neto, Duarte, and Paez (2015), and Haddad, Hewings, Porsse, Van Leeuwen, and Vieira (2015)	Socioeconomic	Analysis of problems related to metropolitan areas in Brazil	Large-scale integrated modeling systems and econometrics	One needs to consider interactions both inside and outside a prime metropolitan system to recognize the role it plays in an integrated interregional system
Azzoni and Haddad (2012) and Barbieiri et al. (2010)	Socioeconomic	Assessment of the costs of global climate change	Large-scale integrated modeling systems	In Brazil, the most vulnerable regions to climate change are the traditionally less developed areas

Note: CGE, computable general equilibrium.

Research topics developed by scholars involved in the Brazilian REAL network mainly address concerns with the analysis of regional problems in Brazil using the tool kits in regional science (Figure 10). The emphasis on economic issues reflects both the historical development of the field in Brazil and the academic background of the key researchers in the network.

Figure 10.

Word cloud based on titles of papers in international peer-reviewed journals published by Brazilian Regional Economics Applications Laboratory scholars. This image was generated by wordle.net.

One of the dimensions of the success of the network, based on a combination of intellectual and social capital, is the high productivity of the Brazilian scholarly collaboration, which is anchored in a few key factors, discussed in this article. First, it is important to recognize that it takes time for such a social network to be established and perseverance has played an important role. Second, one has to recognize the role played by key researchers in the evolution of the network, which involves a high degree of commitment. Third, the existence of links outside the endogenous network, involving both domestic researchers and international researchers in the developed world, is deemed important for bringing new and refreshing ideas to an evolving network. Fourth, the existence of institutional mechanisms that facilitate interaction should not be neglected.

There is, nonetheless, increasing collaboration with scholars in other parts of the developing world (E. A. Haddad et al. 2009, 2011, 2014; E. A. Haddad 2014; Perobelli et al. 2010). The Brazilian experience has been proved relevant for sharing with other countries that face similar problems. Parcell (2010) acknowledges that to stand a chance of being effective long term, knowledge-based networks need first to build momentum and then to sustain themselves. Effective knowledge networks share at least three common elements: a community of people who collaborate, a focused field of knowledge, and organizational processes that ensure effective and meaningful connections. The Brazilian REAL network demonstrates how these three dimensions fit together in practice.

Brazilian scholars seem to have embraced regional science seriously—by applying and amending the available tools to analyze concrete problems of the Brazilian economy—as, according to the founder of the field, it “concerns the careful and patient study of social problems with regional or spatial dimensions, employing diverse combinations of analytical and empirical research” (Isard 1975, 2).

Footnotes

Appendix

Table A3.

Top Twenty Authors Based on AuthorRank along with Degree Centrality.

Name	Institution	AuthorRank	Degree
Endogenous network
Eduardo Amaral Haddad	University of São Paulo	3.785	10
Fernando Salgueiro Perobelli	Federal University of Juiz de Fora-Minas Gerais	3.070	8
Edson Paulo Domingues	Federal University of Minas Gerais	2.778	7
Carlos Roberto Azzoni	University of São Paulo	1.966	4
Joaquim Jose Martins Guilhoto	University of São Paulo	1.784	6
Mauro Borges Lemos	Federal University of Minas Gerais	1.310	2
Raul da Mota Silveira Neto	Federal University of Pernambuco	1.232	3
Enlinson Henrique Carvalho de Mattos	Fundação Getúlio Vargas-São Paulo	1.000	1
Luiz Ricardo Mattos Teixeira Cavalcante	Federal University of Bahia	1.000	1
Simone Uderman	State University of Bahia	1.000	1
Rafael Terra de Menezes	University of Bahia	1.000	1
Andre Matos Magalhaes	Federal University of Pernambuco	0.997	3
Eduardo Simoes de Almeida	Federal University of Juiz de Fora-Minas Gerais	0.885	4
Admir Antonio Betarelli Junior	Federal University of Juiz de Fora-Minas Gerais	0.791	4
Roberta de Moraes Rocha	Federal University of Pernambuco	0.754	2
Denise Imori	University of São Paulo	0.698	3
Aline Souza Magalhaes	Federal University of Minas Gerais	0.490	2
Weslem Rodrigues Faria	Federal University of Juiz de Fora-Minas Gerais	0.489	3
Fabiano Maia Pereira	Secretaria do Tesouro	0.407	1
Flaviane Souza Santiago	Federal University of Minas Gerais	0.324	1

Extended endogenous network
Eduardo Amaral Haddad	University of São Paulo	4.690	15
Geoffrey J. D. Hewings	University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign	4.239	15
Joaquim Jose Martins Guilhoto	University of São Paulo	2.739	9
Fernando Salgueiro Perobelli	Federal University of Juiz de Fora-Minas Gerais	2.683	10
Edson Paulo Domingues	Federal University of Minas Gerais	2.487	8
Carlos Roberto Azzoni	University of São Paulo	1.840	6
Michael Sonis	University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign	1.328	5
Mauro Borges Lemos	Federal University of Minas Gerais	1.208	2
Andre Matos Magalhaes	Federal University of Pernambuco	1.081	5
Enlinson Henrique Carvalho de Mattos	Fundação Getúlio Vargas-São Paulo	1.000	1
Luiz Ricardo Mattos Teixeira Cavalcante	Federal University of Bahia	1.000	1
Simone Uderman	State University of Bahia	1.000	1
Rafael Terra de Menezes	University of Bahia	1.000	1
Raul da Mota Silveira Neto	Federal University of Pernambuco	0.988	3
Eduardo Simoes de Almeida	Federal University of Juiz de Fora-Minas Gerais	0.776	5
Admir Antonio Betarelli Junior	Federal University of Juiz de Fora-Minas Gerais	0.718	4
Denise Imori	University of São Paulo	0.557	4
Roberta de Moraes Rocha	Federal University of Pernambuco	0.502	2
Aline Souza Magalhaes	Federal University of Minas Gerais	0.456	2
Weslem Rodrigues Faria	Federal University of Juiz de Fora-Minas Gerais	0.446	3

Exogenous network
Joaquim Jose Martins Guilhoto	University of São Paulo	13.671	81
Eduardo Amaral Haddad	University of São Paulo	10.734	55
Geoffrey J. D. Hewings	University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign	9.245	34
Fernando Salgueiro Perobelli	Federal University of Juiz de Fora-Minas Gerais	8.156	51
Eduardo Simoes de Almeida	Federal University of Juiz de Fora-Minas Gerais	6.052	55
Mauro Borges Lemos	Federal University of Minas Gerais	5.962	37
Charles Ulises De Montreuil Carmona	Federal University of Pernambuco	5.495	28
Carlos Roberto Azzoni	University of São Paulo	5.335	30
Edson Paulo Domingues	Federal University of Minas Gerais	4.966	35
Raul da Mota Silveira Neto	Federal University of Pernambuco	4.664	26
Luciano Menezes Bezerra Sampaio	Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte	4.303	29
Jose Irineu Rangel Rigotti	Federal University of Minas Gerais	3.650	30
Enlinson Henrique Carvalho de Mattos	Fundação Getúlio Vargas-São Paulo	3.603	14
Luiz Ricardo Mattos Teixeira Cavalcante	Federal University of Bahia	3.387	17
Luiz Carlos de Santana Ribeiro	The Regional Economics Applications Laboratory-University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign	3.304	16
Silvia Harumi Toyoshima	Federal University of Viçosa–Minas Gerais	3.238	29
Roberta de Moraes Rocha	Federal University of Pernambuco	3.208	18
Andre Matos Magalhaes	Federal University of Pernambuco	2.801	20
Ricardo da Silva Freguglia	Federal University of Juiz de Fora-Minas Gerais	2.561	23
Fernanda Finotti Cordeiro Perobelli	Federal University of Juiz de Fora-Minas Gerais	2.368	20

Source: Calculated by the authors.

Acknowledgments

Eduardo A. Haddad acknowledges financial support from CNPq and Fapesp, and he also thanks Princeton University and Rutgers University for their hospitality. Jesús P. Mena-Chalco acknowledges financial support from CNPq.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Eduardo A. Haddad received funding from CNPq (Grant # 229256/2013-9) and Fapesp (Grant # 14/25030-2).

Notes

References

Almeida

E. S.

Haddad

E. A.

Hewings

G. J. D.

. 2010. “Transport-regional Equity Issue Revisited.” Regional Studies 44:1387–400.

Amann

Haddad

E. A.

Perobelli

F. S.

Guilhoto

J. J. M.

. 2007. “Structural Change in the Brazilian Automotive Industry and Its Regional Impacts.” Latin American Business Review 7:97–119.

Azzoni

C. R.

2001. “Economic Growth and Regional Income Inequality in Brazil.” The Annals of Regional Science 35:133–52.

Azzoni

C. R.

2010. “Making a Great Difference: The Influence of Professor Werner Baer on the Economic Literature in Brazil, and on Brazil.” In Economic Development in Latin America: Essay in Honor of Werner Baer, edited by Esfahani

Facchini

Hewings

G. J. D.

, 295–306. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Azzoni

C. R.

Haddad

E. A.

. 2012. “Climate Changes and the Future of Regions.” In Networks, Space and Competitiveness, edited by Capelo

Dentinho

, 137–48. London, UK: Edward Elgar.

Azzoni

C. R.

Kalatzis

A. E. G.

. 2008. “Incorporating Demand-side Aspects into Regional Policy: Variations in the Importance of Private Investment Decision Factors across Regions.” The Annals of Regional Science 44:69–82.

Azzoni

C. R.

Servo

L. M. S.

. 2002. “Education, Cost of Living and Regional Wage Inequality in Brazil.” Papers in Regional Science 81:157–75.

Azzoni

C. R.

Silveira-Neto

. 2005. “Decomposing Regional Growth: Labor Force Participation Rates, Structural Changes, and Sectoral Factor Reallocation.” The Annals of Regional Science 39:221–39.

Barabási

A. L.

Jeonga

Nédaa

Ravasza

Schubertd

Vicsekb

. 2002. “Evolution of the Social Network of Scientific Collaborations.” Physica A 311:590–614.

10.

Barbieiri

A. F.

Domingues

E. P.

Queiroz

B. L.

Ruiz

R. M.

Rigotti

J. I.

Carvalh

J. A. M.

Resende

M. F. C.

. 2010. “Climate Change and Population Migration in Brazil’s Northeast: Scenarios for 2025 2050.” Population and Environment 31:344–70.

11.

Barufi

A. M. B.

Haddad

E. A.

Paez

. 2012. “Infant Mortality in Brazil, 1980-2000: A Spatial Panel Data Analysis.” BMC Public Health 12:1–15.

12.

Belter

2012. “Visualizing Networks of Scientific Research.” Information Today Inc 36:14. Accessed October 31, 2014. http://www.infotoday.com/online/may12/Belter-Visualizing-Networks-of-Scientific-Research.shtml.

13.

Boschma

2005. “Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment.” Regional Studies 39:61–74.

14.

Capello

2013. “A New Team for New Challenges.” Papers in Regional Science 92:1–2.

15.

Carvalho

T. S.

Santiago

F. S.

Perobelli

F. S.

. 2013. “International Trade and Emissions: The Case of the Minas Gerais State–2005.” Energy Economics 40:383–95.

16.

Chagas

A. L. S.

Toneto

Azzoni

C. R.

. 2012. “A Spatial Propensity Score Matching Evaluation of the Social Impacts of Sugarcane Growing on Municipalities in Brazil.” International Regional Science Review 35:48–69.

17.

Chatterji

2014. “Walter Isard and the Role of Regional Science and Peace Science for the Poor Countries.” International Regional Science Review 37:96–106.

18.

Chinchilla-Rodríguez

Vargas-Quesada

Hassan-Montero

González-Molina

Moya-Anegón

. 2010. “New Approach to the Visualization of International Scientific Collaboration.” Information Visualization 9:277–87.

19.

CNPq—Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico. 2014. Plataforma Lattes. Brasília: CNPq. Accessed October 31, 2014. http://www.lattes.cnpq.br/.

20.

Costa

C. C.

Burnquist

H. L.

Guilhoto

J. J. M.

. 2006. “Relations of the Regional Brazilian Cane Agro-industry with the National Economy: Analysis Applied to the Centre-south and North-northeast.” Applied Economics 38:519–31.

21.

Cragun

R. T.

Cragun

. 2008. Introduction to Sociology. Seven Treasures.

22.

Cravo

T. A.

Resende

G. M.

. 2013. “Economic Growth in Brazil: A Spatial Filtering Approach.” The Annals of Regional Science 50:555–75.

23.

Cruz

C. H. B.

Chaimovich

H. B.

. 2010. “Brazil.” In UNESCO Science Report 2010—The Current Status of Science around the World, edited by Schneegans

, 103–21. Paris, France: UNESCO.

24.

Donaghy

K. P.

2014. “Walter Isard’s Evolving Sense of the Scientific in Regional Science.” International Regional Science Review 37:78–95.

25.

Ferreira

2000. “Convergence in Brazil: Recent Trends and Long-run Prospects.” Applied Economics 32:479–89.

26.

Frenken

Hardeman

Hoekman

. 2009. “Spatial Scientometrics: Towards a Cumulative Research Program.” Journal of Informetrics 3:222–32.

27.

Glänzel

Schubert

. 2005. “Analyzing Scientific Networks through Co-authorship.” In Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research, edited by Moed

H. F.

Glänzel

Schmoch

, 257–76. New York: Springer.

28.

Goeschl

Igliori

D. C.

. 2006. “Property Rights for Biodiversity Conservation and Development: Extractive Reserves in the Brazilian Amazon.” Development and Change 37:427–51.

29.

Gonçalves

Almeida

. 2009. “Innovation and Spatial Knowledge Spillovers: Evidence from Brazilian Patent Data.” Regional Studies 43:513–28.

30.

Guilhoto

J. J. M.

Fonseca

M. A. R.

. 1998. “The Northeast and the Rest of Brazil Economies in a Mercosur Context, 1992-2014: An Econometric Interregional Input-output Approach.” Studies in Regional Science 29:171–85.

31.

Guilhoto

J. J. M.

Hewings

G. J. D.

Sonis

. 2002. “Productive Relations in the Northeast and the Rest of Brazil Regions in 1995: Decomposition and Synergy in Input-output Systems.” Geographical Analysis 34:62–75.

32.

Haddad

E. A.

2014. “Spatial Perspectives of Increasing Freeness of Trade in Lebanon.” The Annals of Regional Science 53:29–54.

33.

Haddad

E. A.

Bonet

Hewings

G. J. D.

Perobelli

F. S.

. 2009. “Spatial Aspects of Trade Liberalization in Colombia: A General Equilibrium Approach.” Papers in Regional Science 88:699–732.

34.

Haddad

E. A.

Domingues

E. P.

Perobelli

F. S.

. 2002. “Regional Effects of Economic Integration: The Case of Brazil.” Journal of Policy Modeling 24:453–82.

35.

Haddad

E. A.

Domingues

E. P.

Perobelli

F. S.

. 2005. “Brazil-Argentina Trade and Its Impacts in Brazilian States.” Investigaciones Regionales 7:113–37.

36.

Haddad

E. A.

Farajalla

Camargo

Lopes

R. L.

Vieira

F. V.

. 2014. “Climate Change in Lebanon: Higher-order Regional Impacts from Agriculture.” REGION 1:9–24.

37.

Haddad

E. A.

Haddad

P. R.

. 2010. “Major Sport Events and Regional Development: The Case of the Rio de Janeiro 2016 Olympic Games.” Regional Science Policy and Practice 2:79–95.

38.

Haddad

E. A.

Hewings

G. J. D.

. 1999. “The Short-run Regional Effects of New Investments and Technological Upgrade in the Brazilian Automobile Industry: An Interregional Computable General Equilibrium Analysis.” Oxford Development Studies 27:359–83.

39.

Haddad

E. A.

Hewings

G. J. D.

. 2005. “Market Imperfections in a Spatial Economy: Some Experimental Results.” Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance 45:476–96.

40.

Haddad

E. A.

Hewings

G. J. D.

Perobelli

F. S.

Santos

R. A. C.

. 2010. “Regional Effects of Port Infrastructure: A Spatial CGE Application to Brazil.” International Regional Science Review 33:239–63.

41.

Haddad

E. A.

Hewings

G. J. D.

Porsse

A. A.

Van Leeuwen

Vieira

R. S.

. 2015. “The Underground Economy: Tracking the Higher-order Economic Impacts of the São Paulo Subway System.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 73:18–30.

42.

Haddad

E. A.

Perobelli

F. S.

Domingues

E. P.

Aguiar

. 2011. “Assessing the Ex Ante Economic Impacts of Transportation Infrastructure Policies in Brazil.” Journal of Development Effectiveness 3:44–61.

43.

Haddad

E. A.

Porsse

A. A.

Rabahy

W. A.

. 2013. “Domestic Tourism and Regional Inequality in Brazil.” Tourism Economics 19:173–86.

44.

Haddad

E. A.

Teixeira

. 2015. “Economic Impacts of Natural Disasters in Megacities: The Case of Floods in São Paulo, Brazil.” Habitat International 45:106–13.

45.

Haddad

M. A.

Nedović-Budić

. 2006. “Using Spatial Statistics to Analyze Intra-urban Inequalities and Public Intervention in São Paulo, Brazil.” Journal of Human Development 7:85–109.

46.

Hewings

G. J. D.

Fonseca

M. A. R.

Guilhoto

J. J. M.

Sonis

. 1989. “Key Sectors and Structural Change in the Brazilian Economy: A Comparison of Alternative Approaches and their Policy Implications.” Journal of Policy Modeling 11:67–90.

47.

Hirschman

A. O.

1958. The Strategy of Economic Development. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

48.

Isard

1975. An Introduction to Regional Science. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

49.

Isserman

1995. “The History, Status, and Future of Regional Science: An American Perspective.” International Regional Science Review 17:249–96.

50.

Kalatzis

A. E. G.

Azzoni

C. R.

Achcar

J. A.

. 2008. “Financial Constraints and Investment Decisions: Evidence from a Highly Unstable Emerging Economy.” Applied Economics 40:1425–34.

51.

Kalatzis

A. E. G.

Bassettoa

C. F.

Azzoni

C. R.

. 2011. “Multicollinearity and Financial Constraint in Investment Decisions: A Bayesian Generalized Ridge Regression.” Journal of Applied Statistics 38:287–99.

52.

Katz

J. S.

Matin

B. R.

. 1997. “What Is Research Collaboration?” Research Policy 26:1–18.

53.

Lane

Julia

. 2010. “Let’s Make Science Metrics More Scientific.” Nature 454:488–89.

54.

Laurini

Andrade

Pereira

. 2005. “Income Convergence Clubs for Brazilian Municipalities: A Non-parametric Analysis.” Applied Economics 37:2099–118.

55.

Lima

M. A. M.

Resende

. 2007. “Convergence of Per Capita GDP in Brazil: An Empirical Note.” Applied Economics Letters 14:333–35.

56.

Liu

Bollen

Nelson

M. L.

Van de Sompel

. 2005. “Coauthorship Networks in the Digital Library Research Community.” Information Processing & Management 41:1462–80.

57.

Magalhaes

Hewings

G. J. D.

Azzoni

C. R.

. 2005. “Spatial Dependence and Regional Convergence in Brazil.” Investigaciones Regionales 6:5–20.

58.

Markusen

2015. “Problem-driven Research in Regional Science.” International Regional Science Review 38:3–29.

59.

Martínez

S. H.

Van Eijck

Cunha

M. P.

Guilhoto

J. J. M.

Walter

Faaij

. 2013. “Analysis of Socio-economic Impacts of Sustainable Sugarcane-ethanol Production by Means of Inter-regional Input-output Analysis: Demonstrated for Northeast Brazil.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 28:290–316.

60.

Mena-Chalco

J. P.

Cesar-Jr

R. M.

. 2009. “ScriptLattes: An Open-source Knowledge Extraction System from the Lattes Platform.” Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society 15:31–39.

61.

Menezes

Silveira-Neto

Azzoni

C. R.

. 2012. “Demography and Evolution of Regional Inequality.” The Annals of Regional Science 49:643–55.

62.

Menezes

T. A.

Silveira-Neto

Ratton

J. L.

Monteiro

. 2013. “Spatial Correlation between Homicide Rates and Inequality: Evidence from Urban Neighborhoods.” Economics Letters 120:97–99.

63.

Mossi

Aroca

Fernandez

Azzoni

C. R.

. 2003. “Growth Dynamics and Space in Brazil.” International Regional Science Review 26:393–418.

64.

Myrdal

1957. Rich Lands and Poor: The Road to World Prosperity. New York: Harper and Brothers.

65.

North

1959. “Agriculture in Regional Economic Growth.” Journal of Farm Economics 41:943–51.

66.

Otte

Rousseau

. 2002. “Social Network Analysis: A Powerful Strategy, also for the Information Sciences.” Journal of Information Science 28:441–53.

67.

Parcell

2010. “Learning Together: Knowledge Networks in Capacity Development Initiatives.” In Capacity Development in Practice, edited by Ubels

Acquaye-Baddoo

Fowler

, 225–35. Oxford, UK: Earthscan.

68.

Perobelli

F. S.

Haddad

E. A.

Bastos

S. Q.

Pimentel

. 2007. “Fiscal Incentives and Regional Development Projects: Mercedes-Benz in Juiz de Fora (MG), Brazil 1996/1999.” Latin American Business Review 7:49–75.

69.

Perobelli

F. S.

Haddad

E. A.

Bonet

Hewings

G. J. D.

. 2010. “Structural Interdependence among Colombian Departments.” Economic Systems Research 22:279–300.

70.

Perobelli

F. S.

Oliveira

C. C. C.

. 2013. “Energy Development Potential: An Analysis of Brazil.” Energy Policy 59:683–701.

71.

Perroux

1955. “Note sur la Notion de Pôle de Croissance.” Économie Appliquée 8:307–20.

72.

Porsse

Haddad

E. A.

Ribeiro

E. P.

. 2007. “Economic Effects of Regional Tax Incentives: A General Equilibrium Approach.” Latin American Business Review 7:195–216.

73.

Pyke

Bristow

Coombes

Fan

Gillespie

Harris

Hull

Marshall

Wren

. 2007. “Editorial: Regional Studies: 40 Years and More.” Regional Studies 43:S1–S8.

74.

Rey

Anselin

. 2000. “Regional Science Publication Patterns in the 1990s.” International Regional Science Review 23:323–44.

75.

Rogers

2003. Diffusion of Innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press.

76.

Royal Society. 2011. Knowledge, Networks and Nations: Global Scientific Collaboration in the 21st Century. London, UK: Elsevier.

77.

Royuela

Duque

J. C.

Suriñach

. 2008. “Regional and Urban Science in France: Rankings of Authors and Institutions and Publication Patterns during the Nineties.” Région et Développement 28:207–32.

78.

Royuela

Suriñach

Duque

J. C.

. 2006. “Regional Science in Germany During the Nineties—Are German Publication Patterns Different?” Raumforschung und Raumordnung 64:77–92.

79.

Santos

G. F.

Haddad

E. A.

Hewings

G. J. D.

. 2013. “Energy Policy and Regional Inequalities in the Brazilian Economy.” Energy Economics 36:241–55.

80.

Scherngell

Barber

M. J.

. 2011. “Distinct Spatial Characteristics of Industrial and Public Research Collaborations: Evidence from the Fifth EU Framework Programme.” Annals of Regional Science 46:247–66.

81.

Schettini

Azzoni

C. R.

Paez

. 2011. “Neighborhood and Efficiency in Manufacturing in Brazilian Regions: A Spatial Markov Chain Analysis.” International Regional Science Review 34:397–418.

82.

Sidone

O. J. G.

Haddad

E. A.

Mena-Chalco

J. P.

. 2015. “Scholarly Publication and Collaboration in Brazil: The Role of Geography.” Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology.

83.

Silva

C. E. L.

Hewings

G. J. D.

. 2012. “Locational and Managerial Decisions as Interdependent Choices in the Headquarter-manufacturing Plant Relationship: A Theoretical Approach.” The Annals of Regional Science 48:703–17.

84.

Silveira-Neto

Azzoni

C. R.

. 2011. “Non-spatial Government Policies and Regional Income Inequality in Brazil.” Regional Studies 45:453–61.

85.

Silveira-Neto

Azzoni

C. R.

. 2012. “Social Policy as Regional Policy: Market and Nonmarket Factors Determining Regional Inequality.” Journal of Regional Science 52:433–50.

86.

Silveira-Neto

Duarte

Paez

. 2015. “Gender and Commuting Time in São Paulo Metropolitan Region.” Urban Studies 52:298–313.

87.

Suriñach

Duque

J. C.

Ramos

Royuela

. 2003. “Publication Patterns in Regional and Urban Analysis: Have Topics, Techniques and Applications Changed During the 1990s?” Regional Studies 37:351–63.

88.

Vieira

F. V.

Haddad

E. A.

Azzoni

C. R.

. 2014. “Export Performance of Brazilian States to Mercosul and Non-mercosul Partners.” Latin American Business Review 15:253–67.

89.

Wasserman

Faust

. 1994. Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.