Access to this full-text is provided by Taylor & Francis.
Content available from Cogent Business & Managment
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
MANAGEMENT | REVIEW ARTICLE
Four decades of counterfeit research:
A bibliometric analysis
Irfan Butt
1
*, Maha Khamis Al Balushi
2
, Seung Hwan (Mark) Lee
3
, Myuri Mohan
4
,
Naseer Ahmad Khan
5
and Shelley Haines
6
Abstract: This paper assesses the evolution of last 43 years in counterfeit research
with respect to sources of knowledge (i.e. journals, authors, institutions, countries)
and research themes. The oldest paper on this subject discovered in the Scopus
database was published 43 years ago, yet a time frame was not specified. Sources
of knowledge are assessed on research productivity (quantitative) as well as impact
(qualitative). Research themes, key areas of focus within the counterfeit research
landscape, are identified and discussed to conceptualize our understanding of the
field. Via a systematic literature review, 713 peer-reviewed academic articles pub-
lished in 282 journals from 1978 to 2021 were selected as the sample for this study.
The systematic review technique was chosen as compared with narrative reviews of
the literature it focuses on open, extensive, and detailed approaches to literature
searches, in addition to conforming to the scientific criteria utilised in primary
research, namely transparency, rigour, comprehensiveness, and reproducibility.
A database of references and citations was created for analysis. The data was
analyzed to prepare comparative tables. Further, the Leximancer software was
used to generate lexical conceptual trends. This data was further analyzed to
identify emerging themes. The Journal of Business Ethics had the highest number
of articles and citations, followed by the Journal of Business Research and Business
Horizons. Ian Phau (14 articles) and Michael D. Smith, (9 articles) were the most
prolific authors. Joseph Nunes and Ian Phau attained the highest number of cita-
tions, cited 658 and 577 times respectively. Eight major research themes were
identified: products, piracy, model, price, firms, digital, supply, and ethical. Each
theme was analyzed over time. The major research areas analyzed across the
articles over time were Technology (particularly “Technology” and “Software”
topics) and Ethics (particularly “IP” and “Legislation”). The identification of these
research area captures the essence of the paper’s uniqueness and contribution to
this field of research. This is the first systematic literature review in counterfeit
literature that captures multi-decade sources of knowledge in business journals.
Subjects: Consumer Psychology; International Business; Marketing; Education - Social
Sciences;
Keywords: citation analysis; lexical analysis; systematic review
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 1 of 20
Received: 21 July 2023
Accepted: 10 November 2023
*Corresponding author: Irfan Butt,
Department of Marketing
Management, Ted Rogers School of
Management, Toronto Metropolitan
University, 55 Dundas St W, Toronto,
ON M5G 2C3, Canada
E-mail: Irfan.butt@torontomu.ca
Reviewing editor:
Ansar Abbas, Management,
Universitas Airlangga - Kampus B,
Indonesia
Additional information is available at
the end of the article
© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribu-
tion, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The terms on
which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in
a repository by the author(s) or with their consent.
1. Introduction
Counterfeiting is defined as the act of copying the features and characteristics of an existing
product to create a new product with the intention of making it indistinguishable from the original
(Eisend & Schuchert-Güler, 2006). This phrase, which denotes a high degree of precision or likeness,
is frequently used in a variety of contexts, such as when assessing the quality of a replica, a copy,
or a counterfeit. Products that are purposefully designed to resemble real products from a well-
known brand are known as counterfeit goods in the world of trademarks and brands. These fake
products are frequently created with the goal of being “indistinguishable from the original” in
terms of design, branding, and packaging. In order to trick customers into thinking they are buying
authentic products when they are actually buying fraudulent and unlicensed replicas. Owners of
copyrights and trademarks are legally entitled to prevent unlawful copies, sales, or distribution of
their intellectual property. Intellectual property rights are intended to shield brand owners and
content creators from unauthorized copies and imitations that can hurt their interests or mislead
customers. Counterfeit products are generally sold for a lower price than the original product
(Eisend & Schuchert-Güler, 2006). More simply, counterfeiting, also commonly referred to as piracy,
“involves the unauthorized replication of copyrighted intellectual assets for commercial purposes”
(van Wijk, 2002, p. 689). It can further be divided into deceptive (e.g., commodities falsely acting as
luxury products) and non-deceptive channels (i.e., consumers are aware that the goods they are
purchasing are counterfeit; Khan et al., 2020). Piracy, specifically, is the illegal reproduction,
distribution, or use of intellectual property, such as software, music, movies, books, or other
works, that are protected by copyrights without the owner’s consent. It is a type of intellectual
property violation that is prohibited in the majority of nations.
Globally, according to current forecasts on counterfeiting and international trade, the magnitude
of counterfeiting is estimated to exceed USD 3 trillion in 2022 (Organisation for Economic Co-
operation and Development, 2021). According to a survey by the Organization for Economic Co-
operation and Development (OECD), the value of global commerce in fake and pirated goods is
estimated to be 3.3% of all trade, or about USD 509 billion. This represents a huge drain on the
revenue of genuine enterprises and tax revenue for governments (EUIPO, 2019). In legitimate
industries, counterfeiting results in employment losses. Over 468,000 jobs have been lost due to
piracy and counterfeiting in the European Union, according to a study by the European Union
Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO, 2019). Counterfeiting threatens intellectual property (IP) and
causes a loss of revenue because it limits the ability of a manufacturer or brand to charge fair
prices and diminishes product image because consumers are unable to distinguish between
genuine and counterfeit products (Çekirdekci & Baruonu Latif, 2019; Chaudhry & Stumpf, 2011).
In addition to revenue losses, legitimate producers have cited declines in brand reputation and
equity (Phau et al., 2009). Consumers may be at risk for safety issues as a result of counterfeit
products, particularly in sectors like electronics and pharmaceuticals.
In the case of luxury products, where counterfeiting is rampant, the exclusiveness of an original,
authentic product is vastly reduced (Çekirdekci & Baruonu Latif, 2019; Phau et al., 2009).
Inconsistent or absent punishment for those engaging in counterfeit activities has resulted in
further incentives for pirates to continue producing counterfeit products (Chaudhry & Stumpf,
2011). As a result, consumers risk being subjected to low-quality and imitation products which
may cause harm to their well-being, particularly in the case of counterfeit medicine and drugs.
Although counterfeiting can increase brand awareness and create additional demand (Braun &
Eklund, 2019), the overall damage caused by counterfeiting is outweighs the benefits gained from
exposure.
A quick search of “counterfeit” or “piracy” in the title, abstract, or keywords in an online journal
database resulted in about 14,000 academic peer-reviewed English language articles. Counterfeit
or piracy is a multi-disciplinary concept; amongst 14,000 articles, the concept was found in diverse
disciplines such as law, social science, political science, agriculture, business, engineering, eco-
nomics, biology, geography, earth sciences, economics, transportation, and anthropology. Since
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 2 of 20
counterfeiting is a complex issue with wide-ranging effects, it is connected to many different
academic fields. Legal frameworks are essential for pursuing counterfeiters and defending the
rights of those who possess intellectual property. Political science and counterfeiting can interact
through issues of global trade agreements, intellectual property laws, and the responsibility of
governments in stopping the trade in counterfeit goods. Social scientists research the effects of
counterfeit goods on people. False pesticides, fertilizers, and seeds in agriculture can reduce crop
yields and food output. Businesses are directly impacted by counterfeiting since it impacts their
sales, market share, and brand integrity. Economic losses result from counterfeiting, including
those from lower sales of real goods, higher expenditures associated with law enforcement, and
effects on trade balances. Economists research these outcomes. Medical devices and drugs that
are fake can seriously affect your health. Intricate transportation networks, including air, sea, and
land routes, are frequently used to convey counterfeit goods. The ways that counterfeiters abuse
these systems are examined by transportation experts. A global and multidisciplinary problem,
counterfeiting has an impact on many facets of society and the economy. Since this issue is so
complicated, it requires the participation of several academic disciplines in order to be successfully
understood, addressed, and mitigated. To handle various aspects of the issue, each field offers
special knowledge and perspectives.
Academic research on counterfeiting has been conducted on various topics such as Counterfeit
goods with products, including software, books, medicine, drugs, luxury products, software, anti-
counterfeits, among others (e.g., Alghannam et al., 2014; Almuzaini et al., 2013; Barnor et al., 2020;
Baruönü Latif et al., 2018; Chavarria et al., 2016; Eisend et al., 2017; Fadlallah et al., 2016; Hoecht &
Trott, 2014; Karunamoorthi, 2014; Khan et al., 2021; Koczwara & Dressman, 2017; Lima de et al.,
2018; Samaddar & Menon, 2020; Staake et al., 2009).
Despite considerable importance and multi-dimensional nature of this topic, there is a dearth of
literature reviews that has synthesized this area of research. Therefore, in order to comprehend the
state of knowledge about counterfeiting and its ramifications, the main goal of this study is to
identify the knowledge sources and their noteworthy contributions to the literature. To achieve this
objective, this study presents a systematic review of the counterfeit literature using citation
analysis. It further presents conceptual trends observed in the literature using Leximancer,
a visual text analysis tool. We mainly focus on articles published in business and management
journals. Specifically, we posit the following research questions:
●RQ1: What are the sources of knowledge depicted in terms of the most prolific and highly influential
journals, authors, institutions, and countries?
●RQ2: What are the major research themes relevant to this topic and how do they vary over time?
●RQ3: What are the mature and emerging research topics and how do they relate to one another?
This paper makes four major contributions. First, we argue that this is the most comprehensive
review of the counterfeit literature to date that encompasses all relevant counterfeit topics within
the field of business and management addressing the lack of an integrative literature review on
this topic. Second, we identify the most prolific and influential sources of knowledge to provide
credibility to research findings; it acknowledges the contribution of different authors, journals,
institutions, and countries and makes it easier for aspiring researchers to identify co-researchers
and potential collaborators. Third, the categorization of research into different themes allows
researchers and policymakers to better identify and understand sub-topics relevant to counter-
feiting. Additionally, it provides a conceptual map of areas and shows how different topics are
linked to one another leading to interdisciplinary research. Fourth, the identification of emerging
research topics offers direction for future research on this timely topic encouraging relevance and
exploration of research in most needed areas.
The remainder of this paper is organized into five sections: Section 2 provides an overview of the
existing literature on this topic. Section 3 elaborates on article selection and methodological
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 3 of 20
procedures. It also describes the process of deriving conceptual themes using Leximancer. Section 4
presents findings of citation and Leximancer analyses, and further explores the research questions
posited. Section 5 concludes and discusses the results in terms of a broader research perspective.
2. Prior literature reviews
Table 1 lists the previous literature reviews related to counterfeiting. However, only three literature
reviews—Staake et al. (2009), Latif et al. (2018), and Samaddar and Menon (2021)—are considered
relevant to the current study and are discussed below (see Table 2). The review’s overall focus on
counterfeiting in general as opposed to a focus on a particular product was how the relevance was
determined. The studies with research on a specific product covered medicine (e.g., Koczwara &
Dressman, 2017; Lima de et al., 2018), luxury brands (e.g., Eisend et al., 2017; Khan et al., 2021),
digital (e.g., Barnor et al., 2020), and software (e.g., Chavarria et al., 2016). Hoecht and Trott (2014)
examined anti-counterfeit strategies. Thus, because a general overview of the topic cannot be
attained from those articles, they have been excluded from discussion in the current study.
Staake et al. (2009) is the only review published in a top-tiered journal. The authors organize their
review around six categories: 1) general description and overview of the phenomenon, 2) qualitative
impact analysis, specifically the effect of counterfeit on various indicators such as brand value, turnover,
Table 1. Systematic literature reviews in the field of counterfeit
Topic Systematic Literature Reviews
Counterfeit Goods/General Samaddar and Menon (2020), Latif et al. (2018),
Staake et al. (2009)
Medicine/drugs Lima de et al. (2018), Koczwara and Dressman (2017),
Fadlallah et al. (2016), Alghannam et al. (2014),
Karunamoorthi (2014), Almuzaini et al. (2013)
Luxury brands Khan et al. (2021), Eisend et al. (2017)
Digital Barnor et al. (2020)
Software Chavarria et al. (2016)
Anti-counterfeit Hoecht and Trott (2014)
Table 2. Characteristics of comparable literature reviews
Reference Current Study
(2022)
Samaddar and
Menon (2020)
Latif et al.
(2018)
Staake et al.
(2009)
No. of Studies 713 120 65 Not Given
No. of Journals 282 50 Not Given Not Given
Timeframe of
Studies
1978–2021
(43 years)
1994–2019
(25 years)
1980–2017
(37 years)
Not Given
Focus Overall
counterfeits,
including tangible
and intangible
Non-deceptive
counterfeit
(tangible) only
Demand side counterfeit
studies only
Counterfeit goods
(tangible) only
Analysis ●Research pro-
ductivity &
impact
●Research
themes
●Research
areas
●Theories
●Antecedents
●Journals
●Research
gaps
●Article
characteristics
●Method
●Theories
●Variables
●Research
themes
●Brief descrip-
tion of each
study
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 4 of 20
and liability claims, on the manufacturers of genuine products, 3) supply-side investigations, including
the motive of illegal parties, production aspects, and supply chain implications, 4) demand-side inves-
tigations, which represent consumer attitudes toward counterfeit products, 5) managerial guidelines to
avert counterfeits, which includes strategies and tactics to tackle counterfeiting activities, and 6) legal
issues and legislative, such as the enforcement of intellectual property rights. Staake et al (2009) identify
research gaps and further propose managerial implications for both demand and supply side. They
suggest evaluation of counterfeit market to estimate the impact on brand loyalty, brand awareness, and
quality perception while educating consumers about it. They also encourage examination of strategies
and production locations of actors involved in counterfeiting.
Latif et al. (2018) focus on the demand side (i.e., consumers) of counterfeit goods. In this review, they
“illuminate the existing body of research on counterfeiting through a content analysis and identify
theoretical gaps and opportunities for further research from a marketing perspective” (Latif et al, 2018,
p. 458). The authors provide a comprehensive background on the history of history before delving into
their main findings. Based on a review of 65 articles published over a 37-year period, Latif et al. (2018)
identify four themes related to counterfeiting: 1) product and brand-specific motivations, 2) social
influence motivations, 3) consumer trait-specific motivations, and 4) proliferated motivations.
Samaddar and Menon (2020) review literature related to non-deceptive counterfeit products. Non-
deceptive counterfeit is a subsection of the counterfeit literature in which the user is aware that the
product is not authentic. In this review, they “develop a morphological analysis (MA) framework and to
identify the major research gaps that offer potential for future research” using 120 research papers
published over 25 years (Samaddar & Menon, 2020, p. 1). MA is a qualitative method widely used in
social sciences for examining and analyzing a set of structured interactions in a multidimensional
setting. The authors derived five key themes from the literature focusing on non-deceptive counter-
feit: 1) market characteristics, 2) influencing factors, 3) self-regulating factors, 4) research methodol-
ogy, and lastly 5) theoretical model. By building a cross-comparison matrix, Samaddar and Menon
(2020) determine that future research directions for counterfeiting should focus on the societal role of
intention, consumer traits, mindful consumption, and social media in anti-counterfeit.
Relative to other related works, Table 2 demonstrates that the current study is the most
comprehensive account of extant research on counterfeit literature to date for three reasons.
First, it has the largest sample size (713) of any systematic review on this topic. The next highest is
Table 3. Article selection process
N Description Articles
1 Article Search using keywords 33,606
2 English 31,352
3 Business, Management,
Accounting
2,468
4 Journal Articles 1,527
5 Not Relevant −814
6Final Sample 713
Table 4. Articles by timeframe
Timeframe Articles Articles %
1978–2001 47 6.6%
2002–2011 238 33.4%
2012–2021 428 60.0%
Total 713 100.0%
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 5 of 20
120 studies by Samaddar and Menon (2020). It also covers the largest timeframe (43 years. Latif
et al. (2018) examine the literature over 37 years. It also includes the largest number of journals
(282) as compared to 50 journals by Samaddar and Menon (2020), the next highest. To date, this is
the only study which examines sources of knowledge, research productivity and impact.
3. Methodology
Large-scale scientific data can be explored and analyzed using the popular bibliometric analysis
technique such as citation analysis. Bibliometric techniques use a quantitative approach to
describe, assess, and track published research. Only with the emergence of easily accessible
internet databases with citation data such as Scopus and Web of Science, bibliometric methods
began to draw wide attention (Zupic & Čater, 2015). Citation analysis is considered a measurement
of influence in academia (Liu et al., 2013). As a bibliometric technique, it has been used by
researchers as a performance metric of authors, articles, journals, and universities (Chatha et al.,
2015). Publications that are cited more than others are presumed to have been more relevant and
influential for research (Jeung et al., 2011).
The first step in citation analysis is article selection. Based on the prior literature reviews
(Baruönü Latif et al., 2018; Samaddar & Menon, 2020; Staake et al., 2009), four keywords –
counterfeit, pirated, piracy, and fake – were searched in the Scopus database. The articles were
restricted to peer-reviewed, published in academic journals, and the English language only, and
published within the last 43 years (i.e., 1978–2021). Since the objective of this study is to examine
counterfeit literature relevant to the field of business, only journals in the following areas were
searched: business, management, and accounting.
The initial search resulted in 1,527 journal articles. After removing 814 irrelevant articles, 713
unique articles were retained for further analyses (Table 3). The analysis was performed in the
form of a frequency distribution of articles and citations, and the percentage of articles and
citations. To better analyze the various research topics explored in this field, we developed
a matrix that cross references each topic. This matrix was developed by first identifying most
frequently keywords then filtering most frequently occurring keywords in the title, abstract, and
KWs of each article in our database. A number of research topic were further categories into broad
research areas such as a) intangible products (books, clothes, drugs, food, and luxury, b) intangible
products (movie, music, software), c) technology (technology, blockchain, and RFID), d) IP rights
(legislation, legal, IP, and copyright). Anti-counterfeit and ethics were treated as a standalone
research topic. The matrix, similar to correlation matrix, captures cross-reference of each topic
against one another. The matrix shows how different topics are interrelated.
The field can be divided into three timeframes across the examined papers (Table 4). 47 articles
were gathered between 1978 and 2001, 238 articles between 2002 and 2011, a considerable
increase, and 428 papers between 2012 and 2021, a twofold increase. In terms of percentage, it
comes out to be 6.6% of the total sample from 1978 to 2001, 33.5% between 2002 and 2011,
60.0% of the entire sample from 2012 to 2021. Thus, research in the field of counterfeiting has
increased over time. Notably, the volume of articles published doubled between the second and
final timeframes following a considerable spike in activity in the early 2000s. The significant
increase in counterfeit research since can be attributed to greater focus on this area due to several
factors such as globalization leading to higher trade across borders, technological advancement
making it easier to produce and distribute counterfeit products, particularly digital products. The
international multilateral agencies such as World Trade Organization has realized the negative
economic impact of counterfeit on countries and encouraged legislation to curb counterfeit.
Next, via a visual text analysis software (Leximancer), we extracted conceptual themes from the
data in each of the three timeframes (i.e., 1978–2001, 2002–2011, and 2012–2021). Leximancer
uses a combination of machine learning processes, such as Bayesian statistics, to generate
concepts and then further relates these identified concepts with other co-occurring concepts
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 6 of 20
(Angus et al., 2013). Specifically, for extracting and displaying concepts, themes, and patterns from
enormous amounts of text data, Leximancer is a text analysis software program. Here is a detailed
explanation of how Leximancer operates (Smith et al., 2016):
●All 713 papers (PDFs) that comprise the entire sample were uploaded to the software.
●Leximancer use an algorithm to recognize concepts or keywords in text and automatically extract
them. In the dataset, these ideas represent the most important and frequent phrases.
●The program looks at the co-occurrence patterns of concepts to find themes or subjects. In order to
determine the main themes or topics present in the data, it evaluates which concepts commonly
appear together in the text.
●The extracted concepts and topics are turned into graphic representations called concept maps that
make it simpler to understand and explain the findings.
●Leximancer’s visualizations and insights are used by researchers and to analyse the data, compre-
hend the content more thoroughly, and spot trends, patterns, or anomalies.
Leximancer provides emerging themes present in the dataset analyzed through a map visualiza-
tion (Ward et al., 2014). Themes are visualized by bubbles; the bubble size directly referring the
content density of a specific theme. The size of the bubble relates to the frequency in which the
theme is represented in the dataset. The proximity of the bubbles indicates their likelihood to
appear together in similar contexts (Ward et al., 2014). For instance, a bubble labelled “consumer”
overlaps with a bubble labelled “affinity”, then the two themes are strongly related to each other.
Via this process, researchers can identify relationships among terms and present it in a network
visualization format (Ward et al., 2014). In short, the size of a bubble denotes the significance or
prominence of that concept within the dataset. Larger bubbles often represent themes that are
more prominent or frequently appear in the text under analysis. The closeness of bubbles on
a map denotes the strength of the relationships between certain concepts. The text in the bubbles
is more closely related to the ones that are closer together.
Content analysis is an important research methodology, for it quantitates social science research. As
a result, Leximancer has become a strategic tool for researchers looking to improve their rigour. It has
also provided a method to analyze conceptual trends and sentiments over time, as leveraged in this
research paper. Leximancer is preferred over manual content analysis for several reasons. First, large
amounts of text can be processed by Leximancer quickly, whereas doing so manually (713 articles)
would take a lot of time and effort. Second, Leximancer provides consistent results which would be
difficult to maintain in manual coding due to subjectivity of coder. Third, coder’s interpretations may
contain intentional or unconscious bias with manual coding. The automated process used by
Leximancer removes any prejudice and provides a neutral analysis.
4. Results
4.1. RQ1: What are the sources of knowledge depicted in terms of the most prolific and
highly influential journals, authors, institutions, and countries?
Across the 713 articles published in 282 journals, the majority of articles came from 33 journals.
The top five journals by total publications are the Journal of Business Ethics (51), Journal of
Business Research (29), Business Horizons (22), Journal of Brand Management (16), and Journal
of Consumer Marketing (10). Almost 60% articles published in the Journal of Business Ethics focus
on software piracy. In additional to ethical issues related to piracy, these studies discuss intellec-
tual property rights. Journal of Business Research, on the other hand, mainly examines counterfeit
luxury and fashion. The major focus of Business Horizons is on anti-counterfeit measures.
The Journal of Business Ethics has the highest number of citations (3323, 24% of total citations). The
Journal of Consumer Marketing and Journal of Business Research are both with more than one thousand
citations at 1566 citations and 1137 citations respectively. The Journal of Marketing has 980 citations
and the Journal of Management Information Systems has 962 citations. Of the five most influential
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 7 of 20
journals, none had published articles relevant to counterfeiting in the 1978–2001 timeframe. The Journal
of Business Ethics, Journal of Business Research, and Journal of Consumer Marketing appeared multiple
times from 2002–2011, and again from 2012–2021. Journal of Marketing and Journal of Management
Information Systems appeared in the 2002–2011 timeframe. Notably, at this time, research began to
emerge more prolifically across many journals. See Table 5 for details.
Ian Phau, Michael D. Smith, Peggy E. Chaudhry, and Deli Yang are the most prolific authors with 14,
9, 9, and 8 articles, respectively. Ian Phau’s research focuses on luxury branding, brand counter-
feiting and piracy, and consumer animosity. Michael D. Smith’s research focuses on piracy and
technology, specifically information systems, security, and other retail technology-related topics.
Peggy E. Chaudhry studies management and operations concerning piracy. Deli Yang conducts
research on business intellectual property and brand counterfeiting and specializes in information
related to patent uncertainties. With respect to citations, Joseph Nunes (658 citations), Ian Phau
(577 citations), and Lawrence G. Sanders (469 citations) have been cited the most in order.
Joseph Nunes’ research specializes in status and luxury goods, anti-counterfeiting, and pricing.
Specifically, his highly cited study titled “Signaling Status with Luxury Goods: The Role of Brand
Prominence” examines the reasons for consumer use of luxury counterfeit brands. Lawrence
G. Sanders’ research focuses on information technology and piracy. Sanders’s research examines
key issues and impact of software piracy and propose preventive and deterrence mechanisms in
addition to deliberating ethical considerations in decision making and software piracy. Of these
noteworthy authors, Sanders is the only author to have exclusively published between the 1978 to
Table 5. Most prolific and influential journals
N Journal Articles Rank Citations Rank
1 Journal of Business Ethics 51 1 3,323 1
2 Journal of Business Research 29 2 1,137 3
3 Business Horizons 22 3 530 6
4 Journal of Brand Management 16 4 246 15
5 Journal of Consumer Marketing 15 5 1566 2
6 Marketing Intelligence and
Planning
14 6 228 16
7 Publishing Research Quarterly 12 7 70 47
8 Journal of Management
Information Systems
11 8 962 5
9 Journal of Product and Brand
Management
11 8 110 32
10 Information Systems Research 10 10 471 8
11 Decision Support Systems 10 10 216 17
12 Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing
and Logistics
10 10 163 25
13 Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services
10 10 87 37
14 MIS Quarterly: Management
Information Systems
9 14 505 7
15 European Journal of Marketing 8 16 422 9
16 Marketing Science 7 20 269 14
17 Journal of Marketing 5 27 980 4
18 International Marketing Review 2 63 210 18
19 Journal of Marketing Research 1 108 372 10
Cut-off point: 10 or more journal articles and/or more than 300 total citations.
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 8 of 20
2001 timeframe. Ian Phau has consistently published across all three timeframes. Particularly, his
study titled, “Devil wears (counterfeit) Prada: a study of antecedents and outcomes of attitudes
towards counterfeits of luxury brands” is considered influential even in the most recent times. It
examine how social and personality factors affect Chinese customers’ perceptions of luxury brand
knockoffs and how these two sets of criteria affect consumers’ intentions to make a purchase. It
gives a profile of those who buy and don’t buy luxury brand knockoffs. Michael D. Smith has
published frequently across all three timeframes. However, he has mainly focused on movie and
music piracy. His study titled, “The effect of graduated response anti-piracy laws on music sales:
Evidence from an event study in France” examines the effectiveness of government anti-piracy
policies. The research found that increased awareness of anti-piracy law had a positive impact on
sales of digital music sales. Other authors, such as Peggy E. Chaudhry, joined the field of research
in the 2002–2011 timeframe and have remained active in the field to date. On the other hand,
Joseph Nunes and Deli Yang also joined in 2002–2011 but exited (per their publication count) in
2012–2021. See Table 6 for details.
Table 6. Most prolific and influential authors
N Author University Articles Rank Citations Rank
1 Phau I. Curtin University,
Australia
14 1 577 2
2 Smith, M.D. Carnegie Mellon
University, USA
9 2 392 7
3 Chaudhry, P.E. Villanova University, USA 9 2 165 22
4 Yang, D. Trinity University, USA 8 4 164 23
5 Telang, R. Carnegie Mellon
University, USA
7 5 315 12
6 Stöttinger, B. Vienna University of Econ.
and Business, Austria
7 5 119 35
7 Tjiptono, F. Monash University,
Malaysia
7 5 75 62
8 Penz, E. Vienna University of Econ.
and Business, Austria
6 8 141 31
9 Wilson, J.M. Michigan State University,
USA
6 8 30 131
10 Bian X. Northumbria University,
UK
5 10 344 9
11 Gopal R.D. University of Connecticut,
USA
4 16 460 4
12 Sanders G.L. State University of
New York, Buffalo, USA
3 29 469 3
13 Cronan T.P. University of Arkansas,
USA
3 29 438 5
14 Cheng H.K. College of William and
Mary, USA
3 29 353 8
15 Moutinho L. University of Nottingham,
UK
3 29 282 13
16 Nunes J.C. University of Southern
California, USA
2 64 658 1
17 Al-Rafee S. Kuwait University, Kuwait 2 64 396 6
18 Sims R.R. College of William and
Mary, USA
2 64 322 10
19 Teegen H. George Washington
University, USA
2 64 322 10
Cut-off point: 5 or more journal articles and/or more than 250 total citations.
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 9 of 20
The most prolific institutions in this field by total publications are Curtin University in Australia
with 12 articles, Carnegie Mellon University in the USA with 11 articles, Hong Kong Polytechnic
University in Hong Kong with 11 articles, the University of British Columbia in Canada with 9
articles, and the University of Minnesota in the USA with 8 articles. The most prolific author Ian
Phau is based at Curtin University while M.D. Smith, another prolific author is affiliated with
Carnegie Mellon University. There are multiple researchers associated with the University of
British Columbia and the University of Minnesota. Hong Kong Polytechnic University in
Hong Kong with 11 articles is home to 34 authors this making it truly a source of knowledge for
counterfeit research. Both Curtin University and Carnegie Mellon University are present throughout
all three timeframes, specifically a denser number of articles from Curtin University in 2012–2021
and Carnegie Mellon University in 2002–2011. See Table 7 for details.
Although certain institutions produce more research than others, this is certainly not indicative
of the most prolific countries in research areas. Unsurprisingly, the North American region pro-
duced the most research, specifically the USA at 285 articles. The second most prolific country in
this field is the United Kingdom, with 76 articles published. From there, China occupies the third-
most prolific country in this field at 47 articles, Australia as fourth-most at 43, and Hong Kong fifth
Table 7. Most prolific and influential universities
N University Country Articles Rank Citations Rank
1 Curtin university Australia 12 1 181 24
2 Carnegie Mellon University USA 11 2 433 7
3Hong Kong Polytechnic
University
Hong Kong 11 2 175 25
4 University of British Columbia Canada 9 4 887 1
5 University of Minnesota USA 8 5 253 16
6 Villanova University USA 8 5 152 30
7 Universiti Sains Malaysia Malaysia 8 5 92 36
8 Michigan State University USA 8 5 76 40
9 Curtin University of
Technology
Australia 7 9 476 5
10 Vienna University of Business
and Economics
Austria 7 9 108 35
11 University of Connecticut USA 6 11 509 4
12 Indiana University USA 6 11 115 33
13 National University of
Singapore
Singapore 5 13 511 3
14 Iowa State University USA 5 13 202 23
15 University of Arkansas USA 4 15 444 6
16 Arizona state university USA 4 16 300 14
17 State University of New York USA 3 30 422 8
18 Hong Kong University of
Science & Technology
Hong Kong 3 31 420 9
19 Kuwait University Kuwait 3 31 410 10
20 City University of New York USA 3 31 409 11
21 Simon Fraser University Canada 3 31 327 13
22 University of California, Los
Angeles
USA 2 58 655 2
23 Johns Hopkins University USA 2 58 377 12
Cut-off point:5 or more journal articles and/or more than 300 total citations.
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 10 of 20
at 39 articles. At the time this research first started being explored (1978–2001), most publications
came from the USA. As interest in this area developed, more research from notably the UK and
Australia came to be published across 2002–2011, with some prominence from China and
Hong Kong. In recent years, more countries have published occasional research on counterfeiting,
such as Canada, Italy, Spain, and Taiwan. Malaysia has emerged as a recurring publisher for
counterfeit research from 2012–2021, even as the USA and UK remain present throughout all
three timeframes. See Table 8 for details.
4.2. RQ2: What are the major research themes relevant to this topic and how do they vary
over time?
The major research themes across the articles over time provide insight into the areas of interest
but also steers future research directions based on areas that currently have less attention. Across
this systematic literature review, eight main themes emerged. The densest theme discussed in the
literature is “products” at 29% of all lexical occurrences. As the literature is divided amongst
various commodities, technologies, and other related product offerings, this concept sets the
framework for the other following concepts: “piracy” (17%), “firms” (11%), “price” (12%),
“model” (12%), “digital” (9%), “supply” (6%), and “ethical” (5%). Taken together, these themes
indicate that most research focuses on product and organizational counterfeiting and piracy and
aims to maximize current tools in anti-counterfeiting methods through cost-effectiveness and
digitally efficient means. See Figure 1 for details.
Table 8. Most prolific and influential countries
N Country Region Articles Rank Citations Rank
1 USA North
America
285 1 11146 1
2 UK Europe 76 2 1677 2
3 China Asia 47 3 760 8
4 Australia Oceania 43 4 1032 5
5 Hong Kong Asia 39 5 1354 3
6 France Europe 37 6 302 14
7 Canada North
America
35 7 1078 4
8 Germany Europe 30 8 416 11
9 Taiwan Asia 26 9 981 6
10 Italy Europe 25 10 253 16
11 India Asia 24 11 187 21
12 Malaysia Asia 23 12 200 18
13 Spain Europe 18 13 433 10
14 Singapore Asia 14 14 867 7
15 South Korea Asia 14 14 287 15
16 Austria Europe 11 16 177 22
17 New Zealand Oceania 11 16 104 28
18 Portugal Europe 10 18 150 23
19 Sweden Europe 10 18 106 26
20 Thailand Asia 6 26 307 13
21 Kuwait Asia 4 33 619 9
22 Mexico Latin
America
4 33 345 12
Cut-off point:10 or more journal articles and/or more than 300 total citations
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 11 of 20
Leximancer also provides an opportunity to further analyze concepts correlated to the major
themes identified in its lexical analyses. Regarding “products”, concepts associated included counter-
feits, consumers, brands, luxury, and value. “Piracy” was related to software, music, legal, property,
and protection. “Model” yielded connections to information, data, analysis, online, and systems.
“Price” correlated to behaviour, risk, influence, and demand. “Firms” related to countries, economics,
public, strategy, and trade. Concerning “Digital”, this term correlated to industry, technology, content,
users, development, and security. “Supply” related to control, services, processes, media, and produc-
tion. Lastly, “Ethical” correlated to cost, enforcement, and government. See Figure 2.
Of interest is also the timeframes for when each of the identified themes was discussed. Across the
three timeframes, “Products” were discussed the most, increasing in frequency from 1978 to 2001 from
27% to just under half (44%) from 2012–2021. In terms of specific product categories, clothing and
pharmaceuticals lead the pack followed by cosmetic and personal care, watches and jewellery, hand-
bags and luggage, toys and games, and sports goods (Sabanoglu, 2022). The total number of counterfeit
incidents related to pharmaceuticals increased worldwide from 196 in 2002 to 6,615 in 2022, showing
a phenomenal rise by 3275% (Mikulic, 2023). The countries most hit by counterfeit clothing and footwear
in Europe include Italy, Spain, United Kingdom, Germany, and France (Statista, 2015). The probable
Figure 1. Themes in
Leximancer.
Figure 2. Heat map of themes
and concepts in Leximancer.
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 12 of 20
reasons for increasing trend of counterfeit clothing could be several including high prices of luxury
brands beyond the reach of ordinary persons, ubiquitous use of social media which promotes the use of
counterfeit products. A recent study estimates that 22% of consumers aged 16–60 years and active on
social media purchase counterfeits because the illicit goods were recommended by influencers; 31% of
males and 13% of females (Shepherd et al., 2023). Supply chains have become increasingly complicated
as a result of globalization, with apparel production frequently taking place across numerous nations.
Because of this complexity, there are opportunities for counterfeiters to enter the supply chain and
create fake apparel. The expansion of online marketplaces and e-commerce has made it simpler for
counterfeiters to reach a global clientele. Online marketplaces can have trouble efficiently policing fake
listings.
On the other hand, the second-most discussed theme, “Piracy,” decreased over the timeframes in
frequency, from 33% between 1978 and 2001 to 24% between 2002 and 2011 to 13% from 2012 to
2021. The term piracy is generally associated with software and digital products. The share of
unlicensed software has gradually decreased overtime across all regions in the world (Vailshery,
2022). Some probable reasons for this trend is stricter enforcement and legal actions by the
government and software companies, availability of free and open-source software, improve acces-
sibility of legitimate software, increased awareness, introduction of cloud-based software and
subscription models. Other themes that increased in frequency over the 43 years include “Model”,
“Digital”, and “Supply”. On the contrary, themes such as “Firms” and “Ethical” decreased over the
years. “Price” is the only theme to have fluctuated throughout the years, from 8% from 1978 to 2001
to 10% from 2002 to 2011 and then down a percentage point to 9% from 2012 to 2021.
4.3. RQ3: What are the mature and emerging areas of research and how do they relate to
one another?
To better analyze the various research topics explored in these journals, we developed a matrix that
cross references each of these topics. Upon this exercise, we identified that research topics can be
categorized into three distinct and broad areas such as commodities, technology, and ethics, etc.
Across numerous journals, there emerged some areas of research that deserve specific attention. Over
the past decade, technology has made incredible advancements from the 3 G to 4 G and 5 G, AI, cloud
computing, and big data (Palandrani, 2020). Not surprisingly, technology emerged as one of the most
mature areas of focus in this field of research (i.e., “Software” at 136 counts in the Commodities
segment and “Technology” at 84 counts in the Technology segment). Similarly, results coincide with
recent technological advancements, as research is still emerging for topics such as “Blockchain” at 14
counts and “RFID” at 11 counts. Interestingly, in the Ethics segment, many journals discussed legality
(i.e., “Legality” at 87 counts) and specifically mentioned IP at 140 counts and Legislation at 136 counts.
Ethics itself appeared 125 times in the dataset. Other mature areas in the research included “Luxury”,
“Music” and “Software”, all from the Commodities segment. See matrix A for details.
The least-dense segment was Commodities. On average, across ten different topics,
Commodities averaged 55.2 citations. Specifically, the topics “Books” and “Clothes” garnered little
interest across the journals. Therefore, it may be concluded that research in these areas has lost its
traction, perhaps due to longevity and prior breadth of literature, to other progressive areas such
as technological advancements (e.g., Chavarria et al., 2016), as noted earlier.
Concerning the topic of anti-counterfeit, the topic with highest correlation was “IP” at 15 counts
and “Luxury” and “Technology” both at 7 counts. On the opposite end, topics such as “Books” and
“Food” and “Clothes” had correlation with anti-counterfeit, ranging from 1 to 3 counts. This further
suggests that current research is less concerned with commodity-based topics through the lens of
anti-counterfeit and is instead focusing on topics such as high-profile items and technology as
they relate to anti-counterfeit.
The findings from Leximancer analysis were corroborated by matrix analysis. Overtime, the
research shows increasing trend in the area of fashion and luxury items, which are mainly related
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 13 of 20
Matrix A: Research Topics and Relationships
Total Books Clothes Drugs Fashion Food Luxury Movie Music Soft
ware
Anti-
count
erfeit
Techn
ology
Block
chain
RFID Legis
lation
Legal IP Copy
right
Ethics
Total 713 20 27 38 47 22 95 41 86 136 40 84 14 11 22 87 140 136 125
Book 20 20 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 5 5 5
Clothes 27 27 1 10 2 3 1 1 2 3 3 1 4 3 5 8
Drugs 38 1 1 38 6 1 3 1 2 5 10 1 8 1 2 9 7 4
Fashion 47 10 47 1 22 1 3 5 1 3 5 5 6 8
Food 22 1 2 6 1 22 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 4 1 2 1
Luxury 95 1 3 1 22 95 1 1 1 7 3 1 1 2 5 7 11
Movie 41 1 1 3 1 1 41 16 9 5 3 6 13 9
Music 86 2 1 1 1 1 16 86 18 1 15 4 13 16 31 20
Soft
ware
136 1 2 2 1 1 1 9 18 136 1 17 3 17 44 34 52
Anti- coun
terfeit
40 1 3 5 3 2 7 1 1 40 7 3 2 2 6 15 7 4
Tech
nology
84 3 10 5 3 3 5 15 17 7 84 11 6 5 11 24 24 7
Block
chain
14 1 1 2 1 3 11 14 2 1 2
RFID 11 8 2 2 6 11 1 2
Legis
lation
22 1 1 3 1 4 3 2 5 22 13 8 10 2
Legal 87 3 4 2 5 4 2 3 13 17 6 11 2 13 87 33 51 14
IP 140 5 3 9 5 1 5 6 16 44 15 24 1 1 8 33 140 45 21
Cop yright 136 5 4 6 4 5 13 31 34 4 23 2 2 8 42 37 136 29
Ethics 125 5 8 4 8 1 11 9 20 52 4 7 2 14 21 29 125
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 14 of 20
to clothing and accessories. Similarly, as piracy, a concept primarily related to software, showed
a decreasing trend, captured by matrix as well where research on software has declined signifi-
cantly in the most recent times. Another notable trend is lower emphasis on ethics research.
A deeper introspection reveals that a big component of ethics research was focused on software.
Thus, a decline in software research caused a slow down on ethics research. In Table 9, research
conducted in last five years (2017–2021) was further bifurcated and compared with research
conducted overall to identify emerging areas of research. The research areas showing increasing
trend in last five years include food, luxury, blockchain technology, and anti-counterfeiting. The
research on software, intellectual property, and RFID has declined in the most recent timeframe.
Interestingly, the research demonstrated that overlapping keywords included system, develop-
ment, and sales across the themes of “model” and “digital”. This may indicate that digitization is
becoming a prominent feature of information technology, particularly related to the ways that it
can aid sales tactics. Similarly, the overlap between the themes of “model” and “supply” yielded
topics related to information, media, and services. This finding may point to a potential benefit in
using digital media to optimize supply chain management (SCM) strategies. In relation to the
themes “ethical” and “firms”, the topic of trade appeared, perhaps signalling that trade is
a shadowy channel of counterfeit and piracy that requires more attention. See Table 9 for details.
5. Discussion, conclusion, limitations, and future research directions
This paper uses citation analysis to conduct a bibliometric analysis of the literature in the field of
counterfeiting. The main motivation for the current study is to determine the sources of knowledge
(specifically the articles, authors, and journals) that are making significant contributions to the field of
counterfeiting. The identification of the relevant quality of these parameters will help us to identify the
notable contributions to the literature. This paper identifies the most prolific and highly cited journals
and authors, and thus it provides a broad overview of the field and guidance to potential researchers in
the same. It was also found that teamwork and collaboration are needed in order to publish in high-
quality journals. Potential researchers can select appropriate journals to disseminate their work and can
identify opportunities to pursue collaborative work. Further, potential graduate students can approach
established scholars for supervision of their research. The scope of this study was limited to only 11
journals. Future studies can pursue articles published in other journals as well. To date, there have been
limited integrative systematic literature reviews that have identified the most influential authors,
journals, and articles, and research themes in the counterfeit literature (including piracy). Of those
that exist, they are narrow in focus or have small number of studies as part of their review. The results
of the current review are expected to fill this gap by providing a more comprehensive overview of the
counterfeit literature.
We contend that this is the most thorough assessment of the counterfeit literature to date in the
fields of business and management. We acknowledge the contributions of various authors, jour-
nals, institutions, and countries and making it easier for aspiring researchers to find co-researchers
and potential collaborators. We also offers a conceptual map of the various topics and illustrates
the connections between various subjects that encourage interdisciplinary research. By identifying
emerging research areas, we encourage exploration of the most pressing issues for research and
provide direction for future study on this topical topic.
This study performs citation and lexical concept analysis of 713 articles published in business
journals over a 43-year period. The objective of this research is to identify sources of knowledge, the
most prolific and highly influential authors, and journals. The Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of
Business Research, Business Horizons, Journal of Brand Management, and Journal of Consumer
Marketing are the most prolific journals. Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of Consumer Marketing,
Journal of Business Research, Journal of Marketing, and Journal of Management Information Systems
attained the highest overall citations. Although many of the same journals were both highly prolific
and cited, the data shows that they can be mutually exclusive and that despite being non-prolific,
journals can be highly cited (see Journal of Marketing, Journal of Management Information Systems).
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 15 of 20
Table 9. Research topics by timeline
Research N %
Total 1978–2001 2002–2011 2012–2021 2017–2021 1978–2001 2002–2011 2012–2021 2017–2021
Book 20 5 15 5 25% 75% 25%
Clothes 27 1 11 15 11 4% 41% 56% 41%
Drugs 38 1 18 19 7 3% 47% 50% 18%
Fashion 47 12 35 16 26% 74% 34%
Food 22 5 17 11 23% 77% 50%
Luxury 95 1 13 81 44 1% 14% 85% 46%
Movie 41 17 24 17 41% 59% 41%
Music 86 2 40 44 18 2% 47% 51% 21%
Software 136 26 70 40 15 19% 51% 29% 11%
Anti- counterfeit 40 8 32 17 20% 80% 43%
Technology 84 4 28 52 31 5% 33% 62% 37%
Blockchain 14 14 14 100% 100%
RFID 11 6 5 55% 45% 0%
Legislation 22 2 6 14 8 9% 27% 64% 36%
Legal 87 9 32 46 20 10% 37% 53% 23%
IP 140 11 62 67 24 8% 44% 48% 17%
Copyright 136 11 53 72 32 8% 39% 53% 24%
Ethics 125 17 54 54 27 14% 43% 43% 22%
Total 713 47 238 428 225 7% 33% 60% 32%
Note: the research topics were identified by filtering specific keywords (topics) in title, abstract and keyword of each article.
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 16 of 20
The most prolific journal, the Journal of Business Ethics, has become less dominant in recent times
while the Journal of Business Research and Business Horizons are more active. Overall, this paper has
identified the most prolific and highly cited journals and authors, thus providing a broad overview of
the field of counterfeiting and piracy, as well as offering guidance to potential researchers.
This research also sought to identify research themes among the collected articles. Specifically, eight
lexical concepts (i.e., themes) were identified: products, piracy, firms, price, model, digital, supply, and
ethical. The research articles were further categorized into three topics: commodities, technology, and
ethics. In conjunction with the major themes, most research tends to focus on improving organizational
efficiency and product offerings through digitization and security. Specifically, the theme “Products”
relates to commodity-based research and the value placed upon them by consumers. For example,
consumers who knowingly purchase counterfeit luxury goods value the status that they incur from the
physical appearance of the good, as opposed to the good’s functional qualities, such as durability (Phau
et al., 2009). “Piracy” focused on specific intellectual commodities, such as music and software, with
a focus on how to protect them against piracy. For example, Jeong et al. (2012) address the challenges of
assessing a product’s piracy risk. “Model” provided a substantial overview on how best to achieve
efficiency in anti-counterfeit measures, commonly referring to systems and data to analyze. “Price” as
a theme focused on ethical pricing tactics and how prices and price-based demand impacted consumer
behaviour. “Firms”, “Digital”, and “Supply” refers to topics related to increasing organizational efficiency
through digital systems and other methods of lean supply-chain management. Lastly, the theme
“Ethical” referenced policies, such as government enforcement. Thus, this research provides a frame
of reference, based on prior studies, about the interests previously examined and the themes present
within this area of research.
For tangible products, there are a number of areas which show a significant increase in number of
studies such as fashion, luxury, food, and books. Incidentally, there is a dearth of research on
pharmaceutical which is one of highest counterfeit categories as mentioned earlier. It is important
to educate consumers and develop public health campaigns about the importance of obtaining food
and medications from reputable sources. It is important to encourage, possibly through legislation and
regulations, the pharmaceutical and food industries to develop supply chain traceability and transpar-
ency procedures. Demand-side solutions are required for counterfeit luxury and fashion products. It is
integral to investigate how consumers behave when purchasing fake designer goods to learn why
certain people do so and how this behaviour may be modified. The effectiveness of intellectual
property laws in preventing counterfeiting should be studied, and if necessary, improvements should
be suggested. To assist buyers in determining the authenticity of luxury goods, manufacturers and
retailers should use cutting-edge authentication technology like QR codes and NFC tags.
Anti-counterfeit studies mainly concentrate on Intellectual Property Rights with a major focus on
luxury, fashion, and clothing. Interestingly, there is lack of anti-counterfeiting research on blockchain, an
emerging research area within this field. In the context of blockchain technology, counterfeit goods
provide unique difficulties and challenges. There is a need for practitioners to design and implement
technologies such as smart contracts and product authentication systems and academics can conduct
research to study the effectiveness of those technologies. Policymakers and regulations need to
enhance regulatory frameworks to facilitate the use of blockchain or similar technologies in specific
industries to thwart counterfeiting. There is a need to set up sector-specific standards for blockchain-
based anti-counterfeiting systems. Programs that certify adherence to these requirements should be
supported.
The current study is not without limitations. First, the scope of this study was limited only to business/
management-related journals. That is, the dataset for the current study only included counterfeit and
piracy-related articles published in business and management journals. Future studies should analyze
articles published in other disciplines, such as law and economics. It is also encouraged, as a future
research direction, to explore the areas where counterfeit-related research is currently dwindling in
popularity to determine the reasons for the decline in research. As well, further examination of areas
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 17 of 20
lacking substantial research is necessary to provide a more thorough wealth of information to society at
large. A content analysis with precise, focused, and pointed inquiries to gather and analyze data from
each study was not possible due to the large sample size of 713 studies. By performing an interrogative
analysis on a sample of studies that have been classified according to research topics, future researchers
can gain a deeper comprehension of the goals and findings of the studies. The future studies can
consider smaller sample size with TCCM framework (Theory, Context, Characteristics, Method). Business
literature is useful for understanding the business-related aspects of counterfeiting, but it falls short of
fully addressing the subject given its complexity. To effectively combat counterfeiting and lessen its
negative impacts on society, a holistic and multidisciplinary approach that incorporates knowledge from
numerous sectors is needed. However, give the vast nature of studies on this topic, future research
should focus on narrow areas such as law and intellectual property, technology and forensics, public
policy, etc. and examine it within overall literature.
Overall, this research provides future researchers insights for identifying appropriate journals that best
align with their research topic to disseminate their work. As well, this research will help future research-
ers determine novel and burgeoning areas of study to differentiate their work within the field of
counterfeit and piracy. As mentioned earlier, future researchers should expand current literature to
include emerging research areas (i.e., “Blockchain” and “RFID” as it relates to counterfeiting). For
instance, Blockchain technologies are increasingly being discussed as a solution to counterfeiting as it
adds traceability to a product or service. In fact, it has been explored as an anti-counterfeiting measure
for various industries, from drugs to cryptocurrencies (e.g., Haq & Esuka, 2018; Ma et al., 2020). Thus,
blockchain-based applications may be a viable anti-counterfeiting solution for most industries. Other
sparsely populated areas of research to further explore include miscellaneous laymen commodities,
such as “Books” or “Clothes”. Demonstrating the difference between anti-counterfeit and piracy for
commonplace goods, in comparison to luxury goods, may help retailers to further understand the
impulses, tactics, and outcomes of counterfeiting more holistically.
Due to cultural, economic, legal, and historical differences, the characteristics of counterfeit goods
might differ between Eastern and Western nations. Counterfeit goods may be more socially acceptable
or seen as more cost-effective premium brand alternatives in some Eastern nations. Western societies,
on the other hand, frequently place a premium on a product’s authenticity and uniqueness. Economic
differences between Eastern and Western nations might affect the market for counterfeit goods. Due of
price, it’s possible that counterfeit goods are more common in lower-income Eastern nations. Western
nations often have more effective laws protecting and enforcing intellectual property, especially those in
Europe and North America. The dedication to and efficiency of eastern nations in protecting intellectual
property rights may vary. Consumers’ knowledge of fakes and the risks they pose can vary. Western
buyers may actively seek out genuine goods since they are frequently better aware of the risks
associated with counterfeit products. Given this backdrop, Eastern countries should continue the
trajectory of publishing more prolifically within this field, as each timeframe shows that Western
countries dominate this research space. Thus, because most research related to counterfeiting has
been conducted by Western countries (predominantly the USA and the UK), the research and subse-
quent themes are likely to be influenced by a Western-centric lens. Thus, findings may not be globally
generalized. Having more prolific and influential papers from the East may ameliorate this incongruency,
should it at all exist.
Most of the research conducted in western cultures follows emic approach. The emic approach is
concerned with evaluating a cultural construct and comprehending it from the perspective of those who
belong to that culture (Gudykunst, 1997). This kind of research frequently adapts conceptions, hypoth-
eses, or measurements created in one culture—typically the United States—for use in another society.
The etic technique uses broader comparative assessments encompassing two or more cultures, whereas
the emic approach concentrates on key elements of the specific culture being studied. In order to better
comprehend a construct, etic cross-cultural study specifically compares it across cultures (Schaffer &
Riordan, 2003). It is important for researchers in eastern countries to use etic approach for conducting
counterfeit research.
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 18 of 20
Additionally, a more diverse research design should contribute to the advancement of biblio-
metric research. It should be noted that publication trends and citation analyses are limited to
research papers using quantitative research methods. Indeed, very few articles utilized qualitative
or mixed methods research designs. Since counterfeit is more of a demand than a supply concern
in eastern countries due to consumers receptiveness, it is crucial that academics in the east
conduct qualitative research to build contextual and in-depth understanding of issues. If utilized
more, these methodologies could be a new path for research directions in this area.
Counterfeit products frequently fall short in terms of safety and quality. Businesses and government
can collaborate to ensure the security and welfare of customers by comprehending these concerns in
the framework of consumer protection. Preventing consumers from unintentionally purchasing infer-
ior or potentially dangerous products is crucial. Businesses have an ethical duty to combat piracy and
counterfeiting. These actions can harm a company’s brand, violate moral standards, and erode
consumer and partner trust. Businesses can be helped to make ethical decisions by being aware of
the ethical implications of piracy and counterfeiting. The intellectual property rights of inventors,
innovators, and lawful businesses are violated by counterfeiting and piracy. It is essential to compre-
hend these concerns in relation to intellectual property rights in order to safeguard innovation, foster
creativity, and advance fair competition. Research on piracy and counterfeiting can offer crucial
insights that motivate constructive modifications to corporate procedures, governmental policies,
and consumer behaviour. This in turn helps to create a company atmosphere that is more moral
and sustainable and that values creativity, customer confidence, and fair competition.
Author details
Irfan Butt
1
E-mail: Irfan.butt@torontomu.ca
Maha Khamis Al Balushi
2
Seung Hwan (Mark) Lee
3
Myuri Mohan
4
Naseer Ahmad Khan
5
Shelley Haines
6
1
Department of Marketing Management, Ted Rogers
School of Management, Toronto Metropolitan University,
Toronto, Canada.
2
Department of Marketing, College of Economics and
Political Science, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat,
Oman.
3
Department of Retail Management, Ted Rogers School of
Management Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto,
Canada.
4
Ted Rogers School of Management, Toronto
Metropolitan University, Toronto, Canada.
5
Department of Management Sciences, University of
South Asia, Lahore, Pakistan.
6
Department of Communication and Culture, Toronto
Metropolitan University, Toronto, Canada.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the
author(s).
Funding
This work was supported by the Sultan Qaboos University.
Data availability statement
The authors consent to providing, upon reasonable
request, all data and materials necessary to substantiate
the findings and conclusions in this research.
Citation information
Cite this article as: Four decades of counterfeit research:
A bibliometric analysis, Irfan Butt, Maha Khamis Al
Balushi, Seung Hwan (Mark) Lee, Myuri Mohan, Naseer
Ahmad Khan & Shelley Haines, Cogent Business &
Management (2023), 10: 2284814.
References
Alghannam, A., Evans, S., Schifano, F., & Aslanpour, Z.
(2014). A systematic review of counterfeit and
substandard medicines in field quality surveys.
Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice, 71,
71. https://doi.org/10.2147/IPRP.S63690
Almuzaini, T., Choonara, I., & Sammons, H. (2013).
Substandard and counterfeit medicines: A systematic
review of the literature. British Medical Journal Open, 3
(8), e002923. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-
002923
Angus, D., Rintel, S., & Wiles, J. (2013). Making sense of
big text: A visual-first approach for analysing text
data using leximancer and discursis. International
Journal of Social Research Methodology, 16(3),
261–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2013.
774186
Barnor, J., Boateng, R., Kolog, E., Afful-Dadzie, A.,
Entee, E., & Patterson, A. (2020). A Systematic
Literature Review of Digital Piracy Research in
Information Systems Journals (2010 -2020):
Preliminary Insights.
Baruönü Latif, Ö., Kaytaz Yiğit, M., & Kirezli, Ö. (2018). A
review of counterfeiting research on demand side:
Analyzing prior progress and identifying future
directions. The Journal of World Intellectual Property,
21(5-6), 458–480.
Braun, J. A., & Eklund, J. L. (2019). Fake news, real money:
Ad tech platforms, profit-driven hoaxes, and the
business of journalism. Digital Journalism, 7(1), 1–21.
https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2018.1556314
Çekirdekci, Ş., & Baruonu Latif, F. O. (2019). Users and
non-users of counterfeits: Motivations, emotional
outcomes and neutralization processes. Journal of
Product & Brand Management, 28(6), 733–746.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-06-2018-1926
Chatha, K. A., Butt, I., & Tariq, A. (2015). Research meth-
odologies and publication trends in manufacturing
strategy: A content analysis based literature review.
International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, 35(4), 487–546. https://doi.org/10.
1108/IJOPM-07-2012-0285
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 19 of 20
Chaudhry, P. E., & Stumpf, S. A. (2011). Consumer com-
plicity with counterfeit products. Journal of Consumer
Marketing, 28(2), 139–151. https://doi.org/10.1108/
07363761111115980
Chavarria, J. A., Andoh-Baidoo, F. K., Midha, V., & Hughes, J.
(2016). Software piracy research: A cross-disciplinary
systematic review. Communications of the Association
for Information Systems, 38, 31. https://doi.org/10.
17705/1CAIS.03831
Eisend, M., Hartmann, P., & Apaolaza, V. (2017). Who buys
counterfeit luxury brands? A meta-analytic synthesis
of consumers in developing and developed markets.
Journal of International Marketing, 25(4), 89–111.
https://doi.org/10.1509/jim.16.0133
Eisend, M., & Schuchert-Güler, P. (2006). Explaining
counterfeit purchases: A review and preview.
Academy of Marketing Science Review, 12.
EUIPO, (2019). Status report on IPR Infringement, why IP
rights are important, IPR infringement and the fight
against counterfeiting and piracy.
Fadlallah, R., El-Jardali, F., Annan, F., Azzam, H., & Akl, E. A.
(2016). Strategies and systems-level interventions to
combat or prevent drug counterfeiting: A systematic
review of evidence beyond effectiveness.
Pharmaceutical Medicine, 30(5), 263–276. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s40290-016-0156-4
Gudykunst, W. B. (1997). Cultural variability in
communication. Communication Research, 24(4),
327–348. https://doi.org/10.1177/
009365097024004001
Haq, I., & Esuka, O. M. (2018). Blockchain technology in
pharmaceutical industry to prevent counterfeit
drugs. International Journal of Computer Applications,
180(25), 8–12. https://doi.org/10.5120/
ijca2018916579
Hoecht, A., & Trott, P. (2014). How should firms deal with
counterfeiting?: A review of the success conditions of
anti-counterfeiting strategies. International Journal
of Emerging Markets, 9(1), 98–119. https://doi.org/10.
1108/IJOEM-02-2011-0014
Jeong, B. K., Zhao, K., & Khouja, M. (2012). Consumer
piracy risk: Conceptualization and measurement in
music sharing. International Journal of Electronic
Commerce, 16(3), 89–118. https://doi.org/10.2753/
JEC1086-4415160304
Jeung, C. W., Yoon, H. J., Park, S., & Jo, S. J. (2011). The
contributions of human resource development research
across disciplines: A citation and content analysis.
Human Resource Development Quarterly, 22(1), 87–109.
Karunamoorthi, K. (2014). The counterfeit anti-malarial is
a crime against humanity: A systematic review of the
scientific evidence. Malaria Journal, 13(1), 209.
https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-13-209
Khan, S., Fazili, A. I., & Bashir, I. (2021). Counterfeit luxury
consumption: A review and research agenda. Journal
of Consumer Behaviour, 20(2), 337–367. https://doi.
org/10.1002/cb.1868
Koczwara, A., & Dressman, J. (2017). Poor-quality and
counterfeit drugs: A systematic assessment of
prevalence and risks based on data published from
2007 to 2016. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences,
106(10), 2921–2929. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xphs.
2017.05.018
Lima de, F. R. P., Da Silva, A. L., Godinho Filho, M., &
Dias, E. M. (2018). Systematic review: Resilience
enablers to combat counterfeit medicines. Supply
Chain Management: An International Journal, 12(3),
117–135. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-04-2017-0155
Liu, X., Zhang, J., & Guo, C. (2013). Full-text citation ana-
lysis: A new method to enhance scholarly networks.
Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology, 64(9), 1852–1863. https://
doi.org/10.1002/asi.22883
Ma, J., Lin, S. Y., Chen, X., Sun, H. M., Chen, Y. C., &
Wang, H. (2020). A blockchain-based application
system for product anti-counterfeiting. Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers Access, 8,
77642–77652. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.
2972026
Mikulic, M. (2023). Total number of counterfeit incidents
concerning pharmaceuticals worldwide 2002-2022;
Retrieved October 10, 2023 from https://www-
statista-com/.
Palandrani, P. (2020, February 10). A Decade of
Change: How Tech Evolved in the 2010s and
What’s in Store for the 2020s. Global X ETFs.
https://www.globalxetfs.com/a-decade-of-change-
how-tech-evolved-in-the-2010s-and-whats-in-
store-for-the-2020s/
Phau, I., Sequeira, M., & Dix, S. (2009). Consumers’ will-
ingness to knowingly purchase counterfeit products.
Direct Marketing: An International Journal, 3(4),
262–281. https://doi.org/10.1108/
17505930911000865
Sabanoglu, T. (2022). Global sales loss from counterfeit
and pirated goods 2020, Retrieved October 10, 2023,
from https://www-statista-com//.
Samaddar, K., & Menon, P. (2020). Non-deceptive coun-
terfeit products: A morphological analysis of litera-
ture and future research agenda. Journal of Strategic
Marketing, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.
2020.1772348
Schaffer, B. S., & Riordan, C. M. (2003). A review of
cross-cultural methodologies for organizational
research: A best-practices approach. Organizational
Research Methods, 6(2), 169–215. https://doi.org/10.
1177/1094428103251542
Shepherd, D., Whitman, K., Button, M., & Wilson, J. M.
(2023). The impact of deviant social media influ-
encers and consumer characteristics on purchas-
ing counterfeit goods. Deviant Behavior, 1–15.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2023.223
3041
Smith, A., McFadden, T., & McFadden, K. (2016).
Leximancer User Guide (Manual) (p. 132).
Brisbane.
Staake, T., Thiesse, F., & Fleisch, E. (2009). The emergence
of counterfeit trade: A literature review. European
Journal of Marketing, 43(3/4), 320–349.
Statista. (2015). Sales lost due to counterfeit clothing
and footwear in Europe 2015, by country;
Retrieved October 10, 2023, from https://www-
statista-com///.
Vailshery, L. S. (2022). Share of pirated software in global
regions 2009-2017; Retrieved October 10, 2023 from
https://www-statista-com.
van Wijk, J. (2002). Dealing with piracy: Intellectual Asset
Management in music and software. European
Management Journal, 20(6), 689–698. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0263-2373(02)00118-4
Ward, V., West, R., Smith, S., McDermott, S., Keen, J.,
Pawson, R., & House, A. (2014). The role of informal
networks in creating knowledge among health-care
managers: A prospective case study. Health Services
and Delivery Research, 2(12), 1–132. https://doi.org/
10.3310/hsdr02120
Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in
management and organization. Organizational
Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.
1177/1094428114562629
Butt et al., Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2284814
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2284814
Page 20 of 20
