1 Introduction

In the 1950 and 1960 s, the world economy grew at twice the secular rate (Toniolo, 1998). In Italy, the uniqueness of those years caused a major misalignment between the economy, on the one hand, and institutions and the state, on the other hand, which were no longer able to support the growth imperatives of industrial capitalism (De Cecco, 2007). In the late 1960s, with the so-called “hot autumn”, workers’ wage claims exploded and the foundations were laid for a new form of trade unionism. Some of the largest groups in Italian capitalism sought to initiate a dialogue with the latter and the productive classes to reform the state and dissolve obstacles to growthFootnote 1. In parallel, the exceptional increase in income had favored mass schooling, and the “1968 student movement” expressed the deep cultural and ideological unease of the new generations in the face of economic and social challenges (Salvati, 1981).

In the early 1970s, the Italian question became intertwined with international dynamics. The world economy saw its linear and seemingly balanced growth come to a halt. Salient moments, such as the end of dollar convertibility and the 1973 oil crisis, accompanied the restructuring of relations among the Great Powers (Lewis, 1980).

In this context of double crisis, but also of economic and social reforms, the most culturally and socially committed Italian scholars immersed themselves in the facts and sought interpretations that could help untangle the knots that were blocking growth. They tried to apply the method and models of industrial economics and policy to the Italian and European case. In 1973, under the stimulus of Sergio Vaccà, professor at the Bocconi University in Milan, the Bollettino di Economia e Politica Industriale was born, which the following year took on the title of Economia e Politica Industriale (EPI). Two years later, on the initiative of Romano Prodi, professor at the University of Trento and then Bologna, the Rivista di Economia e Politica Industriale (REPI) came into being, which, in 1980, took on the title L’Industria - Rivista di Economia e Politica Industriale, gaining access to the publishing rights of this historic journal, founded in 1886.

The flourishing of these initiatives is hardly surprising, as the most influential Italian intellectuals had become aware of the need to contribute to the solution of the complex problems posed by the new economic and social phase. Perhaps it may come as a surprise that these two journals are still alive and well: the former has taken on an international dimension since 2015 and it is published in English under the title Journal of Industrial and Business Economics (JIBE), while the latter has retained its original title and publishes articles in both Italian and English. The two journals have remained firmly grounded in their history and have engaged in fair competition over time, thus creating a scientific and social space for the meeting and discussion between Italian scholars of industrial economics.

However, many of JIBE-EPI’s current contributors and readers may be unaware of its origins and history. Therefore, on the occasion of its fiftieth anniversary, it seems appropriate to propose a historical sketch of its first fifty years. This should not only be seen as a grateful celebration of those who have devoted part of their intellectual efforts and time to the Journal. In our view, it is the best way to explain its identity, that is, the characteristics that have ensured JIBE-EPI’s uniqueness as a non-conformist and non-mainstream journal, open to interdisciplinary contributions complementary to industrial economics, which has remained its key pillar.

We believe it is essential not to lose the memory of these events in order to keep a straight rudder in navigating today’s crowded sea of international journals, which are sometimes pure containers of articles, being blurry in their aims, methods and content. Below, the narrative will focus on JIBE-EPI, but some comparisons will be made both with its closest “rival” in the domestic market and, far more importantly today, with other international journals. Before moving forward, we must caution the reader. Although our arguments are supported by data, they can sometimes come across as “biased,“ given our emotional attachment to the Journal. The latter certainly has many strengths, but also some weaknesses, discussed in the text. But not all flaws should be blamed on the Journal on its 50th birthday!

2 Data and trends

The half-century of JIBE-EPI’s life can be divided into three periods: the first, from its origin until the end of 1993, when a systematic survey of the articles published up to then was drawn up (EPI Editorial Board, 1994); the second, until the end of 2014, when the transition to the new publisher and the English language took place; and the third, from 2015 until now.

Table 1 shows the number of authors (who wrote one or more contributions) and the number of articles published in the three periods. The 1973–1993 period was characterized by a relatively low number of authors, compared to the total number of published articles (the ratio is 0.49). The EPI Editorial Board (1994) reported that the 16 most prolific out of a total of 417 authors (3.8%) wrote 28% of the articles, while the top 42 authors (4.1%) wrote 44% of the articles. This high concentration does not correspond to a process of “crystallization” and “closure”, but rather to the formation of a core group of scholars who, over time, have given the Journal a clear cultural and scientific identity. In fact, over the two decades, “new” authors (i.e., previously not contributors to the Journal) were on average twenty each year 1994. In this regard, the EPI Editorial Board (1994) stated that: «The presence of a stable and truly operational think tank, highly cohesive while fully respecting the individual opinions of its members, has given Economia e Politica Industriale […] the capability to: propose research questions and hypotheses; promote seminars and debates on key issues by involving scholars with different skills and points of view; and stimulate in-depth studies, critical reviews and updates, with contributions placed in time, but linked together in answering questions-often ‘intellectual provocations’-that arise from non-episodic reflection» (author’s translation).

Table 1 Authors and articles in the succession of JIBE-EPI life stages
Full size table

The collective commitment of EPI’s pioneers led to an increasing involvement of other authors, whose number almost doubled in the following two decades, thus bringing the author/article ratio to 0.93, with the total number of articles almost similar between the two periods (about 40 per year). Based on our experience, it can be said that scholars were attracted to the Journal because of the cultural space created by its prerogatives to “be always on the ball”, attentive to major problems, fundamental research questions, and the generation of substantive ideas and approaches to address them, while avoiding the syndrome of elegant formalism and self-referentiality at the expense of the breadth and relevance of published research. In other words, EPI embraced what Krugman (2018) has also recently stated as: «the important point shouldn’t be “don’t formalize”; it should be that formalism is there to open your mind, not close it, and if the real world seems to be telling you something inconsistent with your model, the problem lies in the model, not in the world».

Over time, EPI’s founder and inspirer Sergio Vaccà endeavored to figure out how to preserve the collegiality of the Journal when its catalytic role would cease. Thus, in 2007, the non-profit organization Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale (hereinafter EPI Association) was born with the aim of entrusting ownership of the Journal to an association of scholars, with the most loyal collaborators at the forefrontFootnote 2. The members of the Association have since grown in number, joining the mission and projects of the Journal. On the one hand, the EPI Association ensured the Journal’s survival and continuity; on the other hand, an institutional mechanism was intentionally activated to foster cohesion and a style of collective orientation toward a non-conformist journal of industrial economics.

Times changed again in 2015, when the EPI Association decided to transform EPI into an international journal, with a predominantly European, but world-oriented perspective. The EPI Association was fully aware of how difficult it would be to position the Journal in the international market and maintain good quality and visibility together with the historical identity of EPI, which was henceforth associated with the title JIBE. A visible effect of this change was reflected in the number and variety of authors and articles. Table 1 shows how over the period 2015–2022, while the number of articles per year has decreased (29 compared to 40 in the past), the number of authors has increased considerably, reversing the author/article ratio, which rose to 1.81, underscoring the relevance of co-authored articles. Thus, the internationalization process of JIBE-EPI has been accompanied by alignment with the growing phenomenon of multi-authorship that has emerged in the postwar period in economics, as well as in other scientific areas (Hudson, 1996; McDowell & Melvin, 1983)Footnote 3. The involvement of an increasing number of authors not affiliated with Italian institutions has positively enhanced the reputation of JIBE-EPI in the international scientific publication market, yielding important achievements in terms of journal ranking and bibliometric indicators (see Sect. 4). Table 2 shows the breakdown of articles by subject category over the three periods. Some aggregate trends deserve attention.

Table 2 Article breakdown by subject category
Full size table
  1. (i)

    The share of articles devoted to large private and public companies and institutions has decreased over time. Above all, interest in the public sector has declined in connection with the privatization wave that swept through the world, including Italy. In fact, the share of “public enterprises and institutions” fell from 7.3% in the 1973–1993 period to 2.3% in the following two periods, while the share of “structure and dynamics of industrial capitalism” remained quite stable, with just physiological fluctuations (between 9% and 11%).

  2. (ii)

    The focal area closest to the study of industrial structures and markets has also shrunk, more markedly in the latest period (from 34.5 to 25.6% between the first and third periods). Especially, “industry studies”, so traditional in the industrial economics of the 1960-1980s, and articles on “districts, firm networks, environment”, which are quite specific to the Italian economy, have declined. In the latter case, the “internationalization effect”, with authors being less involved in these issues, is evident.

  3. (iii)

    The share of articles devoted to the most relevant changes in the world economy - internationalization and innovation - is stable (between 19% and 21%). However, there is a shift in the share from “firm internationalization and multinational enterprises” to “technical change and innovation”, with a greater focus on the latter.

  4. (iv)

    Over time, policies have captured more attention (share increased from 14.4 to 25.4% and 17.5%). The mirror effect of liberalization, namely the growing importance of competition and regulatory policies worldwide is undoubtedly the main causes. On the other hand, the share of “economic and labor policy” decreased from 6.4 to 4.6%.

  5. (v)

    Last but not least, mention should be made of the two subject categories closest to management and finance. While the share of articles devoted to “firm strategy and organization, corporate governance” has remained very stable (about 11%), “bank-business relationships and finance” is the subject category that has recorded the most dramatic increase in share in the transition from the first two periods to the last: 3.5% vs. 3.7% vs. 13.5%. This performance could be explained by many factors: the financialization of the world economy, the 2007–2008 global financial crisis, innovative finance instruments, and the financing of innovation and start-ups. Other explanations may be occasional in nature or due to editorial board preferences, compared to the past, when finance and financial market topics per se were less considered, if not in close connection with the industrial strategy of companies.

In taking on this broad scope, JIBE-EPI has made use of Forums, Special Issues, and Special Sections to stimulate and engage scholars in making timely contributions on hot topics and/or deemed relevant. With reference to the last period, Table 3 shows the time sequence of publishing initiatives, by type and title.

Table 3 Forum, special issues, and special section, 2015–2022
Full size table

Finally, the effectiveness of the Journal in influencing scientific debate should be assessed. We refer to Sect. 4 for an analysis in the present time, based on comparison with other similarly positioned journals in the international publishing market. Here we focus on a comparison between JIBE-EPI and L’Industria-REPI based on the number of citations over timeFootnote 4.

Table 4 shows that, although the number of cited articles differed slightly between the two journals, the number of citations until the end of 2014 was the same (5,111 vs. 5,112). This parity in visibility breaks down starting in 2015, in connection with the internationalization of JIBE-EPI. In the 2015–2022 period, the latter’s citations are more than three and a half times those of L’Industria-REPI (3,354 vs. 901), an expected result, given the different geographic scope, but one that confirms the stifling that country-focused social science journals currently suffer from. The values of the indicators “citations/article” and “citations/year” are very telling in explaining the different dynamics of the two journals in the last period. It is worth noting the contribution of Special Issues and Forum to the total number of JIBE-EPI citations over the period 2015–2022. The timely Forum on Covid-19 has a 28% share; the top three initiatives (adding the Special Issues on digitization and cryptocurrencies) 45%; and the top six 60%.

Table 4 A comparison between JIBE-EPI and L’Industria-REPI: Cited articles and citations (numbers)
Full size table

3 Actors

Fifty years of life for a scholarly journal is primarily the result of the constant and converging efforts of scholars who give it continuity with their papers, but also of renewal choices that foster continuous new additions to the editorial board. Table A1 in Appendix is a very much due acknowledgment of those who were among the most committed authors in supporting the Journal with their scientific contributions. It is worth noting that 8 of the top 15 authors by number of published articles are still active in the Journal as of 2022. As far as the citations are concerned, Table A2 shows the major contributors to the Journal’s visibility. Credit goes to Sergio Vaccà and Enzo Rullani, whose contributions to the citations in the 1973–2014 period were sizeable, meaning that their articles have greatly influenced the debate in Italy among scholars of industrial economics, knowledge economics, and multinational enterprises.

The 2015–2022 period marks the international debut of the Journal and the consolidation of its reputation on a global scale. Internationalization has enlarged the number of citations per article. Single articles exceeded 100 citations in just a short time, an event that rarely occurred in the past. Among the top 15 most cited authors for articles in JIBE-EPI during this period, the vast majority are foreign scholars (10) and Italian scholars affiliated with foreign institutions (2). Some authors who contribute to the Journal have outstanding scientific profiles. According to Google Scholar, David Audretsch has more than 100,000 citations (he was named Clarivate Citation Laureate in 2021), Giovanni Dosi 78,000, Bengt-Åke Lundvall 60,000, Tod Sandler 44,000, Ha-Joon Chang more than 33,000, Albert Link 30,000, Massimo Colombo and Rajneesh Narula more than 18,000, Cristiano Antonelli, Eric Lehmann and Roger Strange around 13,000.

4 Present and future

The current situation of the Journal is quite different from the past. As of 2019, it has taken on the title JIBE and the subtitle EPI. Today, JIBE-EPI is an international journal ranked by Scimago-Scopus in the first quartile of the subject categories Business and international management, Business, management and accounting, Economics, econometrics and finance. JIBE-EPI is indexed in ESCI Web of Science and ABS Academic Journal Quality Guide. Its worldwide diffusion is evidenced by the growth in annual downloads, which went from 1,779 to 2015, the year of its international debut, to 174,654 in 2021.

To better assess its performance on the international scene, Table 5 compares JIBE-EPI with other journals, selected according to the following criteria: (i) disciplinary contiguity, in accordance with the academic positioning of the Journal and the Scimago similarity indicatorFootnote 5; (ii) less important and relevant to few cases, sharing of Italian originFootnote 6. The comparison is based on relevant bibliometric indicators, with reference to the most recent values (2021) made available by ScimagoFootnote 7.

Table 5 A comparison between JIBE-EPI and similar journals: Bibliometric indicators, 2021
Full size table

The table confirms the growth of the Journal. As for SJR and quartile, JIBE-EPI has left behind 10 journals out of the total 18 included in the list (among them, all those with a past national tradition). It is very close to the position of the Journal of Industrial Economics (JIE), founded in 1952 and recognized as a leading journal in the field. Moreover, by number of citations and citations per article in recent years, JIBE-EPI distances both JIE and other journals with a higher SJR, envisaging in the near future a further approach to the positions of well-renowned journals, such as Industrial and Corporate Change, International Business Review, Journal of Technology Transfer. In particular, it should be noted that, by number of citation/paper, JIBE-EPI (5.43) quite clearly distances almost all similar journals (average value equal to 2.1), with the only exceptions being International Business Review (8.44), and Journal of Technology Transfer (6.79).

This performance can surely be considered an excellent achievement that rewards fifty years of commitment by three generations of scholars. The Journal has continued to innovate, reacting to, and sometimes anticipating the evolution (and revolution) of the real economy. Accordingly, the subjects, ideas and methods have changed over time. The challenge for the Journal’s internationalization has further encouraged such changes. But what about the near future?

During the transition phase, JIBE-EPI may have suffered from a mismatch between expectations in line with its historical tradition and the submission of papers by foreign scholars not yet aware of its aim and scope. Having successfully overcome this phase, it is now up to the Journal’s editors to focus the topics so as to ensure high scholarly quality and effective positioning in the context of international publications. In pursuing these goals, they must not forget the non-conformist origin of the Journal and its orientation that favors ideas and interpretations addressing the great challenges of our changing world, rather than elegant and technically sophisticated models limited to specialized fields.

Some of us may have come across this quote from John Maynard Keynes in the essay commemorating Alfred Marshall:

the master-economist must possess a rare combination of gifts. He must reach a high standard in several different directions and must combine talents not often found together. He must be mathematician, historian, statesman, philosopher in some degree. He must understand symbols and speak in words. He must contemplate the particular in terms of the general, and touch abstract and concrete in the same flight of thought. He must study the present in the light of the past for the purposes of the future. No part of man’s nature or his institutions must lie entirely outside his regard (Keynes, 1924: 322).

Keynes certainly had very high standards. The EPI Association is well aware of the fact that the intersection of all these attributes is most likely an empty set. However, in keeping with JIBE-EPI’s 50-year history, this still seems to be the ideal guide to address the Journal’s editorial policy.