An Evaluation of Global Co-Authorship Networks and a Comparative Study of Social and Commercial Entrepreneurship

Mathieu Roger^*
*Correspondence: Mathieu Roger, Department of Social Geography and Regional Development, University of Debrecen, Egyetem tér 1, 4032 Debrecen, Hungary, Email:

Introduction

Global co-authorship networks have become increasingly prevalent in academic research, reflecting the collaborative nature of scholarly work across borders. Concurrently, there has been growing interest in understanding the dynamics between social entrepreneurship and commercial entrepreneurship, exploring their similarities, differences, and impacts. This article aims to evaluate global co-authorship networks in academic research and conduct a comparative study of social and commercial entrepreneurship, shedding light on their characteristics, challenges, and implications for societal development. Global co-authorship networks represent collaborations among researchers from different countries, disciplines, and institutions. These networks facilitate knowledge exchange, interdisciplinary research, and the dissemination of findings on a global scale. Evaluating global co-authorship networks involves analyzing their structure, dynamics, and impact on scientific progress. Global co-authorship networks exhibit a complex structure characterized by dense clusters of collaborations among researchers. Network analysis techniques, such as centrality measures and community detection algorithms, can reveal key nodes, influential clusters, and patterns of collaboration within these networks. Global co-authorship networks are dynamic entities that evolve over time in response to changes in research trends, funding opportunities, and academic policies. Longitudinal analysis of co-authorship patterns can uncover temporal trends, emerging research topics, and shifts in collaboration dynamics within and across disciplines. Global co-authorship networks contribute to scientific progress by fostering innovation, knowledge dissemination, and cross-cultural exchange. Studies have shown that researchers involved in international collaborations tend to produce higher-quality research, receive more citations, and have greater visibility within their fields [1-3].

Description

Social entrepreneurship and commercial entrepreneurship represent two distinct approaches to business creation and innovation, each with its unique goals, motivations, and societal impacts. Conducting a comparative study of these two forms of entrepreneurship can provide insights into their similarities, differences, and implications for economic development and social change. Social entrepreneurship involves using entrepreneurial principles to address social or environmental issues, whereas commercial entrepreneurship focuses primarily on profit generation. While both forms of entrepreneurship aim to create value, social entrepreneurs prioritize social impact over financial returns. Social entrepreneurs are driven by a desire to effect positive change and address pressing societal problems, whereas commercial entrepreneurs are motivated primarily by profit-seeking and market opportunities. However, there is growing recognition of the potential synergies between social and commercial objectives, leading to the emergence of hybrid models of entrepreneurship. Social entrepreneurship faces unique challenges, including access to funding, measuring social impact, and achieving sustainability. Commercial entrepreneurship, on the other hand, grapples with market competition, scalability, and regulatory constraints. Despite these challenges, both forms of entrepreneurship offer opportunities for innovation, job creation, and economic growth. Social entrepreneurship has the potential to drive inclusive growth, reduce inequality, and promote sustainable development by addressing unmet social needs and empowering marginalized communities. Commercial entrepreneurship contributes to economic development by fostering innovation, creating wealth, and generating employment opportunities [4-6].

Conclusion

Global co-authorship networks and the comparative study of social and commercial entrepreneurship offer valuable insights into the dynamics of collaboration and innovation in academic research and business creation. By evaluating global co-authorship networks, researchers can better understand the structure, dynamics, and impact of collaborative research efforts on scientific progress. Similarly, conducting a comparative study of social and commercial entrepreneurship can provide insights into their respective characteristics, challenges, and implications for societal development. By harnessing the synergies between academic research and entrepreneurial innovation, societies can address pressing global challenges and drive sustainable development.

Acknowledgement

None.

Conflict of Interest

None.

References

1. Ferrer-Ventosa, Roger. "On the perfect sphere: The preference for circular compositions for depicting the universe in medieval and early modern art." Religions 15 (2024): 171.

Google Scholar, Crossref

2. Gustafsson, Daniel. "Beyond making and unmaking: Re-envisioning sacred art." Religions 10 (2019): 89.

Google Scholar, Crossref

3. Harrison, Charles, and Paul Wood. "Art in theory, 1900-2000 an anthology of changing ideas." (2003).

Google Scholar

4. Campbell, Melissa, Kathleen P. Decker, Kerry Kruk and Sarah P. Deaver. "Art therapy and cognitive processing therapy for combat-related PTSD: A randomized controlled trial." Art Therapy 33 (2016): 169-177.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

5. Chao, Tzu-Yang and Yao-Ting Sung. "An investigation of the reasons for test anxiety, time spent studying and achievement among adolescents in Taiwan." Asia Pac Educ 39 (2019): 469-484.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

6. Erford, Bradley T., Erin Johnson and Gerta Bardoshi. "Meta-analysis of the English version of the beck depression inventory–second edition." Meas Eval Couns Dev 49 (2016): 3-33.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at