• What is the current state of knowledge about the R&D activities of MNEs? • How are these activities likely to change in the future? • How are technological and geopolitical developments in the world economy driving product, process, and business model innovations? • How are these developments impacting both the geographical configuration of GVCs and their organization? • How can government policies encourage innovation and promote the domestic capture of the rents therefrom? Overview of the main issues addressed by the panel Innovation underpins firms’ competitiveness and sustainable performance. For multinational enterprises (MNEs) which compete in global markets, innovation has long been recognized (see, for example, Vernon 1966) as essential not just to growth and success but fundamentally to survival (Papanastassiou et al., 2020). Innovations may be developed in-house and/or acquired externally through different forms of knowledge sourcing such as acquisitions, strategic alliances, and R&D cooperation (Kafouros et al., 2022). MNEs are not only the seedbed for many innovations through their R&D activities at home and abroad, but they also facilitate the diffusion of new innovations across national borders. MNEs are thus important conduits for cross-border knowledge transfer, from the headquarters to overseas affiliates, from overseas affiliates to the headquarters, and/or between affiliates. Organizations like the MNEs have been characterised by the effort to continuously look inward and outward for new knowledge in the attempt to develop new idea and artifacts. MNEs consist of geographically dispersed organizational units that reconfigure themselves to allow more distant and peripheral knowledge search. Research shows that that this ability depends not only on idiosyncrasies specific to the MNE, but also on exogenous forces associated with international variations in appropriability regimes and industry-specific technological opportunities (Kafouros et al., 2012; Dachs et al., 2023). Scholars have stressed the crucial role of globalizing R&D for MNEs aiming to access new technologies (Penner-Hahn and Shaver, 2005) and researched the conditions that induce MNEs to globalise their R&D, and emphasise the role of technological capabilities of the lab and external embeddedness in the local scientific and engineering communities (Song et al., 2011). Geographic dispersion is found to enhance the effects of a firm’s own R&D on its performance (Kafouros et al., 2018). A closer examination of this research area reveals a notable trend in the internationalization of R&D activities, shifting from more developed North to encompass the emerging South (Zhao, Tan, Papanastassiou, Harzing, 2019). This shift was primarily driven by the growing need for advanced-economy MNEs to monitor and understand emerging global trends. This necessity led to a shift towards sourcing knowledge inputs from diverse channels, further propelled by the rising costs of R&D and a shortage of R&D professionals in industrialized nations. Consequently, there has been a strategic (re)alignment in global innovation efforts, emphasizing the maximization of locally developed knowledge while also capturing and synthesizing locally available knowledge, both in North and South (Dodourova, Zhao & Harzing, 2021). Additionally, Southern markets and institutions have witnessed substantial improvements. The convergence of these factors, combined with advancements in information technologies for knowledge management, has led to a shift in the center of gravity for innovation towards the South. This shift has resulted in the establishment of more sustainable competitive advantages by aligning global knowledge networks within and outside the MNEs (Mavroudi, Kafouros, Jia & Hong, 2023). However, this trend is increasingly being disrupted by significant changes in the global economy. One of these disruptions is the rapid technological catch-up and indigenous innovation by EMNEs, partly accelerated by the ‘Tech Cold War’. Specifically, FDI flows from these emerging economies have emerged as a dominant force reshaping the global innovation landscape (Zhao et al., 2020). The rapid rise of EMNEs has spurred comprehensive investigations into various aspects, including the sources and patterns of knowledge flows, as well as the intricate processes of knowledge management and related outcomes (Elia, Kafouros & Buckley, 2020). One area of research has highlighted the innovation impact of EMNEs’ OFDI, particularly when directed towards advanced economies (e.g., Thakur-Wernz, et al., 2019; Wu & Park, 2019).

International entrepreneurship represents a very lively research field and community of scholars. It is positioned at the crossroads between international business and entrepreneurship and contributes to the former providing a complementary perspective on the internationalization phenomenon. The year 2024 marks an important anniversary for this relatively young topic: 30 years since the publication of Oviatt & McDugall (1994) and 20 years since the publication of Knight & Cavusgil (2004), both on JIBS and both receiving the JIBS decade article award. In this panel, we ask what is the present and the future of a field which attracts many young scholars and is quite popular at international business conferences and journals? What is the state of this discipline today, disciplines which received so much attention from scholars and contributions as well as criticism? And what is its future? In many works, International Entrepreneurship is depicted as an outcome of globalization processes: what is its future in a world which is turning less global and more prone to multiple international shocks? In the past, International Entrepreneurship has adopted its research approaches and methods from the two disciplines in which it has been rooted. Is that sufficient for capturing IE-related phenomena in the future, or should we look beyond disciplinary borders and seek additions to our methodological toolbox? The panel will try to address these issues from different angles, encompassing research approaches and theoretical lenses.

Geopolitics has been a crucial driver of globalization and growth throughout history, a fact that has often been overlooked by international business scholars who have traditionally viewed globalization as an open opportunity for all capable firms and supportive governments. However, historical patterns show that modern globalization has thrived under unequal power regimes, with the dominance of Britain and later the United States, which facilitated global economic integration through initiatives like the Marshall Plan and support for countries like South Korea to counterbalance influences from Russia and China. This historical context highlights that opportunities for globalization and growth have been unevenly distributed, often favoring geopolitical allies of dominant powers. Recent empirical studies suggest that sustained growth is less about liberal trade policies and more about how states align their policies with the interests of multinational enterprises (MNEs), with the domestic political economy being significantly shaped by geopolitics. The paper discusses the implications of these dynamics for developing countries choosing geopolitical alliances, the impact of techno-nationalism, and the challenges posed by China's rise as a new global power. This backdrop sets the stage for a panel discussion among leading scholars to explore the evolving relationship between geopolitics and international business.

This panel will explain both the anatomy of ethics within the AIB and the operation of ethical processes. As AIB members, many of you will know that the Academy has three codes of ethics: the Member Code of Ethics, Leadership Code of Ethics and the Journals Code of Ethics covering its three journals. Our panel will kick off with an explanation of the nature of these three codes (to be found at: https://www.aib.world/about/policies/). We will also explain how AIB generates, revises and updates, its ethical rules and how it implements and enforces them. One thing that we all learn is that it is surprisingly easy, if not to transgress, then to come perilously close to transgressing. Understanding the pitfalls that are out there is particularly important today, given digitalisation and – dare we say it – the rise of artificial intelligence (AI). Our panellists are right at the heart of the ethical dimension to the AIB. Rosalie Tung, as Editor-in-Chief (EIC) of the Journal of International Business Studies (JIBS) is alerted to possible violations of the Journal’s Code of Ethics. Ari Van Assche has a parallel brief as EIC of the Journal of International Business Policy (JIBP), and Gary Knight, as President-Elect is knowledgeable of the ethical processes within the AIB, across each of the ethical codes, and how AIB handles ethical cases. Our panel will look at the relevant history of AIB’s codes, consider those types of instances that arise most frequently and that we all need to guard against, as AIB members, if we are AIB leaders (and who qualifies as a leader is broader than you might think) and when we submit to the journals. Examples of violations will highlight the salience of the codes today including potential breaches when making conference submissions, as well as to the journals. Beyond this, one increasingly sensitive area is manuscripts that introduce one’s political/ideological biases and opinions, other than evidenced-based findings. Our journals and our organization aim to adopt a politically/ideologically neutral stance.

This is 12th edition from the series of panels organized by the Commonwealth Research Network on International Business (CRN-IB) at the AIB UK & Ireland conference. With the support of the AIB and leading academics from around the globe, the CRN-IB was established at a special session during the Annual European International Business Conference in Brighton in 2012. It aims to bring together and strengthen relationships and dialogue between academic, businesses and policymaking bodies working on and in Commonwealth countries.