The Dynamics of Gatekeeping: A Longitudinal Analysis of Editorial Boards and Asymmetric Knowledge Flows in Economics Journals
This talk synthesizes the main findings from three recent papers on the governance and knowledge structure of economics journals [1, 2, 3]. Together, they provide a longitudinal and multi layered account of how editorial institutions and asymmetric knowledge flows have shaped the discipline.
The governance of scholarly journals, embodied in their editorial boards, is an understudied mechanism for the formation and direction of science. To address this gap, [1] develops a stock flow framework for analyzing the longitudinal dynamics of editorial boards, applied to the Gatekeepers of Economics Longitudinal Database (GOELD: 1,700 journals, 1866–2006 by decade, plus 2012 and 2019). The analysis reveals three distinct epochs. Until 1946, a "small science" phase with few journals and editorial boards. The decade 1946–1956 marks a watershed shift toward a "big science" model driven by new journal foundations. The contemporary period (2006–2019) represents a new structural break, characterized by low flux, greater stability, but also more closed and self referential editorial communities.
To investigate what happened to the content and knowledge base of economics in the contemporary period (before and after the 2008 financial crisis), [2] develops a multilayer network approach. Journals are connected through four layers (shared editors, shared authors, shared references, textual similarity), integrated via Similarity Network Fusion (SNF) to produce a classification into clusters. Although research topics changed after the crisis, the fundamental relationships among journals remained remarkably stable. Editorial networks (interlocking editorship) play the dominant role in shaping the network and legitimizing knowledge production. Thus, the contemporary period is marked by a persistence architecture, anchored in stable editorial governance and clusters.
In order to identify hierarchical relationships among clusters of journals, [3] examines directed knowledge flows through citations. The results uncover a clear hierarchy: the CORE cluster operates as a central hub and net exporter of knowledge to all other clusters; Finance exports only within its own domain and remains dependent on the CORE. These asymmetries are reinforced at the journal level, where a small set of top journals occupies the apex of a hierarchically ordered system.
At the aggregate level, self referentiality across the discipline has declined (increased openness). However, this conceals a dual dynamic: while Finance became gradually less self referential, the CORE shows increasing closure after the crisis.
Thus, the contemporary period is characterized by a stable cluster structure (from the multilayer analysis) but a persistently hierarchical and increasingly closed core (from the flow analysis).
[1] Baccini, A. (2026). A Stock-Flow Framework for Editorial Board Dynamics: The Case of Economics Journals, 1866-2019. Quantitative Science Studies. [https://doi.org/10.1162/QSS.a.477]
[2] Baccini, A., Barabesi, L., Debernardi C. (2026). Exploring the Shape of Economics: A Multilayer Network Analysis of Social Communities and Intellectual Similarity Among Journals Before and After the 2008 Financial Crisis. [https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2508.09079]
[3] Baccini, A., Debernardi, C. (2026). Self-referentiality and asymmetric knowledge flows between journals. The case of economics. [https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.18144]
[The full version of paper [3] has been uploaded]
Area:
Keywords: History of Economic Thought, Sociology of Economics, Journal Governance, Editorial Boards, Interlocking Editorship, Gatekeeping, Big Science
Please Login in order to download this file