Business History: Time for Debate

Abstract

This issue of Business History Review, the fi rst to be published by Cambridge University Press, is also the fi rst to be available both in print and on line. The journal's complete archive, from 1926 forward, is also posted on the Web. 1 The occasion has provided an opportunity for the editorial team to consider the work published by business historians over the past ten years, and to think about the future direction of the journal as well as of the fi eld more broadly. We invite responses to this essay. here has rarely been a moment when the view that "history matters" has been so widespread. Scholars in economics, political science, and law are showing an ever-greater interest in history-in part as a consequence of the economic and fi nancial crises of the past decade. Less evident is a recognition that business history itself matters as a discipline. The citations and impact factors of the business history journals lag dramatically behind top-tier management and economics journals. 2 In many regions of the globe, interest in the fi eld is small, including Latin America (except, especially, Argentina, Colombia, and Mexico), Africa (except South Africa), and many Asian countries (except Japan and South Korea). We believe the fi eld has great potential for growth. The Review seeks to serve the business history community by showcasing the best new research. We are proud of the quality of our articles, and we plan to continue publishing work that will drive the fi eld forward. At BHR, we aspire to publish articles that are analytical, creative, and bold, and to feature book reviews that are candid and perceptive. We especially hope to receive submissions of articles that are comparative in nature, whether the comparison be among fi rms, sectors, towns, regions, or countries.

History and the Debate Over Intellectual Property

“…Extending such traditions of history research, our article suggests that historical variation is an important complement to contemporary cross-sectional variation in articulating conceptual issues (Jones & Khanna, 2006). Our approach also resonates with the recent call for an international comparison in better understanding how history matters (Friedman & Jones, 2011).…”

“…Between the founding of the United States in 1776 and the enactment of the Chace Act in 1891, pirating British publications (such as books) and entertainment (such as stage plays) was widely practiced by numerous Americans to make a living (and a 'killing') (Lohr, 2002). This article endeavors to demonstrate how history can help to identify patterns and further resonates with the recent call for international comparisons to better understand how history matters (Friedman & Jones, 2011).…”

Let the best story win – evaluation of the most cited business history articles

“…Indeed, in numbers of citations even the major business history journals are lagging behind mainstream economics and management journals (Friedman and Jones, 2011) 1 . This is purely and simply because the business history research community is small and diverse, with only few scholars widely reputed outside the discipline.…”

“…Business history is an established field of research with two long-established flagship journals Business History Review (established 1926) and Business History (established 1958) (see especially Friedman and Jones, 2011;Harvey and Wilson, 2007;Wilson and Toms, 2008). Nevertheless, in the last decade or so the discipline has gone through a process of critical selfreflection in a number of articles and books.…”

Essays in Latin American Business and Economic History: Introduction

“…Friedman and Jones, Business history; Jones, van Leeuwen, and Broadberry, The future; Scranton and Fridenson, Reimagining Business History .…”