Letter From the Editor

Welcome to the second issue of The Richmond Journal of Law and Technology\u27s seventh publication term. As we near the halfway point of this term, the Journal is stronger than ever. Our continued growth and success is due in large part to the dedication of our staff and Editorial Board. This year we will publish four issues and will hold a symposium on the soon-to-be-enacted Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act ( UCITA ). The symposium will be held on March 2, 2001. Registration for and information on the symposium will be available on our website soon

Türk Kütüphaneciliği Dergisi, 1987-2001

The journal Türk Kütüphaneciliği (Turkish Librarianship) has been published since 1987. A continuation of the Türk Kütüphaneciler Derneği Bülteni (Bulletin of the Turkish Librarians’ Association) that was published between 1952 and 1986, Türk Kütüphaneciliği became a refereed journal in 1995. Based on a review of 238 articles published in the journal between 1987-2001 (135 of which were published before it became refereed, 103 after), this study compares some bibliometric features (number of pages in each issue, the length of articles, authors, topics, citations, etc.) of articles that were published before the journal became refereed with those after. The average number of pages in each issue increased 81% after the journal became refereed. The average length of an article increased 75% (from 8 pages to 14 pages). The number of citations per article increased 65% (from 11 citations to 171 citations). The percentage of articles having abstracts in Turkish and English increased from 24% to 96%. Articles were written by 94 different authors representing 42 institutions. Overwhelming majority of articles were written by a single author. Researchers affiliated with the departments of librarianship have authored the majority of articles. More than 20% of articles that appeared in the journal are on libraries (including public, academic, and special libraries), followed by 12% on information retrieval and bibliographic control (cataloging and classification), and 8% on information technology and library automation. More than half (53%) of all citations (3204) were for books while 42% for journals and 5% for “other publications” (e.g., unpublished manuscripts, web sites, among others). Türk Kütüphaneciler Derneği Bülteni, Türk Kütüphaneciliği, Resmî Gazete (Turkish Official Gazette), Library Trends, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Information Technology and Libraries and College & Research Libraries are among the most frequently cited journals. Majority of citations were for articles appeared in a few core journals, which fits Bradford’s Law of Scattering (1934). The problems facing Türk Kütüphaneciliği are also discussed along with some recommendations

Re-Examining the Publicity, Advertising and Marketing of Legal Profession in Malaysia

The legal practitioners in Malaysia are restricted from publicising, advertising and marketing themselves on the grounds of fiduciary relationship with clients, the duty to serve the public and it is professionally undignified. Despite the advancement of the Information, Communication and Technology, lawyers are restricted in utilising it for publicity, advertising and marketing. At the same time, the public is deprived of information to engage the best lawyers of their choice. Furthermore, while other countries such as European Union, United Kingdom, Singapore and Australia have moved forward, the Malaysian legal profession remains unchanged. This concept paper investigates the adequacy of the Legal Profession (Publicity) Rules 2001(“LPPR 2001”) in legalising publicity, advertising and marketing. This paper adopts a qualitative research methodology with doctrinal and comparative approaches. Firstly, this paper focuses on content analysis of statutes as the primary source of law. Secondly, content analysis on secondary sources of law including journal articles, and online sources. Thirdly, conducting a comparative study by analysing the primary and secondary sources of law in other jurisdictions. This paper explains that lawyers must be allowed to innovate into new methods in publicising, advertising and marketing themselves. Society will greatly benefit from this as they will be more informed and knowledgeable in engaging the service of lawyers of their choice. This paper ends by suggesting that there is a dire need to legalise the publicity, advertising and marketing of the legal profession in Malaysia. Thus, this research is significant to the development of the legal profession in Malaysia

Conceptualisation of the three-dimensional matrix of collaborative knowledge barriers

[EN] Nowadays, collaborative knowledge management (CKM) is well accepted as a decisive asset in the field of networked enterprises and supply chains. However, few knowledge management initiatives have been performed successfully because, in most cases, the barriers that hinder the CKM process are unknown and misunderstood. Currently, the research reveals different uni- and bi-dimensional barriers' classifications, however multi-dimensional approaches provide a better view of the complexity in the area of CKM. Therefore, this paper proposes the three-dimensional matrix of collaborative knowledge barriers taking into account: (i) perspectives; (ii) levels and (iii) barriers blocks to provide a reference way to audit the CKM barriers, and thus, in further research, focus on the corrections and adjustments to guarantee the success while implementing a CKM project.Sanchis, R.; Sanchis Gisbert, MR.; Poler, R. (2020). Conceptualisation of the three-dimensional matrix of collaborative knowledge barriers. Sustainability. 12(3):1-25. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12031279S125123Rajabion, L., Sataei Mokhtari, A., Khordehbinan, M. W., Zare, M., & Hassani, A. (2019). The role of knowledge sharing in supply chain success. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 17(6), 1222-1249. doi:10.1108/jedt-03-2019-0052Sanguankaew, P., & Vathanophas Ractham, V. (2019). Bibliometric Review of Research on Knowledge Management and Sustainability, 1994–2018. Sustainability, 11(16), 4388. doi:10.3390/su11164388Zhang, J., Dawes, S. S., & Sarkis, J. (2005). Exploring stakeholders’ expectations of the benefits and barriers of e‐government knowledge sharing. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 18(5), 548-567. doi:10.1108/17410390510624007Riege, A. (2005). Three‐dozen knowledge‐sharing barriers managers must consider. Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(3), 18-35. doi:10.1108/13673270510602746Yih‐Tong Sun, P., & Scott, J. L. (2005). An investigation of barriers to knowledge transfer. Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(2), 75-90. doi:10.1108/13673270510590236Solli-Sæther, H., Karlsen, J. T., & van Oorschot, K. (2015). Strategic and Cultural Misalignment: Knowledge Sharing Barriers in Project Networks. Project Management Journal, 46(3), 49-60. doi:10.1002/pmj.21501Kukko, M. (2013). Knowledge sharing barriers in organic growth: A case study from a software company. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 24(1), 18-29. doi:10.1016/j.hitech.2013.02.006Mazorodze, A. H., & Buckley, S. (2019). Knowledge management in knowledge-intensive organisations: Understanding its benefits, processes, infrastructure and barriers. SA Journal of Information Management, 21(1). doi:10.4102/sajim.v21i1.990Vuori, V., Helander, N., & Mäenpää, S. (2018). Network level knowledge sharing: Leveraging Riege’s model of knowledge barriers. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 17(3), 253-263. doi:10.1080/14778238.2018.1557999Bacon, E., Williams, M. D., & Davies, G. (2020). Coopetition in innovation ecosystems: A comparative analysis of knowledge transfer configurations. Journal of Business Research, 115, 307-316. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.005General Perspectives on Knowledge Management: Fostering a Research Agenda. (2001). Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 5-21. doi:10.1080/07421222.2001.11045672Gupta, S., & Bostrom, R. (2006). Using peer-to-peer technology for collaborative knowledge management: concepts, frameworks and research issues. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 4(3), 187-196. doi:10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500103Bosua, R., & Scheepers, R. (2007). Towards a model to explain knowledge sharing in complex organizational environments. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 5(2), 93-109. doi:10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500131Brandt, D., & Hartmann, E. (1999). Editorial: Research topics and strategies in sociotechnical systems. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 9(3), 241-243. doi:10.1002/(sici)1520-6564(199922)9:33.0.co;2-bKim, S., & Lee, H. (2006). The Impact of Organizational Context and Information Technology on Employee Knowledge-Sharing Capabilities. Public Administration Review, 66(3), 370-385. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00595.xArgote, L., Beckman, S. L., & Epple, D. (1990). The Persistence and Transfer of Learning in Industrial Settings. Management Science, 36(2), 140-154. doi:10.1287/mnsc.36.2.140Gupta, N., Ho, V., Pollack, J. M., & Lai, L. (2016). A multilevel perspective of interpersonal trust: Individual, dyadic, and cross-level predictors of performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(8), 1271-1292. doi:10.1002/job.2104Gray, B., & Wood, D. J. (1991). Collaborative Alliances: Moving from Practice to Theory. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 27(1), 3-22. doi:10.1177/0021886391271001Roberts, N. C., & Bradley, R. T. (1991). Stakeholder Collaboration and Innovation: A Study of Public Policy Initiation at the State Level. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 27(2), 209-227. doi:10.1177/0021886391272004Scheff, J., & Kotler, P. (1996). Crisis in the Arts: The Marketing Response. California Management Review, 39(1), 28-52. doi:10.2307/41165875Gulati, R., & Gargiulo, M. (1999). Where Do Interorganizational Networks Come From? American Journal of Sociology, 104(5), 1439-1493. doi:10.1086/210179Maitlo, A., Ameen, N., Peikari, H. R., & Shah, M. (2019). Preventing identity theft. Information Technology & People, 32(5), 1184-1214. doi:10.1108/itp-05-2018-0255Bolloju, N., Khalifa, M., & Turban, E. (2002). Integrating knowledge management into enterprise environments for the next generation decision support. Decision Support Systems, 33(2), 163-176. doi:10.1016/s0167-9236(01)00142-7Hanisch, B., Lindner, F., Mueller, A., & Wald, A. (2009). Knowledge management in project environments. Journal of Knowledge Management, 13(4), 148-160. doi:10.1108/13673270910971897Yew Wong, K., & Aspinwall, E. (2004). Characterizing knowledge management in the small business environment. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(3), 44-61. doi:10.1108/13673270410541033Knowledge Acquisition and Sharing for Requirement Engineeringhttps://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/28916Practical Tools and Methods for Corporate Knowledge Management—Sharing and Capitalising Engineering Know-How in the Concurrent Enterprisehttps://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/IST-1999-12685Szulanski, G. (1996). Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 27-43. doi:10.1002/smj.4250171105Wehn, U., & Almomani, A. (2019). Incentives and barriers for participation in community-based environmental monitoring and information systems: A critical analysis and integration of the literature. Environmental Science & Policy, 101, 341-357. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2019.09.002Schiavone, F., & Simoni, M. (2011). An experience‐based view of co‐opetition in R&D networks. European Journal of Innovation Management, 14(2), 136-154. doi:10.1108/14601061111124867Li, Y., Liu, Y., & Liu, H. (2010). Co-opetition, distributor’s entrepreneurial orientation and manufacturer’s knowledge acquisition: Evidence from China. Journal of Operations Management, 29(1-2), 128-142. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2010.07.006McGaughey, S. L., Liesch, P. W., & Poulson, D. (2000). An unconventional approach to intellectual property protection: the case of an Australian firm transferring shipbuilding technologies to China. Journal of World Business, 35(1), 1-20. doi:10.1016/s1090-9516(99)00031-0Ilvonen, I., & Vuori, V. (2013). Risks and benefits of knowledge sharing in co-opetitive knowledge networks. International Journal of Networking and Virtual Organisations, 13(3), 209. doi:10.1504/ijnvo.2013.063049Martinez-Noya, A., Garcia-Canal, E., & Guillen, M. F. (2012). R&D Outsourcing and the Effectiveness of Intangible Investments: Is Proprietary Core Knowledge Walking out of the Door? Journal of Management Studies, 50(1), 67-91. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2012.01086.xROSEN, B., FURST, S., & BLACKBURN, R. (2007). Overcoming Barriers to Knowledge Sharing in Virtual Teams. Organizational Dynamics, 36(3), 259-273. doi:10.1016/j.orgdyn.2007.04.007Hislop, D. (2005). The effect of network size on intra-network knowledge processes. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 3(4), 244-252. doi:10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500073Abou-Zeid, E.-S. (2005). A culturally aware model of inter-organizational knowledge transfer. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 3(3), 146-155. doi:10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500064Balle, A. R., Steffen, M. O., Curado, C., & Oliveira, M. (2019). Interorganizational knowledge sharing in a science and technology park: the use of knowledge sharing mechanisms. Journal of Knowledge Management, 23(10), 2016-2038. doi:10.1108/jkm-05-2018-0328Baccarini, D., Salm, G., & Love, P. E. D. (2004). Management of risks in information technology projects. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 104(4), 286-295. doi:10.1108/02635570410530702Sherehiy, B., Karwowski, W., & Layer, J. K. (2007). A review of enterprise agility: Concepts, frameworks, and attributes. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 37(5), 445-460. doi:10.1016/j.ergon.2007.01.007Peltokorpi, V. (2006). Knowledge sharing in a cross-cultural context: Nordic expatriates in Japan. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 4(2), 138-148. doi:10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500095Solitander, M., & Tidström, A. (2010). Competitive flows of intellectual capital in value creating networks. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 11(1), 23-38. doi:10.1108/14691931011013316Khamseh, H. M., & Jolly, D. (2014). Knowledge transfer in alliances: the moderating role of the alliance type. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 12(4), 409-420. doi:10.1057/kmrp.2012.63Corallo, A., Lazoi, M., & Secundo, G. (2012). Inter-organizational knowledge integration in Collaborative NPD projects: evidence from the aerospace industry. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 10(4), 354-367. doi:10.1057/kmrp.2012.25Salvetat, D., Géraudel, M., & d’ Armagnac, S. (2013). Inter-organizational knowledge management in a coopetitive context in the aeronautic and space industry. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 11(3), 265-277. doi:10.1057/kmrp.2012.6Baba, M. L., Gluesing, J., Ratner, H., & Wagner, K. H. (2004). The contexts of knowing: natural history of a globally distributed team. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(5), 547-587. doi:10.1002/job.259Korbi, F. B., & Chouki, M. (2017). Knowledge transfer in international asymmetric alliances: the key role of translation, artifacts, and proximity. Journal of Knowledge Management, 21(5), 1272-1291. doi:10.1108/jkm-11-2016-0501Faerman, S. R., McCaffrey, D. P., & Slyke, D. M. V. (2001). Understanding Interorganizational Cooperation: Public-Private Collaboration in Regulating Financial Market Innovation. Organization Science, 12(3), 372-388. doi:10.1287/orsc.12.3.372.10099Jaworski, B. J. (1988). Toward a Theory of Marketing Control: Environmental Context, Control Types, and Consequences. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 23-39. doi:10.1177/002224298805200303Cooke-Davies, T. (2002). The «real» success factors on projects. International Journal of Project Management, 20(3), 185-190. doi:10.1016/s0263-7863(01)00067-9Santos, V. R., Soares, A. L., & Carvalho, J. Á. (2012). Knowledge Sharing Barriers in Complex Research and Development Projects: an Exploratory Study on the Perceptions of Project Managers. Knowledge and Process Management, 19(1), 27-38. doi:10.1002/kpm.1379Tiwari, S. R. (2015). Knowledge Integration in Government-Industry Project Network. Knowledge and Process Management, 22(1), 11-21. doi:10.1002/kpm.1460Mariotti, F. (2007). Learning to share knowledge in the Italian motorsport industry. Knowledge and Process Management, 14(2), 81-94. doi:10.1002/kpm.275Ardichvili, A. (2008). Learning and Knowledge Sharing in Virtual Communities of Practice: Motivators, Barriers, and Enablers. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 10(4), 541-554. doi:10.1177/1523422308319536Levy, M., Loebbecke, C., & Powell, P. (2003). SMEs, co-opetition and knowledge sharing: the role of information systems. European Journal of Information Systems, 12(1), 3-17. doi:10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000439Gabelica, C., Bossche, P. V. den, Segers, M., & Gijselaers, W. (2012). Feedback, a powerful lever in teams: A review. Educational Research Review, 7(2), 123-144. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2011.11.003Zakaria, N., Amelinckx, A., & Wilemon, D. (2004). Working Together Apart? Building a Knowledge-Sharing Culture for Global Virtual Teams. Creativity and Innovation Management, 13(1), 15-29. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8691.2004.00290.xKatz, R., & Allen, T. J. (1982). Investigating the Not Invented Here (NIH) syndrome: A look at the performance, tenure, and communication patterns of 50 R & D Project Groups. R&D Management, 12(1), 7-20. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.1982.tb00478.xGupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. (2000). Knowledge flows within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 21(4), 473-496. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(200004)21:43.0.co;2-iBarkema, H. G., & Vermeulen, F. (1997). What Differences in the Cultural Backgrounds of Partners Are Detrimental for International Joint Ventures? Journal of International Business Studies, 28(4), 845-864. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490122Sanchis, R., & Poler, R. (2019). Enterprise Resilience Assessment—A Quantitative Approach. Sustainability, 11(16), 4327. doi:10.3390/su11164327Vaara, E., Sarala, R., Stahl, G. K., & Björkman, I. (2010). The Impact of Organizational and National Cultural Differences on Social Conflict and Knowledge Transfer in International Acquisitions. Journal of Management Studies, 49(1), 1-27. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00975.xRichards, D., Busch, P., & Venkitachalam, K. (2007). Ethnicity-based cultural differences in implicit managerial knowledge usage in three Australian organizations. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 5(3), 173-185. doi:10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500145Seely Brown, J., & Duguid, P. (s. f.). Structure and Spontaneity: Knowledge and Organization. Managing Industrial Knowledge: Creation, Transfer and Utilization, 44-67. doi:10.4135/9781446217573.n3Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. (1998). The Concept of «Ba»: Building a Foundation for Knowledge Creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40-54. doi:10.2307/41165942Bocquet, R., & Mothe, C. (2010). Knowledge governance within clusters: the case of small firms. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 8(3), 229-239. doi:10.1057/kmrp.2010.14Janssens, M., Lambert, J., & Steyaert, C. (2004). Developing language strategies for international companies: the contribution of translation studies. Journal of World Business, 39(4), 414-430. doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2004.08.006Aga, D. A., Noorderhaven, N., & Vallejo, B. (2016). Transformational leadership and project success: The mediating role of team-building. International Journal of Project Management, 34(5), 806-818. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.02.012Panahi, S., Watson, J., & Partridge, H. (2015). Information encountering on social media and tacit knowledge sharing. Journal of Information Science, 42(4), 539-550. doi:10.1177/0165551515598883Bisbal, J., Lawless, D., Bing Wu, & Grimson, J. (1999). Legacy information systems: issues and directions. IEEE Software, 16(5), 103-111. doi:10.1109/52.795108Holsapple, C. W., & Joshi, K. D. (2002). Knowledge Management: A Threefold Framework. The Information Society, 18(1), 47-64. doi:10.1080/01972240252818225Lee, M. R., & Chen, T. T. (2012). Revealing research themes and trends in knowledge management: From 1995 to 2010. Knowledge-Based Systems, 28, 47-58. doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2011.11.016Sieber, J. E. (1988). Data sharing: Defining problems and seeking solutions. Law and Human Behavior, 12(2), 199-206. doi:10.1007/bf01073128Pauleen, D. J., & Wang, W. Y. C. (2017). Does big data mean big knowledge? KM perspectives on big data and analytics. Journal of Knowledge Management, 21(1), 1-6. doi:10.1108/jkm-08-2016-033

Multirate control with incomplete information over Profibus-DP network

This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in International Journal of Systems Science on 2014, available online:http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/00207721.2013.844286When a process ¿eld bus-decentralized peripherals (Pro¿bus-DP) network is used in an industrial environment, a deterministic behaviour is usually claimed. However, due to some concerns such as bandwidth limitations, lack of synchronisation among different clocks and existence of time-varying delays, a more complex problem must be faced. This problem implies the transmission of irregular and, even, random sequences of incomplete information. The main consequence of this issue is the appearance of different sampling periods at different network devices. In this paper, this aspect is checked by means of a detailed Pro¿bus-DP timescale study. In addition, in order to deal with the different periods, a delay-dependent dual-rate proportional-integral-derivative control is introduced. Stability for the proposed control system is analysed in terms of linear matrix inequalitiesThe authors are grateful to the financial support of the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitivity [Research Grant TEC2012-31506].Salt Llobregat, JJ.; Casanova Calvo, V.; Cuenca Lacruz, ÁM.; Pizá Fernández, R. (2014). Multirate control with incomplete information over Profibus-DP network. International Journal of Systems Science. 45(7):1589-1605. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207721.2013.844286S15891605457Alves, M., & Tovar, E. (2007). Real-time communications over wired/wireless PROFIBUS networks supporting inter-cell mobility. Computer Networks, 51(11), 2994-3012. doi:10.1016/j.comnet.2007.01.001Boyd, S., El Ghaoui, L., Feron, E., & Balakrishnan, V. (1994). Linear Matrix Inequalities in System and Control Theory. doi:10.1137/1.9781611970777Bucher, R., & Balemi, S. (2006). Rapid controller prototyping with Matlab/Simulink and Linux. Control Engineering Practice, 14(2), 185-192. doi:10.1016/j.conengprac.2004.09.009Casanova, V., & Salt, J. (2003). Multirate control implementation for an integrated communication and control system. Control Engineering Practice, 11(11), 1335-1348. doi:10.1016/s0967-0661(02)00256-3Lee, J., Jung, W., Kang, I., Kim, Y., & Lee, G. (2004). Design of filter to reject motion artifact of pulse oximetry. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 26(3), 241-249. doi:10.1016/s0920-5489(03)00077-1Cuenca, Á., Pizá, R., Salt, J., & Sala, A. (2012). Linear Matrix Inequalities in Multirate Control over Networks. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2012, 1-22. doi:10.1155/2012/768212Cuenca, A., & Salt, J. (2012). RST controller design for a non-uniform multi-rate control system. Journal of Process Control, 22(10), 1865-1877. doi:10.1016/j.jprocont.2012.09.010Cuenca, Á., Salt, J., & Albertos, P. (2006). Implementation of algebraic controllers for non-conventional sampled-data systems. Real-Time Systems, 35(1), 59-89. doi:10.1007/s11241-006-9001-2Halevi, Y., & Ray, A. (1988). Integrated Communication and Control Systems: Part I—Analysis. Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control, 110(4), 367-373. doi:10.1115/1.3152698Khargonekar, P., Poolla, K., & Tannenbaum, A. (1985). Robust control of linear time-invariant plants using periodic compensation. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 30(11), 1088-1096. doi:10.1109/tac.1985.1103841Lall, S., & Dullerud, G. (2001). An LMI solution to the robust synthesis problem for multi-rate sampled-data systems. Automatica, 37(12), 1909-1922. doi:10.1016/s0005-1098(01)00167-4Lee, I. W. C., & Dash, P. K. (2003). S-transform-based intelligent system for classification of power quality disturbance signals. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 50(4), 800-805. doi:10.1109/tie.2003.814991Lee, C. K., Ron Hui, S. Y., & Henry Shu-Hung Chung. (2002). A 31-level cascade inverter for power applications. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 49(3), 613-617. doi:10.1109/tie.2002.1005388Performance evaluation of control networks: Ethernet, ControlNet, and DeviceNet. (2001). IEEE Control Systems, 21(1), 66-83. doi:10.1109/37.898793Feng-Li Lian, Moyne, J., & Tilbury, D. (2002). Network design consideration for distributed control systems. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 10(2), 297-307. doi:10.1109/87.987076Lin, J., Fei, S., & Gao, Z. (2013). Control discrete-time switched singular systems with state delays under asynchronous switching. International Journal of Systems Science, 44(6), 1089-1101. doi:10.1080/00207721.2011.652230Liou, L.-W., & Ray, A. (1991). A Stochastic Regulator for Integrated Communication and Control Systems: Part I—Formulation of Control Law. Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control, 113(4), 604-611. doi:10.1115/1.2896464Lorand, C., & Bauer, P. H. (2006). On Synchronization Errors in Networked Feedback Systems. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I: Regular Papers, 53(10), 2306-2317. doi:10.1109/tcsi.2006.882824Moayedi, M., Foo, Y. K., & Soh, Y. C. (2011). Filtering for networked control systems with single/multiple measurement packets subject to multiple-step measurement delays and multiple packet dropouts. International Journal of Systems Science, 42(3), 335-348. doi:10.1080/00207720903513335Peñarrocha, I., Sanchis, R., & Romero, J. A. (2012). State estimator for multisensor systems with irregular sampling and time-varying delays. International Journal of Systems Science, 43(8), 1441-1453. doi:10.1080/00207721.2011.625482Piza, R., Salt, J., Sala, A., & Cuenca, A. (2014). Hierarchical Triple-Maglev Dual-Rate Control Over a Profibus-DP Network. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 22(1), 1-12. doi:10.1109/tcst.2012.2222883Ray, A. (1989). Introduction to networking for integrated control systems. IEEE Control Systems Magazine, 9(1), 76-79. doi:10.1109/37.16755Ray, A., & Halevi, Y. (1988). Integrated Communication and Control Systems: Part II—Design Considerations. Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control, 110(4), 374-381. doi:10.1115/1.3152699Sala, A., Cuenca, Á., & Salt, J. (2009). A retunable PID multi-rate controller for a networked control system. Information Sciences, 179(14), 2390-2402. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2009.02.017Salt, J., & Albertos, P. (2005). Model-based multirate controllers design. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 13(6), 988-997. doi:10.1109/tcst.2005.857410Salt, J., Sala, A., & Albertos, P. (2011). A Transfer-Function Approach to Dual-Rate Controller Design for Unstable and Non-Minimum-Phase Plants. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 19(5), 1186-1194. doi:10.1109/tcst.2010.2076386Schickhuber, G., & McCarthy, O. (1997). Distributed Fieldbus and control network systems. Computing & Control Engineering Journal, 8(1), 21-32. doi:10.1049/cce:19970106Sturm, J. F. (1999). Using SeDuMi 1.02, A Matlab toolbox for optimization over symmetric cones. Optimization Methods and Software, 11(1-4), 625-653. doi:10.1080/10556789908805766Tipsuwan, Y., & Chow, M.-Y. (2003). Control methodologies in networked control systems. Control Engineering Practice, 11(10), 1099-1111. doi:10.1016/s0967-0661(03)00036-4Xie, L. B., Ozkul, S., Sawant, M., Shieh, L. S., Tsai, J. S. H., & Tsai, C. H. (2013). Multi-rate digital redesign of cascaded and dynamic output feedback systems. International Journal of Systems Science, 45(8), 1757-1768. doi:10.1080/00207721.2012.752546Yang, T. C. (2006). Networked control system: a brief survey. IEE Proceedings - Control Theory and Applications, 153(4), 403-412. doi:10.1049/ip-cta:2005017

When the Social Meets the Semantic: Social Semantic Web or Web 2.5

The social trend is progressively becoming the key feature of current Web understanding (Web 2.0). This trend appears irrepressible as millions of users, directly or indirectly connected through social networks, are able to share and exchange any kind of content, information, feeling or experience. Social interactions radically changed the user approach. Furthermore, the socialization of content around social objects provides new unexplored commercial marketplaces and business opportunities. On the other hand, the progressive evolution of the web towards the Semantic Web (or Web 3.0) provides a formal representation of knowledge based on the meaning of data. When the social meets semantics, the social intelligence can be formed in the context of a semantic environment in which user and community profiles as well as any kind of interaction is semantically represented (Semantic Social Web). This paper first provides a conceptual analysis of the second and third version of the Web model. That discussion is aimed at the definition of a middle concept (Web 2.5) resulting in the convergence and integration of key features from the current and next generation Web. The Semantic Social Web (Web 2.5) has a clear theoretical meaning, understood as the bridge between the overused Web 2.0 and the not yet mature Semantic Web (Web 3.0).Pileggi, SF.; Fernández Llatas, C.; Traver Salcedo, V. (2012). When the Social Meets the Semantic: Social Semantic Web or Web 2.5. Future Internet. 4(3):852-854. doi:10.3390/fi4030852S85285443Chi, E. H. (2008). The Social Web: Research and Opportunities. Computer, 41(9), 88-91. doi:10.1109/mc.2008.401Bulterman, D. C. A. (2001). SMIL 2.0 part 1: overview, concepts, and structure. IEEE Multimedia, 8(4), 82-88. doi:10.1109/93.959106Boll, S. (2007). MultiTube--Where Web 2.0 and Multimedia Could Meet. IEEE Multimedia, 14(1), 9-13. doi:10.1109/mmul.2007.17Fraternali, P., Rossi, G., & Sánchez-Figueroa, F. (2010). Rich Internet Applications. IEEE Internet Computing, 14(3), 9-12. doi:10.1109/mic.2010.76Lassila, O., & Hendler, J. (2007). Embracing «Web 3.0». IEEE Internet Computing, 11(3), 90-93. doi:10.1109/mic.2007.52Dikaiakos, M. D., Katsaros, D., Mehra, P., Pallis, G., & Vakali, A. (2009). Cloud Computing: Distributed Internet Computing for IT and Scientific Research. IEEE Internet Computing, 13(5), 10-13. doi:10.1109/mic.2009.103Mangione-Smith, W. H. (1998). Mobile computing and smart spaces. IEEE Concurrency, 6(4), 5-7. doi:10.1109/4434.736391Greaves, M. (2007). Semantic Web 2.0. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 22(2), 94-96. doi:10.1109/mis.2007.40Bojars, U., Breslin, J. G., Peristeras, V., Tummarello, G., & Decker, S. (2008). Interlinking the Social Web with Semantics. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 23(3), 29-40. doi:10.1109/mis.2008.50Definition of Web 2.0http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.htmlZhang, D., Guo, B., & Yu, Z. (2011). The Emergence of Social and Community Intelligence. Computer, 44(7), 21-28. doi:10.1109/mc.2011.65Pentlan, A. (2005). Socially aware, computation and communication. Computer, 38(3), 33-40. doi:10.1109/mc.2005.104Staab, S., Domingos, P., Mika, P., Golbeck, J., Li Ding, Finin, T., … Vallacher, R. R. (2005). Social Networks Applied. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 20(1), 80-93. doi:10.1109/mis.2005.16The Semantic Webhttp://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-semantic-webDecker, S., Melnik, S., van Harmelen, F., Fensel, D., Klein, M., Broekstra, J., … Horrocks, I. (2000). The Semantic Web: the roles of XML and RDF. IEEE Internet Computing, 4(5), 63-73. doi:10.1109/4236.877487OWL Web Ontology Language Overviewhttp://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/Vetere, G., & Lenzerini, M. (2005). Models for semantic interoperability in service-oriented architectures. IBM Systems Journal, 44(4), 887-903. doi:10.1147/sj.444.0887Fensel, D., & Musen, M. A. (2001). The semantic web: a brain for humankind. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 16(2), 24-25. doi:10.1109/mis.2001.920595Shadbolt, N., Berners-Lee, T., & Hall, W. (2006). The Semantic Web Revisited. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 21(3), 96-101. doi:10.1109/mis.2006.62Dodds, P. S., & Danforth, C. M. (2009). Measuring the Happiness of Large-Scale Written Expression: Songs, Blogs, and Presidents. Journal of Happiness Studies, 11(4), 441-456. doi:10.1007/s10902-009-9150-9Pang, B., & Lee, L. (2008). Opinion Mining and Sentiment Analysis. Foundations and Trends® in Information Retrieval, 2(1–2), 1-135. doi:10.1561/1500000011Thelwall, M., Buckley, K., & Paltoglou, G. (2011). Sentiment strength detection for the social web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(1), 163-173. doi:10.1002/asi.21662Blogmeterhttp://www.blogmeter.it/Christakis, N. A., & Fowler, J. H. (2010). Social Network Sensors for Early Detection of Contagious Outbreaks. PLoS ONE, 5(9), e12948. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0012948Jansen, B. J., Zhang, M., Sobel, K., & Chowdury, A. (2009). Twitter power: Tweets as electronic word of mouth. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(11), 2169-2188. doi:10.1002/asi.21149Bernal, P. A. (2010). Web 2.5: The Symbiotic Web. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 24(1), 25-37. doi:10.1080/13600860903570145Mikroyannidis, A. (2007). Toward a Social Semantic Web. Computer, 40(11), 113-115. doi:10.1109/mc.2007.405Jung, J. J. (2012). Computational reputation model based on selecting consensus choices: An empirical study on semantic wiki platform. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(10), 9002-9007. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2012.02.03

Social capital in industrial districts: Influence of the strength of ties and density of the network on the sense of belonging to the district

This is the accepted version of the following article: Molina-Morales, F.X.; Capó-Vicedo, J.; Mª Teresa Martínez Fernández; Expósito Langa, M. (2013). Social capital in industrial districts: Influence of the strength of ties and density of the network on the sense of belonging to the district. Papers in Regional Science. 92(4):773-789. doi:10.1111/j.1435-5957.2012.00463.x, which has been published in final form at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1435-5957.2012.00463.x/pdf.A sense of belonging is a crucial factor determining the identification of the firms in industrial districts. From the social capital perspective, this paper analyses how the structural and relational dimensions of social capital determine a firm's sense of belonging to the industrial district. The study analyses a sample of 213 companies belonging to two Spanish industrial districts. Results of the survey offer an important contribution to the specific literature by finding the explanatory factors with which to distinguish between groups according to their level of embeddedness in the district.Molina Morales, FX.; Capó-Vicedo, J.; Martínez Fernández, MT.; Expósito Langa, M. (2013). Social capital in industrial districts: Influence of the strength of ties and density of the network on the sense of belonging to the district. Papers in Regional Science. 92(4):773-789. doi:10.1111/j.1435-5957.2012.00463.xS773789924Aharonson, B. S., Baum, J. A. C., & Plunket, A. (2008). Inventive and uninventive clusters: The case of Canadian biotechnology. Research Policy, 37(6-7), 1108-1131. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.04.008Antonelli, C. (2000). Collective Knowledge Communication and Innovation: The Evidence of Technological Districts. Regional Studies, 34(6), 535-547. doi:10.1080/00343400050085657Asheim, B. T. (1996). Industrial districts as ‘learning regions’: A condition for prosperity. European Planning Studies, 4(4), 379-400. doi:10.1080/09654319608720354Bell, G. G. (2005). Clusters, networks, and firm innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal, 26(3), 287-295. doi:10.1002/smj.448Bell, G. G., & Zaheer, A. (2007). Geography, Networks, and Knowledge Flow. Organization Science, 18(6), 955-972. doi:10.1287/orsc.1070.0308Belussi, F., & Sedita, S. R. (2009). Life Cycle vs. Multiple Path Dependency in Industrial Districts. European Planning Studies, 17(4), 505-528. doi:10.1080/09654310802682065Boschma, R. A., & ter Wal, A. L. J. (2007). Knowledge Networks and Innovative Performance in an Industrial District: The Case of a Footwear District in the South of Italy. Industry & Innovation, 14(2), 177-199. doi:10.1080/13662710701253441Breschi, S. (2001). Knowledge Spillovers and Local Innovation Systems: A Critical Survey. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(4), 975-1005. doi:10.1093/icc/10.4.975Breschi, S., & Lissoni, F. (2001). Localised knowledge spillovers vs. innovative milieux: Knowledge «tacitness» reconsidered. Papers in Regional Science, 80(3), 255-273. doi:10.1007/pl00013627Brown, D. W., & Konrad, A. M. (2001). Granovetter Was Right. Group & Organization Management, 26(4), 434-462. doi:10.1177/1059601101264003Capello, R. (1999). Spatial Transfer of Knowledge in High Technology Milieux: Learning Versus Collective Learning Processes. Regional Studies, 33(4), 353-365. doi:10.1080/00343409950081211Capello, R. (2002). Spatial and Sectoral Characteristics of Relational Capital in Innovation Activity. European Planning Studies, 10(2), 177-200. doi:10.1080/09654310120114481Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95-S120. doi:10.1086/228943Cooke, P. (2002). Knowledge Economies. doi:10.4324/9780203445402Propris, L. D., Menghinello, S., & Sugden, R. (2008). The internationalisation of production systems: embeddedness, openness and governance. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 20(6), 493-515. doi:10.1080/08985620802462074Gargiulo, M., & Benassi, M. (2000). Trapped in Your Own Net? Network Cohesion, Structural Holes, and the Adaptation of Social Capital. Organization Science, 11(2), 183-196. doi:10.1287/orsc.11.2.183.12514Gellynck, X., Vermeire, B., & Viaene, J. (2007). Innovation in food firms: contribution of regional networks within the international business context. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 19(3), 209-226. doi:10.1080/08985620701218395Geringer, J. M., Tallman, S., & Olsen, D. M. (2000). Product and international diversification among Japanese multinational firms. Strategic Management Journal, 21(1), 51-80. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(200001)21:13.0.co;2-kGertler, M. S. (2010). Rules of the Game: The Place of Institutions in Regional Economic Change. Regional Studies, 44(1), 1-15. doi:10.1080/00343400903389979Giuliani, E. (2007). The selective nature of knowledge networks in clusters: evidence from the wine industry. Journal of Economic Geography, 7(2), 139-168. doi:10.1093/jeg/lbl014Giuliani, E., & Bell, M. (2005). The micro-determinants of meso-level learning and innovation: evidence from a Chilean wine cluster. Research Policy, 34(1), 47-68. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2004.10.008Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380. doi:10.1086/225469Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481-510. doi:10.1086/228311Hill, E. W., & Brennan, J. F. (2000). A Methodology for Identifying the Drivers of Industrial Clusters: The Foundation of Regional Competitive Advantage. Economic Development Quarterly, 14(1), 65-96. doi:10.1177/089124240001400109Hundley, G., & Jacobson, C. K. (1998). The effects of the keiretsu on the export performance of Japanese companies: help or hindrance? Strategic Management Journal, 19(10), 927-937. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199810)19:103.0.co;2-1Kale, P., Singh, H., & Perlmutter, H. (2000). Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: building relational capital. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 217-237. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(200003)21:33.0.co;2-yKautonen, T., Zolin, R., Kuckertz, A., & Viljamaa, A. (2010). Ties that blind? How strong ties affect small business owner-managers’ perceived trustworthiness of their advisors. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 22(2), 189-209. doi:10.1080/08985620903168265Kono, C., Palmer, D., Friedland, R., & Zafonte, M. (1998). Lost in Space: The Geography of Corporate Interlocking Directorates. American Journal of Sociology, 103(4), 863-911. doi:10.1086/231292Larson, A. (1992). Network Dyads in Entrepreneurial Settings: A Study of the Governance of Exchange Relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(1), 76. doi:10.2307/2393534Leana, C. R., & Van Buren, H. J. (1999). Organizational Social Capital and Employment Practices. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 538-555. doi:10.5465/amr.1999.2202136Lissoni, F. (2001). Knowledge codification and the geography of innovation: the case of Brescia mechanical cluster. Research Policy, 30(9), 1479-1500. doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(01)00163-9Malipiero A Muñari F Sobrero M 2005 Focal firms as technological gatekeepers within industrial districts: Knowledge creation and dissemination in the Italian packaging machinery industryMcEvily, B., & Zaheer, A. (1999). Bridging ties: a source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 20(12), 1133-1156. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199912)20:123.0.co;2-7MOLINA-MORALES, F. X., & MARTÍNEZ-FERNAÁNDEZ, M. T. (2003). The Impact of Industrial District Affiliation on Firm Value Creation. European Planning Studies, 11(2), 155-170. doi:10.1080/0965431032000072855Molina-Morales, F. X., & Martínez-Fernández, M. T. (2004). Factors That Identify Industrial Districts: An Application in Spanish Manufacturing Firms. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 36(1), 111-126. doi:10.1068/a3618Molina-Morales, F. X., & Martínez-Fernández, M. T. (2008). Shared Resources in Industrial Districts: Information, Know-How and Institutions in the Spanish Tile Industry. International Regional Science Review, 31(1), 35-61. doi:10.1177/0160017607306327Molina-Morales, F. X., & Martínez-Fernández, M. T. (2009). Does homogeneity exist within industrial districts? A social capital-based approach*. Papers in Regional Science, 88(1), 209-229. doi:10.1111/j.1435-5957.2008.00177.xMolina-Morales, F. X., & Martínez-Fernández, M. T. (2010). Social Networks: Effects of Social Capital on Firm Innovation. Journal of Small Business Management, 48(2), 258-279. doi:10.1111/j.1540-627x.2010.00294.xMoreno, A. M., & Casillas, J. C. (2007). High-growth SMEs versus non-high-growth SMEs: a discriminant analysis. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 19(1), 69-88. doi:10.1080/08985620601002162Morrison, A. (2008). Gatekeepers of Knowledgewithin Industrial Districts: Who They Are, How They Interact. Regional Studies, 42(6), 817-835. doi:10.1080/00343400701654178Morrison A Rabellotti R 2005 Knowledge and information networks: Evidence from an Italian wine local systemNahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242-266. doi:10.5465/amr.1998.533225Paniccia, I. (1998). One, a Hundred, Thousands of Industrial Districts. Organizational Variety in Local Networks of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises. Organization Studies, 19(4), 667-699. doi:10.1177/017084069801900406Parrilli, M. D. (2009). Collective efficiency, policy inducement and social embeddedness: Drivers for the development of industrial districts. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 21(1), 1-24. doi:10.1080/08985620801886513Parrilli, M. D., & Sacchetti, S. (2008). Linking learning with governance in networks and clusters: key issues for analysis and policy. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 20(4), 387-408. doi:10.1080/08985620801886463Portes, A., & Sensenbrenner, J. (1993). Embeddedness and Immigration: Notes on the Social Determinants of Economic Action. American Journal of Sociology, 98(6), 1320-1350. doi:10.1086/230191Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65-78. doi:10.1353/jod.1995.0002Raub, W., & Weesie, J. (1990). Reputation and Efficiency in Social Interactions: An Example of Network Effects. American Journal of Sociology, 96(3), 626-654. doi:10.1086/229574Robinson, D. K. R., Rip, A., & Mangematin, V. (2007). Technological agglomeration and the emergence of clusters and networks in nanotechnology. Research Policy, 36(6), 871-879. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2007.02.003Rowley, T., Behrens, D., & Krackhardt, D. (2000). Redundant governance structures: an analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 369-386. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(200003)21:33.0.co;2-mRychen, F., & Zimmermann, J.-B. (2008). Clusters in the Global Knowledge-based Economy: Knowledge Gatekeepers and Temporary Proximity. Regional Studies, 42(6), 767-776. doi:10.1080/00343400802088300Sammarra, A., & Biggiero, L. (2008). Heterogeneity and Specificity of Inter-Firm Knowledge Flows in Innovation Networks. Journal of Management Studies, 45(4), 800-829. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00770.xSignorini, L. F. (2005). THE PRICE OF PRATO, OR MEASURING THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT EFFECT. Papers in Regional Science, 73(4), 369-392. doi:10.1111/j.1435-5597.1994.tb00620.xStaber, U. (2001). The Structure of Networks in Industrial Districts. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 25(3), 537-552. doi:10.1111/1468-2427.00328JOHN, C. H., & POUDER, R. W. (2006). Technology Clusters versus Industry Clusters: Resources, Networks, and Regional Advantages. Growth and Change, 37(2), 141-171. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2257.2006.00313.xSuchman MC 1994 On advice of counsel: Law firms and venture capital funds as information intermediaries in the structuration of Silicon ValleyTrigilia, C. (2001). Social Capital and Local Development. European Journal of Social Theory, 4(4), 427-442. doi:10.1177/13684310122225244Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). SOCIAL CAPITAL AND VALUE CREATION: THE ROLE OF INTRAFIRM NETWORKS. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 464-476. doi:10.2307/257085Uzzi, B. (1996). The Sources and Consequences of Embeddedness for the Economic Performance of Organizations: The Network Effect. American Sociological Review, 61(4), 674. doi:10.2307/2096399Uzzi, B. (1997). Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The Paradox of Embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35. doi:10.2307/2393808Westlund, H., & Bolton, R. (2003). Small Business Economics, 21(2), 77-113. doi:10.1023/a:1025024009072Wilson, P. A. (1997). Building Social Capital: A Learning Agenda for the Twenty-first Century. Urban Studies, 34(5-6), 745-760. doi:10.1080/0042098975808Woolcock, M., & Narayan, D. (2000). Social Capital: Implications for Development Theory, Research, and Policy. The World Bank Research Observer, 15(2), 225-249. doi:10.1093/wbro/15.2.225Yli-Renko, H., Autio, E., & Sapienza, H. J. (2001). Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technology-based firms. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6-7), 587-613. doi:10.1002/smj.18

Poisonous Science: the Dark Side of Academic Copyright in the Digital Age

Copyright on academic and scientific publications (papers, articles, essays, books etc.) is the result of the interaction between formal rules (copyright law), social norms (norms of science) and technology (printing press, digital technologies). Prior to the digital age, academic copyright has had two main functions. a) Priority. The acknowledgment of a paternity (or attribution) right on the scientific publication has facilitated the certification of priority of the scientific discovery described in the text. b) Dissemination. The protection of economic rights (reproduction, distribution etc.) has enabled the alliance between scientific authors and publishers finalized to distribute scientific publications to the public. Usually, scientific authors transfer their economic rights to the publisher because the latter has the economic and technological power to disseminate scientific publications. Nevertheless, scientific authors are mostly interested in reputation and not in the economic return derived from the commercialization of copyright. According to Robert Merton's theory, the norms of science are Communism, Universalism, Disinterestedness, and Organized Skepticism (CUDOS). Scientists compete for priority but they put their ideas and information in the public domain. The ultimate scope is to share ideas and information because the progress of science depends on "communism" and "organized skepticism". In other terms, scientific publications are part of the public and critical dialogue. In this perspective, formal law and social norms, normally stating that the original ownership of copyright belongs to the authors and not to their academic or scientific institutions, mirror freedom of speech and academic liberty. The current scenario however seems completely different. In theory, Internet represents an extraordinary opportunity to strengthen the scientific debate. But reality tells a very different story. In the digital age, scientific publications are only "products". The changing nature of scientific publications is the effect of the commodification of academic research. While the interaction between commodification of academic research and university patents has been deeply investigated and discussed, scholars have paid relatively little attention to the commodification of academic copyright. In the market of scientific publications, bibliometrics and digitization distort the two functions (priority and dissemination) of academic copyright. On the one hand, the right of paternity becomes only part of academic metrics, aimed to generate long lists of publications in academic cv and citations in commercial databases like Scopus, ISI WoS, and Google Scholar. Not surprisingly, according to some studies, the logics of "publish or perish" and "impact or perish" foster scientific misconduct (e.g., falsification, fabrication, plagiarism). On the other hand, economic rights (reproduction, distribution etc.) become the leverage of the oligopolistic power of commercial and proprietary databases which concentrate publishing and evaluation - related to metrics - powers. For example, Elsevier is at the same time the biggest scientific publisher and the "largest abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed literature". This market power is the result of the interplay between copyright and the contemporary processes of academic evaluation connected to the notion of "metrics". In this perspective, the real goal of economic copyright is not to disseminate, but to concentrate the control of scientific information in few hands. The Open Access and Open Science movements are trying to oppose the distortion of academic copyright and indeed re-establish its original twofold function (priority and dissemination). Nevertheless, it is worth emphasising that, without a deep and radical change in the process of academic evaluation and in the copyright law, the progress of science and academic freedom will be at great risk. References Biagioli M. et al., Gaming Metrics: Innovation & Surveillance in Academic Misconduct, Conference at UC Davis, February 4-5, 2016, https://video.ucdavis.edu/media/Gaming+Metrics+-+Mario-Biagioli+%2802-04-2016%29/0_0wcg4w9l Biagioli M., Recycling Texts or Stealing Time?: Plagiarism, Authorship, and Credit in Science (2012). International Journal of Cultural Property, 19: 453-476, 2012. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2427955 Guédon J.C., Open Access: Toward the Internet of the Mind, Budapest Open Access Initiative, 2017, http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/open-access-toward-the-internet-of-the-mind Guédon J.C., In Oldenburg's Long Shadow: Librarians, Research Scientists, Publishers, and the Control of Scientific Publishing, Association of Research Libraries, Washinghton D.C., 2001, ISBN 0-918006-81-3, http://www.arl.org/storage/documents/publications/in-oldenburgs-long-shadow.pdf Merton R. K., The Matthew Effect in Science, II: Cumulative Advantage and the Symbolism of Intellectual Property, Isis, Vol. 79, No. 4 (Dec., 1988), 606 Merton R. K., The Matthew Effect in Science, Science, New Series, Vol. 159, No. 3810. (Jan. 5, 1968), 56 Merton R. K., Priorities in Scientific Discovery: A Chapter in the Sociology of Science, American Sociological Review, Vol. 22, No. 6 (Dec., 1957), 635 Merton R. K., Science and Technology in a Democratic Order, Journal of Legal and Politcal Sociology, 1 (1942), 115 Merton R. K., Science and Social Order, Philosophy of Science, 5 (1938), 321 Moscon V., Academic Freedom, Copyright, and Accessto Scholarly Works: A Comparative Perspective, in Caso R., Giovanella F., Balancing copyright law in the digital age: some comparative perspectives, Springer, 2015, 99 Reichman J. H., Okediji R., When Copyright Law and Science Collide: Empowering Digitally Integrated Research Methods on a Global Scale (September 19, 2012). Minnesota Law Review, Vol. 96, No. 4, 2012; Minnesota Legal Studies Research Paper 12-54. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2149218 Shavell S., Should Copyright of Academic Works be Abolished?. The Journal of Legal Analysis, Forthcoming; Harvard Law and Economics Discussion Paper No. 655; Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 10-10. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=152566

Business opportunities analysis using GIS: the retail distribution sector

[EN] The retail distribution sector is facing a difficult time as the current landscape is characterized by ever-increasing competition. In these conditions, the search for an appropriate location strategy has the potential to become a differentiating and competitive factor. Although, in theory, an increasing level of importance is placed on geography because of its key role in understanding the success of a business, this is not the case in practice. For this reason, the process outlined in this paper has been specifically developed to detect new business locations. The methodology consists of a range of analyzes with Geographical Information Systems (GISs) from a marketing point of view. This new approach is called geomarketing. First, geodemand and geocompetition are located on two separate digital maps using spatial and non-spatial databases. Second, a third map is obtained by matching this information with the demand not dealt with properly by the current commercial offer. Third, the Kernel density allows users to visualize results, thus facilitating decision-making by managers, regardless of their professional background. The advantage of this methodology is the capacity of GIS to handle large amounts of information, both spatial and non-spatial. A practical application is performed in Murcia (Spain) with 100 supermarkets and data at a city block level, which is the highest possible level of detail. This detection process can be used in any commercial distribution company, so it can be generalized and considered a global solution for retailers.Roig Tierno, H.; Baviera-Puig, A.; Buitrago Vera, JM. (2013). Business opportunities analysis using GIS: the retail distribution sector. Global Business Perspectives. 1(3):226-238. doi:10.1007/s40196-013-0015-6S22623813Alarcón, S. (2011). The trade credit in the Spanish agrofood industry. Mediterranean Journal of Economics, Agriculture and Environment (New Medit), 10(2), 51–57.Alcaide, J. C., Calero, R., & Hernández, R. (2012). Geomarketing. Marketing territorial para vender y fidelizar más. Madrid: ESIC.Applebaum, W., & Cohen, S. B. (1961). The dynamics of store trading areas and market equilibrium. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 51(1), 73–101.Baviera-Puig, A., Buitrago-Vera, J. M., Escriba, C., & Clemente, J. S. (2009). Geomarketing: Aplicación de los sistemas de información geográfica al marketing. Paper presented at the Octava Conferencia Iberoamericana en Sistemas, Cibernética e Informática, Orlando, FL.Baviera-Puig, A., Buitrago-Vera, J. M., & Mas-Verdú, F. (2012). Trade areas and knowledge-intensive services: The case of a technology centre. Management Decision, 50(8), 1412–1424.Baviera-Puig, A., Buitrago-Vera, J. M., & Rodríguez-Barrio, J. E. (2013). Un modelo de geomarketing para la localización de supermercados: Diseño y aplicación práctica. Documentos de Trabajo de la Cátedra Fundación Ramón Areces de Distribución Comercial (DOCFRADIS), 1, 1–27.Berumen, S. A., & Llamazares, F. (2007). La utilidad los métodos de decisión multicriterio (como el AHP) en un entorno de competitividad creciente. Cuadernos de administración, 20(34), 65–87.Birkin, M., Clarke, G., & Clarke, M. (2002). Retail geography and intelligent network planning. Chichester: Wiley.Chasco, C. (2003). El geomarketing y la distribución commercial. Investigación y Márketing, 79, 6–13.Chen, R. J. C. (2007). Significance and variety of geographic information system (GIS) applications in retail, hospitality, tourism, and consumer services. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 14, 247–248.Church, R. L. (2002). Geographical information systems and location science. Computers and Operations Research, 29, 541–562.Church, R. L., & Murray, A. T. (2009). Business site selection, location analysis and GIS. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Clarke, G. (1998). Changing methods of location planning for retail companies. GeoJournal, 45, 289–298.Clarkson, R. M., Clarke-Hill, C. M., & Robinson, T. (1996). UK supermarket location assessment. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 24(6), 22–33.Davis, P. (2006). Spatial competition in retail markets: Movie theaters. The RAND Journal of Economics, 37(4), 964–982.Ghosh, A., & McLafferty, S. L. (1982). Locating stores in uncertain environments: A scenario planning approach. Journal of Retailing, 58(4), 5–22.Härdle, W. (1991). Smoothing techniques with implementation in S. Nueva York, NY: Springer.Harris, B., & Batty, M. (1993). Locational models, geographical information, and planning support systems. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 12, 184–198.Hernandez, T. (2007). Enhancing retail location decision support: The development and application of geovisualization. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 14, 249–258.Hernandez, T., & Bennison, D. (2000). The art and science of retail location decisions. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 28(8), 357–367.Huff, D. (1963). Defining and estimating a trade area. Journal of Marketing, 28, 34–38.Instituto Nacional de Estadística (INE). (2011). Padrón de habitantes 2011. http://www.ine.es . Accessed 9 Oct 2012.Kelly, J. P., Freeman, D. C., & Emlen, J. M. (1993). Competitive impact model for site selection: The impact of competition, sales generators and own store cannibalization. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 3, 237–259.Latour, P., & Le Floc’h, J. (2001). Géomarketing: Principes, méthodes et applications. París: Éditions d’Organisation.Mendes, A. B., & Themido, I. H. (2004). Multi-outlet retail site location assessment. International Transactions in Operational Research, 11, 1–18.Moreno, A. (1991). Modelización cartográfica de densidades mediante estimadores Kernel. Treballs de la Societat Catalana de Geografia, 6(30), 155–170.Moreno, A. (2007). Obtención de capas raster de densidad. In A. Moreno (Coord.), Sistemas y Análisis de la información Geográfica. Manual de autoaprendizaje con ArcGIS (pp. 685–691). Madrid: Editorial RA-MA.Murad, A. A. (2003). Creating a GIS application for retail centers in Jeddah City. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 4, 329–338.Murad, A. A. (2007). Using GIS for retail planning in Jeddah City. American Journal of Applied Sciences, 4(10), 820–826.Musyoka, S. M., Mutyauvyu, S. M., Kiema, J. B. K., Karanja, F. N., & Siriba, D. N. (2007). Market segmentation using geographic information systems (GIS). A case study of the soft drink industry in Kenya. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 25(6), 632–642.Nielsen Database. (2012). Retailers Database. http://www.nielsen.com/global/en.html . Accessed 12 Oct 2012.Ozimec, A. M., Natter, M., & Reutterer, T. (2010). Geographical information systems-based marketing decisions: Effects of alternative visualizations on decision quality. Journal of Marketing, 74, 94–110.Reilly, W. J. (1931). The law of retail gravitation. New York: Knickerbocker Press.Rob, M. A. (2003). Some challenges of integrating spatial and non-spatial datasets using a geographical information system. Information Technology for Development, 10, 171–178.Rosenblatt, M. (1956). Remarks on some nonparametric estimates of a density functions. Annals of Mathematical Statistic, 27, 832–837.Sede Electrónica del Catastro. (2012). Datos Catastrales. https://www.sedecatastro.gob.es . Accessed 10 Oct 2012.Silverman, B. W. (1986). Density estimation for statistics and data analysis. London: Chapman and Hall.Sleight, P., Harris, R., & Webber, R. (2005). Geodemographics, GIS and neighbourhood targeting. Chichester: Wiley.Suárez-Vega, R., Santos-Peñate, D. R., & Dorta-González, P. (2012). Location models and GIS tools for retail site location. Applied Geography, 35, 12–22.Thaler, R. (1986). The psychology and economics conference handbook: Comments on Simon, on Einhorn and Hogarth, and on Tversky and Kahneman. The Journal of Business, 59(4), 279–284.Wood, S., & Reynolds, J. (2012). Leveraging locational insights within retail store development? Assessing the use of location planners’ knowledge in retail marketing. Geoforum, 43, 1076–1087