Neo-colonialism in the academy? Anglo-American domination in management journals

Abstract

Leading business and management journals claim to be ‘world-leading’ but are dominated by Anglo-American scholars. The extent of this domination is demonstrated graphically in this article through cartograms based on 2010/2011 authorship and editorship data in top management journals. The dramatically skewed production of management scholarship is both ethically problematic in terms of Anglo-American domination of leading journals and the exclusion of many developing regions, and anachronistic given the shift of global production away from the North Atlantic in recent years. This continuing neo-colonial domination of intellectual production underpins the inequitable organization of the global economy and specifically the disproportionate realisation of wealth in the global North at the expense of the global South. The article proposes a series of measures to begin redressing the imbalance.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 156 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.