2011
DOI: 10.1088/1367-2630/13/6/063021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Geography versus topology in the European Ownership Network

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
18
1
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
1
18
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The detailed structure of the shareholding and interlocking network layers is shown in Fig A in S1 File. One can see that companies tend to be clustered by countries in line with previous work on ownership and geography [18]. …”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 81%
“…The detailed structure of the shareholding and interlocking network layers is shown in Fig A in S1 File. One can see that companies tend to be clustered by countries in line with previous work on ownership and geography [18]. …”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 81%
“…Distance is cumbersome for attending board meetings but reflects cultural differences as well. In this the board network is different from European ownership network where the structure is only partially explained by geography [40]. While geography does play a role, we find no evidence that the network clusters around particular economic sectors.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 82%
“…Economics provides a rich set of networks to consider, in which the nodes can be many things. Examples that have already received considerable attention include interbank lending [62,23,22,63,61,45], international trade [58,57], corporate ownership [101,15,17,100], and input-output relationships in production [31]. There remain many more relationships to be studied.…”
Section: Modelling the Economy As A Complex Evolving Networkmentioning
confidence: 99%