Aistleitner Matthias, Puehringer Stephan
Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy (ICAE), Johannes Kepler University of Linz, Altenbergerstraße 69, 4040 Linz, Austria.
Eur J Dev Res. 2023;35(6):1322-1346. doi: 10.1057/s41287-023-00583-z. Epub 2023 Apr 24.
Recent evidence from citation analysis (Mitra et al., World Dev 135:105076, 2020) suggests that research published in top economic journals is becoming more influential in the development discourse. In this article, we argue that this trend has nontrivial implications for the development discourse on trade in general. Based on an analysis of more than 400 papers published in high-impact economic journals between 1997 and 2017, we highlight three core trade narratives that stand for different biases apparent in the elite economic discourse on trade: "trade championing", "Ignorance in a world full of nails" and "microfounding trade benefits". Further insights derived from citation analysis of five development studies journals and a case-study-oriented approach that focusses on the reception of this particular trade debate in World Development suggests that these biased trade narratives are effectively transmitted into development research.
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1057/s41287-023-00583-z.
引用分析的最新证据（米特拉等人，《世界发展》第135卷：105076，2020年）表明，发表在顶级经济学期刊上的研究在发展话语中变得越来越有影响力。在本文中，我们认为这一趋势对总体贸易发展话语具有重要意义。基于对1997年至2017年间发表在高影响力经济学期刊上的400多篇论文的分析，我们突出了三种核心贸易叙事，它们代表了精英经济贸易话语中明显存在的不同偏见：“支持贸易”、“在满是钉子的世界里无知”和“微观构建贸易利益”。从对五本发展研究期刊的引用分析以及以案例研究为导向的方法（该方法聚焦于《世界发展》中这一特定贸易辩论的接受情况）得出的进一步见解表明，这些有偏见的贸易叙事有效地传播到了发展研究中。
在线版本包含可在10.1057/s41287-023-00583-z获取的补充材料。
