HTML

ePub

PDF

1. INTRODUCTION

By meeting basic needs such as economic well-being and social integration, post-materialistic society demands new types of products and services. The individual demands become esthetic, intellectual, quality of life and autonomy (BENDASSOLLI et al., 2009). The growth of the initiatives of creation in all sectors demonstrates an expansive movement of the cultural field (ARRUDA, 2003).

Innovative behavior, coupled with strategic orientation towards profitability and growth, can be defined as entrepreneurship (GARTNER, 1988). According to Davel and Cora (2011), a way of relating culture and entrepreneurship, is to analyze culture as a process of symbolic creation during the entrepreneurial activity. Culture is shared by the people, who make up an organization, sustaining the entrepreneurial process. Another relation between culture and entrepreneurship is cultural consumption, in which the consumption of goods of experience is made. Cultural consumption can be defined as the “set of socio-cultural processes in which the appropriation and the use of products takes place” (CANCLINI, 2001, p.77).

Florida (2002) defined as “creative class” the group of professionals, scientists and artists, whose presence generates economic, social and cultural dynamism. This term is derived from the concept of “cultural entrepreneurship”. The “creative class” includes individuals or groups in the fields of science, engineering, architecture and design, education, the arts, music and entertainment. The economic function of the “creative class” is to create something new and useful. The creative economy is based on intellectual inputs, created by human creativity (Florida, 2006).

In 2008, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) launched the first version of the Creative Economy Report. In 2010, the report stated that even during the global economic crisis of 2008, world exports of creative products and services continued to grow. This sector reached 592 billion USD in 2008, with an annual growth rate of 14 percent for six consecutive years. The other industrial sectors had a drop in global demand, in addition to a concentration of 12% in international trade. The creative industry is characterized by the development and creation of symbolic and artistic goods, whose consumption is of an interpretive, esthetic, experiential order (JUDICE; FURTADO, 2014).

Given the importance of the theme, in 2012 the Brazilian Ministry of Culture created the Secretariat of Creative Economy. The mission of this secretariat is to lead the formulation, implementation and monitoring of public policies for local and regional development, prioritizing support and encouragement for professionals and micro and small creative Brazilian enterprises. Creative industries have great potential for developing countries seeking to “diversify their economies and make a leap towards one of the most dynamic sectors of the world economy” (UNCTAD, 2010).

The phenomenon of the creative industry has generated great interest among the researchers of Organizations. However, the available literature is fragmented and disassociated (BENDASSOLLI et al., 2009) especially at the national level. The objective of this study is to map and discuss the scientific production scenario related to entrepreneurship in the creative industry sector through a bibliometric study, using the ISI Web of Knowledge database. The aim of this study is to contribute to future research on entrepreneurship in the creative industry sector, identifying the main topics addressed in the area, pointing out the main trends and gaps related to this topic, in addition to identifying the main authors and works.

The article has four more sessions. In the theoretical reference session will be presented the concepts on entrepreneurship, cultural entrepreneurship and creative industry. In the methodology section, the methodological strategy used in this work will be presented, presenting the selection method of the article sample and the analysis criteria. The fourth session will present the results. The fifth session will present the conclusion, limitations and suggestions for future work.

2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

This study aims to analyze the scientific production on entrepreneurship in the creative industry sector. In this sense, the theoretical reference was developed with the objective of conceptualizing Entrepreneurship, Cultural Entrepreneurship and Creative Industry.

2.1. Entrepreneurship

The concept of entrepreneurship has been valued by governments and organizations as an important pillar for economic growth today (Barros & Pereira, 2008). Research on entrepreneurship has a long tradition. The field has grown significantly since the 1980s (LANDSTRÖM; HARIRCHI; ÅSTRÖM, 2012). Entrepreneurship typically encompasses risk-taking, innovation and proactivity; in the absence of any of these elements, the process can be considered as little entrepreneurial (MILLER, 2011). In the recent past, management and economics scholars believed that the motivating principle of entrepreneurship was commercial profit. However, over the last two decades, there has been a growing acceptance of the notion that entrepreneurs do not need to have their profit-oriented view, nor should they be associated with mercantilist practices (DACIN; DACIN; MATEAR, 2010). In a study on social entrepreneurship, Dacin et al. (2010) organized the types of entrepreneurship according to Table 1.

The established theories on entrepreneurship provide a range of information for understanding this field. Dacin et al. (2010), explain that the best strategy for entrepreneurship research in the cultural context is to focus on aspects related to the mission, processes and resources of this context.

2.2. Cultural Entrepreneurship

Dimaggio (1982b), defined the concept of cultural entrepreneurship as a function of “cultural capitalism”. The process begins with identifying the opportunity of the cultural domain and then, there is a risk of developing and disseminating the vision with the aim of creating something with cultural value. For Bankset al. (2000), cultural entrepreneurship is directly related to the production of cultural goods and services, products whose main value is symbolic, through images, symbols, signs and sounds. Cultural entrepreneurs may or may not aim for profit (DACIN; DACIN; MATEAR, 2010). Cultural entrepreneurship refers not only to the cultural industry sector, but also to norms that guide social patterns of behavior in a given society (DIMAGGIO, 1994). Cultural entrepreneurship represents, in the context of its operations and impact, the interpretation and perception of culture in a society (JOHNSON, 2007). Like other types of entrepreneurs, successful cultural entrepreneurs appear to possess certain individual skills and abilities (DIMAGGIO, 1982b). Cultural entrepreneurs must be able to accumulate and manipulate cultural capital, possess a set of skills, knowledge, practices and tastes that are unusual, characteristic and socially virtuous (BOURDIEU apud DACIN; DACIN; MATEAR, 2010).

Guerra and Paiva Júnior (2011), argue that the creative industry is a sector with strategic potential for the development of a region, being the action of cultural producers understood from the perspective of entrepreneurship.

2.3. Creative industry

The term “creative industry” arose in movements that occurred in the 1990s in some industrialized countries. The creative industry sector is in continuous growth, and should be understood as an economic phenomenon related to public development policies (BENDASSOLLI et al., 2009).

Analyzing the literature, it is possible to find several denominations for this sector: cultural industries, creative industries, creative economy, knowledge industries, content industries, entertainment industries, copyright protection industries and media industries (FLACH; ANTONELLO, 2011). While there is no consensus on the definition, the concept of creativity is an essential feature of the creative industry. For the UNCTAD (2010) creative industries are classified as: cultural heritage, including traditional cultural expressions; visual and scenic arts; audiovisual industries; publications and print media; new media; design; and creative services, including advertising and architecture.

Bendassolli et al. (2009), analyzed the definitions of creative industries and divided them into four components. In the first component, creativity is the central element for the generation of intellectual property with commercial potential. The second represents the perception of the consumer in the generation of value in the act of consumption. In the third component, the creative industries transform the value generated by the consumer, in economic value. Finally, we verify the convergence of arts, business and technology.

3. METHODOLOGY

The methodology used in this study was the literature review, using the theory of bibliometrics and analysis of co-citation networks. In management research, the literature review process is a key tool, used to manage the diversity of knowledge for a specific academic research. The literature review allows the researcher to map and evaluate the existing intellectual territory, supporting it in specifying a research question (TRANFIELD; DENYER; SMART, 2003). Bibliometrics is an approach used to measure scientific production. The evolution of information technologies facilitated the use of this approach (MORETTI; CAMPANARIO, 2009). The bibliometric analysis has applications in several areas, with the aim of improving research and analyzing trends (SMALL, 2003).

This work was developed using the ISI Web of Knowledge platform (Web of Science). The ISI database supports a variety of software tools, enabling the retrieval of a variety of important meta-data for research, such as: abstract, cited references, date of citation, authors, institutions and countries (LOPES; CARVALHO, 2012; LI; ROLLINS; YAN, 2018), in addition to providing the h-index. The h-index is an index proposed by Hirsch (2005), with the objective of characterizing the importance of the scientific production of a researcher. The h-index represents the number of articles published by the researcher, which obtained citations greater than or equal to that number.

The ISI search system covers other databases, which the abstracts are indexed in the ISI, with impact factor as measured by the Journal Citation Report (JCR). Another important point is that the analysis of social networks would be unfeasible, in the case of the use of other databases in conjunction with the ISI database. Each database has different formats and typologies, there is no compatibility. The research in the ISI database was done in five steps. In all, only articles were filtered (Document Type), because they undergo peer review processes in their full version (LOPES; CARVALHO, 2012).

In the first step, we only searched for the keyword “ENTREPRENEUR *”, resulting in 19,138 articles. In the second, we seek the terms: “CREATIVE ECONOM*" or “CREATIVE INDUSTR*” or “CULTURAL INDUSTR*” or “CREATIVE CLASS” or “CREATIVE CLUSTER*”, resulting in 1,940 articles. We then combine the articles that had the terms of the first and (AND) second steps. The result of the combination made in the third step were 114 articles. In the fourth step we searched for the terms “CREATIVE ENTREPRENEUR*” or (OR) “CULTURAL ENTREPRENEUR*”. The result was 120 articles. In the fifth step we combine the articles from step three or (OR) four, totaling 218 articles as shown in Figure 1. In the sixth step, we read the titles and abstracts of the 218 articles to verify adherence with the proposed research.

The articles were analyzed according to the following criteria: (a) relevance of the article in relation to the objective of this work, based on the abstract; (b) journal impact factor as measured by the Journal Citation Report (JCR), (c) number of article citations. After this analysis, we obtained 131 articles. The meta-data of the 131 articles were exported from the ISI database as plain text. For data analysis, we used Bibexcel software. Bibexcel allows the construction of citation relationships between the authors and the references, as well as being compatible with relational mapping tools such as the Ucinet software (RUAS; PEREIRA, 2014). Using the Bibexcel we extracted from the sample (i) the most commonly used keywords, (ii) the most cited articles and references, (iii) the journal’s knowledge area and (iv) the co-citation analysis. Co-citation analysis is a set of data collection, analysis, and graphical display techniques, which can be used to produce empirical maps of important authors in various areas of study (MCCAIN, 1990). The co-citation map, used mainly to analyze the intellectual structure of a given scientific field (AHLGREN; JARNEVING; ROUSSEAU, 2003), was generated through the Ucinet software (Borgatti, Everett & Freeman, 2002). In addition to the aforementioned tools, we also used Microsoft Excel software for creating graphs and filters.

The sample was analyzed, grouped and organized in order to obtain the evolution of publications over time, the journals with the largest number of publications, the areas of these journals, the impact factor of journals, the most cited authors, the h-index of these authors and the networks of citations and co-citations.

4. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

The first analysis was the identification of the evolution and distribution of the publication of the 131 articles over time. We verified that the first publication related to the theme dates from the year 1982. Between the years 1983 and 1995 and the years 1996 and 1999 there were no publications. As shown in Figure 1, there is a growth of publications from 2008, with its peak in 2014. The possible explanations for the growth of these studies are: the impact of the creative economy on the innovation capacity of the economy in the midst of the crisis of 2008; the evolution of creative employment between 2009 and 2010, growing four times faster than the economy as a whole, driven by creative employment in non-creative industries and; the fact that the creative industry can directly create products and services that improve economic and social well-being (DE PROPRIS, 2013).

The keywords most frequently found in the sample articles were ‘entrepreneurship’ and ‘creative industr*’ with 15 incidences each and ‘creativity’ with 8 incidents. Figure 3 shows the 11 most used keywords in the sample articles.

During the analysis process, we verified that terms related to the economy were used as keywords in 21 articles. The term “economic development” was used 4 times. The articles were: (1)“Crafting your way out of the recession? New craft entrepreneurs and the global economic downturn” (JAKOB, 2013); (2)“The alert and creative entrepreneur: a clarification” (KIRZNER, 2009); (3)“Small creative industry firms: a development dilemma?” (CHASTON, 2008) and; (4)“The ‘Cultural Turn’ in Australian Regional Economic Development Discourse: Neoliberalising Creativity? (GIBSON; KLOCKER, 2005).

The 131 articles were published in 91 different journals, in the areas of business economics, Sociology, Geography, Urban Studies and environmental sciences ecology. Table 2 shows the distribution of the sample articles in relation to the journal area.

As verified in Table 2, 30% of articles were published in journals related to Business Economics, 24% in Sociology journals and 19% in periodicals related to Geography. This number is consistent with the theme addressed, since entrepreneurship, creative industry and creative economy approach economic and social aspects, in addition to being related to regional development (CHASTON, 2008; FLORIDA; MELLANDER; STOLARICK, 2008; FOSTER; MANNING; TERKLA, 2013; PIERGIOVANNI; CARREE; SANTARELLI, 2011). Figure 4 presents the journals that published at least three articles within the sample collected, representing 20% of the total.

With the exception of the International Journal of Arts Management, whose impact factor is 0.233, all other journals have an impact factor higher than 1 (Journal Citation Report, 2013), as shown in Table 3.

Since the impact factor is a quality metric of the journal, we verified all articles that had publications in journals with impact factor greater than 1. Table 4 presents 19 articles published in journals with impact factor greater than 1. The two articles highlighted in bold were published in journals that have a strong relationship with the theme of entrepreneurship.

Considering the number of citations of each of the articles over the years, we verified that 10 articles of the sample have at least 26 citations. The two most cited articles are by DiMaggio, both from 1982. The article “Cultural entrepreneurship in nineteenth-century Boston - The creation of an organizational base for high culture in America” has 234 citations and the “Cultural entrepreneurship in nineteenth-century Boston, Part II: The classification and framing of american-art”, has 105 citations. Both were published in the journal Media Culture & Society, which had an impact factor in the year 2013 of 1.139. Table 5 presents the 10 most cited articles of the sample and the h-index of the authors, according to the ISI database. In analyzing the h-index of the authors with most cited articles, we verified that the authors Gibson with h-index = 103, Banks with h-index = 77, Johnson with h-index = 77 and Fritsch with h-index = 61 are the authors with the highest h-index of the sample.

Based on the analysis of the information, we were able to verify the evolution of the citations of the 5 most cited articles over time. We found that the articles “What is organizational imprinting? Cultural entrepreneurship in the founding of the paris opera” by Johnson (2007) and “Social entrepreneurship: why we don't need a new theory and how we move forward from here” by Dacin, Dacin and Matear (2010) were the ones that had a greater increase of citations in the last ten years. Figure 4 shows the number of citations from the 5 most cited articles of the sample in the last ten years.

In using Bibexcel software we were able to analyze which authors were the most referenced by the 131 articles of the sample. It is important to point out that being referenced does not necessarily mean having an article that is part of the sample. To exemplify, we have the authors Florida (2002), Becker (1982) and Peck (2005). Although they are highly referenced authors in the sample, the publications are not part of the 131 articles in the sample, since they are books. Another motivation for the work not to be listed in the sample is the fact that it addresses only one of the focus theme constructs of this study. Table 6 presents the list of the 10 most referenced authors in the sample.

After extracting the references of the articles, it was possible to generate the co-citations map using the Ucinet software (BORGATTI; EVERETT; FREEMAN, 2002). The map shown in Figure 5 represents the co-citation network among the authors, based on the references cited in the articles in the sample. Using the co-citation map, we were able to analyze the intellectual structure of the fields that compose this bibliometric study, grouping authors by research topic.

Analyzing Figure 5, we find 4 groups of authors connected by the similarities of ideas. Co-citation connections characterize similarity, association or co-occurrence of ideas, reflecting significant intellectual connections within the field (SMALL, 1973). The first group is made up of entrepreneurs, such as Schumpeter and Shane. The second group (right side) is formed by researchers of cultural entrepreneurship, such as Dimaggio and Bourdieu. The third group, with more recent studies, are the authors who study the phenomenon of the creative economy, including entrepreneurship in the creative industry, creative cities and cultural industry. In this group we have, Florida and Caves. Finally, the fourth group, made up of scholars of economic and regional development, with the authors Scott and Peck.

4.CONCLUSIONS

This study aimed to map and discuss the scientific production scenario related to entrepreneurship in the creative industry sector. For this purpose, a bibliometric research was carried out using the ISI Web of Knowledge database, whose final sample resulted in the analysis of 131 articles. According to the study, entrepreneurship in the creative industry sector is still under-explored; however, it begins to draw the attention of researchers. Between the years 2010 and 2014, there has been a considerable increase in the number of publications related to the theme, with the peak of 26 publications in 2014. The sample presented 3 articles by Brazilian researchers, 1 published in 2005 in the journal Organizações & Sociedade and 2 published in 2014 in the journal Tempo Social. It cannot be said that this growth will continue, however, the graphs show growth trends. In the sample of this study, the areas of the most published journals are related to Economics, Sociology and Geography. We also verified that studies about entrepreneurship in the creative industry are being published in journals with high impact factor, which shows the relevance of the theme.

Among the most commonly used keywords, we highlight Entrepreneurship, creative industr*, Creative Class, in addition to the terms related to the concept of economy. The keyword Economic Development was present in 4 sample articles. These articles address the relationship between entrepreneurship in the creative industry and economic development. According to the report presented by UNCTAD (2010), entrepreneurship in the creative industry contributes to economic development.

Using as classification criterion the h-index (HIRSCH, 2005), the authors with the most relevant scientific production on the subject of this study are: (1) Gibson, (2) and e Johnson, (3) Fritsch, (4) O'Connor and (5) Dimaggio. Analyzing the authors most referenced in the 131 articles of the sample, we have Dimaggio, Bourdieu and Florida.

Based on the results, we were able to map and analyze the scientific production scenario related to entrepreneurship in the creative industry. The terms “cultural entrepreneurship”, “entrepreneurship in the cultural industry” and “entrepreneurship in the creative economy” are also related to the subject of this study.

In analyzing the co-citation map (Figure 5), we verified 4 groups of authors within the sample. The first group are entrepreneurs. The second group are students of cultural entrepreneurship. The third group and the fourth group, with more recent publications, are the authors who study respectively the phenomenon of entrepreneurship in the creative sector and economic and regional development.

The main limitation of this study is the fact that the information presented is limited to the articles found in the ISI Web of Knowledge database (Web of Science) due to the incompatibility of the other databases with the software used in this study. In addition, it is recognized that the analyzes presented in this study are quantitative and therefore, a systematic review study of the 131 articles would present a deeper insight into the content of each article. For future research, we suggest studies on entrepreneurship and aspects related to the objective, work processes and resources in the creative sector. We also suggest studies related to cultural entrepreneurship and economic development.

Referencias

AHLGREN, P.; JARNEVING, B.; ROUSSEAU, R. Requirements for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, v. 54, n. 6, p. 550–560, 2003.

ARRUDA, M. A política cultural: regulação estatal e mecenato privado. Tempo social, 2003.

BANKS, M. . et al. Risk and trust in the cultural industries. Geoforum, v. 31, n. 4, p. 453–464, nov. 2000.

BANKS, M. . B C D. Moral economy and cultural work. Sociology, v. 40, n. 3, p. 455–472, 1 jun. 2006.

BENDASSOLLI, P. F. et al. Indústrias criativas: definição, limites e possibilidades. Revista de Administração de Empresas, p. 10–18, 2009.

BORGATTI, S. P.; EVERETT, M. G.; FREEMAN, L. C. Ucinet for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies, 2002.

BOSCHMA, R. A.; FRITSCH, M. Creative Class and Regional Growth: Empirical Evidence from Seven European Countries. ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY, v. 85, n. 4, p. 391–423, 2009.

CANCLINI, N. G. Consumidores e cidadãos: Conflitos multiculturais da globalização. 4. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Editora UFRJ, 2001. p. 290

CHASTON, I. Small creative industry firms: a development dilemma? MANAGEMENT DECISION, v. 46, n. 5-6, p. 819–831, 2008.

DACIN, P.; DACIN, M.; MATEAR, M. Social Entrepreneurship : Why We Don ’ t Need a New Theory and How We Move Forward From Here. Academy of Management Perspectives, p. 37–58, 2010.

DAVEL, E.; CORA, M. Empreendedorismo Cultural: Construindo Uma Agenda Integrada de Pesquisa. egepe.org.br, p. 1–18, 2011.

DE PROPRIS, L. How are creative industries weathering the crisis? Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, v. 6, p. 23–35, 2013.

DIMAGGIO, P. Cultural entrepreneurship in nineteenth-century Boston, Part II: The classification and framing of american-art. Media, Culture & Society, v. 4, n. 4, p. 303–322, 1982a.

DIMAGGIO, P. Cultural entrepreneurship in nineteenth-century Boston: the creation of an organizational base for high culture in America. Media, Culture & Society, v. 4, n. 1, p. 33–50, 1 jan. 1982b.

DIMAGGIO, P. Culture and Economy. In: SMELSER, N.; RICHARD SWEDBERG (Eds.). . The Handbook of Economic Sociology. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994.

DIMAGGIO, P. J.; POWELL, W. W. The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, v. 48, p. 147, 1983.

DOWD, T. J. Production perspectives in the sociology of music. POETICS, v. 32, n. 3-4, p. 235–246, 2004.

FLACH, L.; ANTONELLO, C. S. Organizações culturais e a aprendizagem baseada em práticas. Cadernos EBAPE.BR, v. 9, n. 1, p. 155–175, mar. 2011.

FLORIDA, R.; MELLANDER, C.; STOLARICK, K. Inside the black box of regional development--human capital, the creative class and tolerance. Journal of Economic Geography, v. 8, n. 5, p. 615–649, 21 jul. 2008.

FOSTER, P. .; MANNING, S. .; TERKLA, D. . The Rise of Hollywood East: Regional Film Offices as Intermediaries in Film and Television Production Clusters. Regional Studies, 2013.

GARTNER, W. B. “Who Is an Entrepreneur?” Is the Wrong Question. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, v. 12, p. 47–67, 1988.

GIBSON, C.; KLOCKER, N. The “cultural turn” in Australian regional economic development discourse: Neoliberalising creativity? Geographical Research, v. 43, n. 1, p. 93–102, 2005.

GUERRA, J. R. F.; PAIVA JÚNIOR, F. G. Empreendedorismo cultural na produção cinematográfica: a ação empreendedora de realizadores de filmes pernambucanos. Review of Administration and Innovation - RAI, v. 8, n. 3, 7 nov. 2011.

HACKLER, D.; MAYER, H. Diversity, entrepreneurship, and the urban environment. JOURNAL OF URBAN AFFAIRS, v. 30, n. 3, p. 273–307, 2008.

HIRSCH, J. E. An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, v. 102, n. 46, p. 16569–16572, 2005.

IZUSHI, H.; AOYAMA, Y. Industry evolution and cross-sectoral skill transfers: a comparative analysis of the video game industry in Japan, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Environment & Planning A, v. 38, n. 10, p. 1843–1861, 2006.

JAKOB, D. . B. Crafting your way out of the recession? New craft entrepreneurs and the global economic downturn. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, v. 6, n. 1, p. 127–140, 2013.

JOHNSON, V. What is organizational imprinting? Cultural entrepreneurship in the founding of the Paris Opera. American Journal of Sociology, v. 113, n. 1, p. 97–127, jul. 2007.

JUDICE, V.; FURTADO, S. Gestão de empreendimentos criativos e culturais: estudo de uma organização de ensino e difusão de ritmos afro-brasileiros em São João Del-Rei (MG). Organizações & Sociedade, p. 293–314, 2014.

KIRKELS, Y.; DUYSTERS, G. Brokerage in SME networks. RESEARCH POLICY, v. 39, n. 3, p. 375–385, 2010.

KIRZNER, I. M. The alert and creative entrepreneur: A clarification. Small Business Economics, v. 32, n. 2, p. 145–152, 2009.

LANDSTRÖM, H.; HARIRCHI, G.; ÅSTRÖM, F. Entrepreneurship: Exploring the knowledge base. Research Policy, v. 41, n. 7, p. 1154–1181, set. 2012.

LI, K., ROLLINS, J.; YAN, E. Web of Science use in published research and review papers 1997–2017: a selective, dynamic, cross-domain, content-based analysis. Scientometrics v. 1, 2018.

LOPES, A.; CARVALHO, M. Evolução da literatura de inovação em relações de cooperação: um estudo bibliométrico num período de vinte anos. Gestão e Produção. São Carlos, p. 203–217, 2012.

MCCAIN, K. W. Mappping Authors in Intellectual Space: A Technical Overview. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, v. 41, n. 6, p. 433–443, 1990.

MCGRANAHAN, D. A.; WOJAN, T. R.; LAMBERT, D. M. The rural growth trifecta: outdoor amenities, creative class and entrepreneurial context. JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY, v. 11, n. 3, p. 529–557, 2011.

MILLER, D. Miller (1983) Revisited: A Reflection on EO Research and Some Suggestions for the Future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, v. 35, n. 5, p. 873–894, 25 set. 2011.

MORETTI, S. L. DO A.; CAMPANARIO, M. DE A. A Produção Intelectual Brasileira em Responsabilidade Social Empresarial - RSE sob a Ótica da Bibliometria A Bibliometric Approach to Brazilian Scientific Production on Corporate Social Responsibility - CSR. RAC, Edição Especial, v. 13, p. 68–86, 2009.

MORT, F. Archaeologies of city life: commercial culture, masculinity, and spatial relations in 1980s London. Environment & Planning D: Society & Space, v. 13, n. 5, p. 573–590, 1995.

PIERGIOVANNI, R. . R.; CARREE, M. A. M. A. .; SANTARELLI, E. . E. Creative industries, new business formation, and regional economic growth. Small Business Economics, v. 39, n. 3, p. 539–560, 5 abr. 2011.

PONZINI, D.; ROSSI, U. Becoming a Creative City: The Entrepreneurial Mayor, Network Politics and the Promise of an Urban Renaissance. URBAN STUDIES, v. 47, n. 5, p. 1037–1057, 2010.

ROY, S. C. “Taking charge of your health”: Discourses of responsibility in English-Canadian women’s magazines. Sociology of Health and Illness, v. 30, n. 3, p. 463–477, abr. 2008.

RUAS, T.; PEREIRA, L. Como construir indicadores de Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação usando Web of Science, Derwent World Patent Index, Bibexcel e Pajek? Perspectivas em Ciência da Informação, p. 52–81, 2014.

SMALL, H. Co-Citation in Scientific Literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, v. 24, n. August, p. 265–269, 1973.

SMALL, H. Paradigms, citations, and maps of science: A personal history. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, v. 54, n. 5, p. 394–399, mar. 2003.

TRANFIELD, D.; DENYER, D.; SMART, P. Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review. British Journal of Management, v. 14, n. 3, p. 207–222, set. 2003.

UNCTAD. Relatório da economia criativaIN: REIS, Ana Carla Fonseca (org), 2010.

WILSON, N. C.; STOKES, D. Laments and Serenades : Relationship Marketing and Legitimation Strategies for the Cultural Entrepreneur Qualitative Market Research : An International Journal By. v. 7, n. 3, p. 218–227, 2004.

YEOH, B. S. A. The global cultural city? Spatial imagineering and politics in the (multi)cultural marketplaces of south-east Asia. Urban Studies, v. 42, n. 5-6, p. 945–958, 2005.

ZIMMERMAN, J. From brew town to cool town: Neoliberalism and the creative city development strategy in Milwaukee. CITIES, v. 25, n. 4, p. 230–242, 2008.

IR