110
S. A. Santos et al.
evidences in order to allow clear and reliable conclusions about the studied subject”
(Denyer and Tranfield 2009, p. 671).
Considering the theoretical notes about the research methodology, now it is necessary to show, in a practical way, what were the steps followed to find the results.
First, it was chosen two databases (Scopus and Web of Science) in which the
scientific articles about “Social Innovation” in the last ten years (2008–2018) could
be collected. Based on it, the research was made—from the insertion of specific
filters—to select a number of scientific articles that would fit the requirements of
this research, such as: approach a specific issue, at a predetermined period of time.
Thus, the result was 169 scientific articles in the Web of Science database and 85 in
Scopus.
By the fact that the items selected in the first place resulted in more than 250
productions, it was chosen to analyze a smaller amount of the entire corpus. The
choice was made according to the importance given to the subject “social innovation”
due to all the summaries of the selected articles, the importance that the subject
received, and it was also counted how many times the phrase was cited in each
summary. Therefore, those which the subject was put in more evidence—a total of
24 items, from both databases—were the selected ones.
Simultaneously, besides the cut of the most significant productions, it was analyzed the amount of articles produced annually, in order to understand in which
period the issue discussed here had greater academic emphasis.
3 Presentation and Discussion of Results
The procedures that were followed to obtain the results, which will be explored here,
have been described in the previous section. Nevertheless, it will be made a more
detailed interpretation about them.
First, this research will be about 169 scientific articles resulting from the search in
Web of Science database. The graphic below shows how this amount of productions
were divided according to the researched period.
By analyzing Graphic 1, it can be observed that the year 2016 was the one with
the largest number of scientific productions involving the theme “social innovation”
in the searched period. Although later (in 2017 and in the 1st semester of 2018) there
has been a reduction on the amount of articles, it was gradual. Between the years of
2008 and 2014, it was verified that academic papers written about the subject were
not very significant, different from the followed years.
It is possible to say that the number of productions of the first five years researched
(2008–2012) do not even reach a quarter of the productions made in the last five years
(2013–2018).
Possibly, the highest number of scientific articles published about the subject
“Social Innovation” was from 2013 to 2018, perhaps the reason was some global
crises, which had happened in the previous years, such as the Great Recession of
the United States (2008–2009) and the Debt Crisis in Europe (2009–2010). Thus,
S. A. Santos et al.
evidences in order to allow clear and reliable conclusions about the studied subject”
(Denyer and Tranfield 2009, p. 671).
Considering the theoretical notes about the research methodology, now it is necessary to show, in a practical way, what were the steps followed to find the results.
First, it was chosen two databases (Scopus and Web of Science) in which the
scientific articles about “Social Innovation” in the last ten years (2008–2018) could
be collected. Based on it, the research was made—from the insertion of specific
filters—to select a number of scientific articles that would fit the requirements of
this research, such as: approach a specific issue, at a predetermined period of time.
Thus, the result was 169 scientific articles in the Web of Science database and 85 in
Scopus.
By the fact that the items selected in the first place resulted in more than 250
productions, it was chosen to analyze a smaller amount of the entire corpus. The
choice was made according to the importance given to the subject “social innovation”
due to all the summaries of the selected articles, the importance that the subject
received, and it was also counted how many times the phrase was cited in each
summary. Therefore, those which the subject was put in more evidence—a total of
24 items, from both databases—were the selected ones.
Simultaneously, besides the cut of the most significant productions, it was analyzed the amount of articles produced annually, in order to understand in which
period the issue discussed here had greater academic emphasis.
3 Presentation and Discussion of Results
The procedures that were followed to obtain the results, which will be explored here,
have been described in the previous section. Nevertheless, it will be made a more
detailed interpretation about them.
First, this research will be about 169 scientific articles resulting from the search in
Web of Science database. The graphic below shows how this amount of productions
were divided according to the researched period.
By analyzing Graphic 1, it can be observed that the year 2016 was the one with
the largest number of scientific productions involving the theme “social innovation”
in the searched period. Although later (in 2017 and in the 1st semester of 2018) there
has been a reduction on the amount of articles, it was gradual. Between the years of
2008 and 2014, it was verified that academic papers written about the subject were
not very significant, different from the followed years.
It is possible to say that the number of productions of the first five years researched
(2008–2012) do not even reach a quarter of the productions made in the last five years
(2013–2018).
Possibly, the highest number of scientific articles published about the subject
“Social Innovation” was from 2013 to 2018, perhaps the reason was some global
crises, which had happened in the previous years, such as the Great Recession of
the United States (2008–2009) and the Debt Crisis in Europe (2009–2010). Thus,