Central banks influence economic debate through research and citations. This paper studies whether citation patterns reflect past colonial ties or present currency hierarchies. Using a bibliometric dataset of 334,750 economics articles, we track how central bank research circulates across countries. Domestic citations exceed foreign ones by about 70% percent, and articles with central bank authors receive more citations than similar work. Former colonial relationships do not raise citation flows. Instead, research from the United States attracts citations, especially from central banks in former colonies. The exchange of ideas follows currency hierarchies rather than imperial history.
Key findings:
- Central bank research is dominated by the US and Europe
- Economists strongly favor domestic research in citation behavior
- Central-bank-affiliated research receives more citations than comparable work
- Colonial history has limited explanatory power for modern citation patterns
- The United States occupies the central position in global central bank research
- Former colonies disproportionately orient toward US-based economic research
- Global citation networks display persistent core–periphery hierarchies
- Monetary dominance shapes knowledge flows more than former imperial ties
Link to Policy Paper: 2026_04_WP01_Bugdalle-Pfeifer
