The Global Trend of Research in the Field of Sustainable Rural Development: A Scientometrics Analysis

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Department of Geography and Rural Planning, Faculty of Planning and Environmental Sciences, University of Tabriz

2 Department of Human Geography and Planning, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

10.22059/jrur.2024.374463.1930

Abstract

Extended Abstract
Introduction
Over the past few decades, addressing the sustainable development of rural areas by emphasising issues such as green economy, reducing poverty, and creating an international framework has received more attention. Sustainable rural development is important in the world for several reasons, including preserving and strengthening natural and environmental potentials, creating employment and reducing social and economic inequalities, developing sustainable agriculture, increasing production and development of local industries, improving living standards and improving conditions, health, and climate, development of local culture and identity and improvement of the level of education and research in villages, as well as the impact of urban and rural links in national and regional development programs around the world. At the same time, the examination of the background of the subject shows that many bibliographic studies focus on rural development, geographical signs and sustainable rural development, rural tourism, sustainable rural livelihood, rural revitalization, sustainable agricultural development, ecosystem services, and programs. Therefore, the purpose of this study, based on bibliometric analysis and the use of VoSviewer software, is the quantitative process of growth and evolution of the research that has been published in the Web of Science database under the title of sustainable rural development from 1970 through 2023.
 
Methodology
To investigate the research process in the field of sustainable rural development during the period from 1970 to 2023 using the Latin term "sustainable rural development" and equivalent terms in the titles, author information, abstracts, keywords, place of publication of the article using operators Boolean was collected in WoS database. To avoid the problem of frequent database updates, all text retrieval and data loading were completed in one day (March 7, 2023). The database is the most authoritative and reliable indexing database in the world and is generally considered one of the most influential and popular databases for bibliometric analysis because it has the most significant number of articles published in indexed journals. At the same time, this database is the oldest indexing service of scientific publications, which by covering more than 12,000 scientific publications, can provide the most important and accurate research results in the field of scientometrics. To include papers published on the subject of the study, a restriction was made regarding the type of publication. By selecting only original articles, publication year from January 1, 1987 to March 7, 2023, and articles written in English, this study only included research articles in English for analysis. Other publications, such as reviews, editorial documents, and various abstracts, have been removed from the data by automatic filters to produce a specific output. As a result, data from 620 original articles published from 1997 to February 2023 were downloaded.
 
Results and discussion
The annual growth trend during the 10 years, from 1989 to 1998, can be called the period of stagnation in publishing articles on sustainable rural development. Also, the 14 years from 2010 to 2023 can be referred to as the period of continuous growth and prosperity of research related to sustainable rural development. The number of received citations also shows a clear upward trend over time. The growth rate of publications has also been positive in the last 14 years. The top countries active in sustainable rural development studies also show that most of the research works in sustainable rural development studies are concentrated in the territory of countries such as the United States of America and China. Areas such as ecology, environmental science, science technology, and business economics have the most published articles. This shows the importance of ecological studies of environmental sciences in sustainable rural development research. In the co-authorship analysis, things like the most co-authored co-authors and the analysis of the most co-authored countries were examined, and in the co-citation analysis, the authors' co-citation analysis was used to reveal the intellectual structure of the knowledge base in sustainable rural development studies and the co-citation analysis. The most powerful references that identify active areas and identify research gaps in the field of research literature were discussed. In addition, by analyzing the strongest co-citation publications, the co-citation network of journals in the field of sustainable rural development was identified and through the frequency of citations, the most influential journals in the field of research literature were identified.
The citation analysis of the most cited organizations in the Publication of research related to sustainable rural development, out of 941 organizations, identified 5 highly cited organizations. The Chinese Academy of Sciences, with 12 articles, received 374 citations and 7 total link power as the most cited organization in the Publication of research related to sustainable rural development. In the citation analysis of sources, there were 290 sources or publications related to the Publication of sustainable rural development research, among which 20 sources were among the most cited publications related to sustainable rural development research. With 102 articles, 47 total link power, and 1451 citations, Sustainability magazine was the best journal in terms of total link power. This journal, with the highest number of links, is the most important in publishing research related to sustainable rural development. The citation analysis of highly cited authors also shows that out of a total of 1898 authors, there are 24 with the highest total linking power. It is interesting to note that most authors cited are from China. Citation analysis of highly cited countries also shows that out of 95 countries producing publications related to sustainable rural development research, 43 countries are highly cited for producing 5 or more articles.
 
Conclusion
The simultaneous analysis of the repeated keywords of the authors shows that the research on sustainable rural development can be categorized into eight clusters as sustainable development, rural development, community development, rural economy, rural tourism, agriculture, and sustainability. The perspective of future studies of sustainable rural development, which can be obtained from the overlapping analysis of the authors' keywords and the average year of publication of these words, shows that things such as rural revitalization, urbanization, sustainable development goals, and entrepreneurship are the most recent keywords, which in recent years have entered into discussions related to sustainable rural development.
 
Funding
There is no funding support.
 
Authors’ Contribution
The first two authors each contributed 45% and the third author contributed 10% to the conceptualization and writing of the paper. All authors approved the content of the manuscript and agreed on all aspects of the work statement of interest to none competitor.
 
Conflict of Interest
The authors declared no conflict of interest.
 
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to all the scientific consultants of this paper.
A B S T R A C T
In recent years, issues such as the green economy, reducing poverty and creating an international framework have received more attention. However, no study has been done on the issue of sustainable rural development from the perspective of scientific analysis. The study's main aim is to use the bibliometric method to analyze the literature related to sustainable rural development research in the WoS database from April 1970 to November 2023. Also, it uses VOSviewer software to graphically map the bibliographic coupling of the countries, co-citations, and co-occurrence of the authors' keywords. In total, 19,480 authors, 941 organizations, 290 publications, and 95 countries have contributed to the publication of 620 scientific articles related to sustainable rural development research. According to research findings, among the countries, China, the United States, Spain, Romania, and the United Kingdom are the most productive and leading in publishing articles in this field. The results showed that the ecology of environmental sciences, with 316 articles and 44.8% of the volume of articles, is the most decisive research field. The analysis of sustainable rural development research has been significantly increasing compared to 36 years ago, and the results emphasize the significant growth of sustainable rural development research over time. Simultaneously, the perspective of future studies of sustainable rural development resulting from the overlapping analysis of authors' keywords and the average year of publication shows that things like rural revitalization, urbanization, sustainable development goals, and entrepreneurship are the most recent keywords that are used during in recent years, they have entered into discussions related to sustainable rural development.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Abdullah, S. & Khan, M. N. (2021). Determining mobile payment adoption: A systematic literature search and bibliometric analysis. Cogent Business & Management, 8, 1893245. DOI: 10.1080/23311975.2021.1893245.
  2. Adenidji, E. M. C., & Özçatalbaş, O. (2022). Rural Tourism and Sustainable Development: A Bibliometric Analysis. Uluslararası Kırsal Turizm Ve Kalkınma Dergisi (IRTAD) E-ISSN: 2602-4462, 5(2). Retrieved from https://turizmvekalkinma.org/index.php/irtadjournal/article/view/498.
  3. Alipour, O., Soheili, F., Ziaei, S., & Khasseh, A. A. (2021). Known and Hidden Relationships of Knowledge Organization Research in the World: a Co-Citation Analysis. Library and Information Science Research, 11(2), 20-43. https://doi.org/10.22067/infosci.2021.24196.0 [In Persian].
  4. Ashley, C. & Maxwell, S. (2001). Rethinking Rural Development. Development Policy Review, 19: 395-425. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-7679.00141.
  5. Badri, S. A., Tahmasbi, S., & Hajari, B. (2021). Scientometrics Approach to Disaster Resilience Studies in Iran. Journal of Spatial Analysis Environmental Hazards, 8 (3), 33-52. doi: 10.52547/jsaeh.8.3.33 [In Persian].
  6. Bircan, T., & Salah, A. A. A. (2022). A Bibliometric Analysis of the Use of Artificial Intelligence Technologies for Social Sciences. Mathematics, 10(23), 4398. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10234398.
  7. Brian, R., Keeble, B., & Mbbs, M. (1988). The Brundtland report: ‘Our common future’. Medicine and War, 4(1), 17-25, https://doi.org/10.1080/07488008808408783
  8. Caputo, A., Pizzi, S., Pellegrini, M., & Dabic, M. (2021). Digitalization and business models: Where are we going? A science map of the field. Journal of Business Research, 123, 489–501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.053.
  9. Cazorla-Montero, A., & De los Ríos-Carmenado, I. (2023). From “Putting the Last First” to “Working with People” in Rural Development Planning: A Bibliometric Analysis of 50 Years of Research. Sustainability, 15(13), 10117. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310117.
  10. Cisneros, L., Ibanescu, M., Keen, C. et al. (2018). Bibliometric study of family business succession between 1939 and 2017: mapping and analyzing authors’ networks. Scientometrics, 117, 919–951. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2889-1.
  11. Cobo, M. J. (2011). An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the fuzzy sets’ theory field. Journal of informetrics, 5, 146-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.002.
  12. Cobo, M. J. (2015). 25 years at knowledge-based systems: a bibliometric analysis, Knowledge-based systems, 80, 3-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2014.12.035.
  13. Cristina, B. (2023). Bibliometric analysis of sustainable business performance: where are we going? A science map of the field. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 36(1), 2137-2176. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2022.2096094.
  14. Danialy S, Naghshineh N. (2014). Co-citation map of outstanding authors in the field of image retrieval. CJS, 1 (2), 66-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.22088/acadpub.BUMS.1.2.66.
  15. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., & Pattnaik, D. (2020). Forty-five years of Journal of Business Research: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Business Research, 109, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.10.039.
  16. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of business research, 133, 285-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070.
  17. Douk T., Maria E. & Falikhatun, H. (2022). Bibliometric Analysis of Rural Tourism and Sustainable Development Goals. Journal of Pendidikan Ekonomi, 10(2), 437-451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2020.10.006.
  18. Esengulova, N., Carella, M. M., & Lopolito, A. (2023). Stakeholder Empowerment in Sustainable Rural Development Partnerships: Two Case Studies from Italy. Sustainability, 15(8), 6977. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15086977.
  19. Eyre-Walker, A., & Stoletzki, N. (2013). The Assessment of Science: The Relative Merits of Post-Publication Review, the Impact Factor, and the Number of Citations. PLoS Biol 11(10): e1001675. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001675.
  20. Feng, J., Zhang, Y.Q. & Zhang, H. (2017). Improving the co-word analysis method based on semantic distance. Scientometrics, 111, 1521–1531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2286-1.
  21. Forkuor, D., Korah, A. (2023). NGOs and sustainable rural development: experience from Upper West Region of Ghana. Environ Dev Sustain, 25, 351–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-02057-w.
  22. Franceschet, M., & Costantini, A. (2010). The effect of scholar collaboration on impact and quality of academic papers. Journal of informetrics, 4(4), 540-553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.06.003.
  23. Ge, B., Wang, C., & Song, Y. (2023). Ecosystem Services Research in Rural Areas: A Systematic Review Based on Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability, 15(6), 5082. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15065082.
  24. Gibbens, M., & Cilliers, J. (2023). ECD centres as change catalysts in sustainable rural livelihood development: Griekwastad, South Africa, as case study. Environ Dev Sustain 25, 8857–8875. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02333-3.
  25. Guo, X. (2022). A bibliometric analysis of child language during 1900–2021. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 862042. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.862042.
  26. Guo, X.-R., Li, X., & Guo, Y.-M. (2021). Mapping Knowledge Domain Analysis in Smart Education Research. Sustainability, 13(23), 13234. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313234.
  27. Haggblade, S., Hazell, P., & Reardon, T. (2010). The rural non-farm economy: Prospects for growth and poverty reduction. World Development, 38(10), 1429-1441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2009.06.008.
  28. Hariri, N., & Nikzad, M. (2011). Co-authorship networks in Iranian library and information science articles, psychology, management, and economics in the ISI database between 2000 and 2009. Journal of Information Processing and Management, 26(4), 825-844. [In Persian].
  29. Hjørland, B. (2013). Facet analysis: The logical approach to knowledge organisation. Information processing & management, 49 (2), 545-557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2012.10.001.
  30. Hong, R., Liu, H., & Xiang, C. (2020). Visualization and analysis of mapping knowledge domain of oxidation studies of sulfide ores. Environ Sci Pollut Res, 27, 5809–5824. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-07226-z.
  31. Hossain, M., Park, S., & Shahid, S. (2023). Frugal innovation for sustainable rural development. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 193, 122662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122662.
  32. Huang, T., & Huang, Q. (2023). Research on Agricultural and Rural Public Governance and Sustainable Development: Evidence from 2350 Data. Sustainability, 15(10), 7876. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15107876.
  33. Ibănescu, B.-C., Stoleriu, O. M., Munteanu, A., & Iațu, C. (2018). The Impact of Tourism on Sustainable Development of Rural Areas: Evidence from Romania. Sustainability, 10(10), 3529. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103529.
  34. Izquierdo-Gascón, M., & Rubio-Gil, Á. (2023). A theoretical approach to Api-tourism routes as a paradigm of sustainable and regenerative rural development. Journal of Apicultural Research, 62(4), 751-766. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218839.2022.2079285.
  35. Jati, H. (2023). Bibliometric Analysis of Human Resource Management Research in the Field of Health Services during the COVID-19 Pandemic: 2019-2023 Study. International Journal of Economics and Management Review, 1(3), 30–42. https://doi.org/10.58765/ijemr.v1i3.121
  36. Kessler, M. M. (1963). Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. American documentation, 14(1), 10-25. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.5090140103.
  37. Khan, A. S., Ur Rehman, S., AlMaimouni, Y. K., Ahmad, S., Khan, M., & Ashiq, M. (2020). Bibliometric Analysis of Literature Published on Antibacterial Dental Adhesive from 1996–2020. Polymers, 12(12), 2848. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12122848.
  38. Khodamoradpour, M. and zanganeh, M. (2019). Investigating the Components of Rural Sustainable Development: Challenges and Solutions. Geography and Human Relationships, 2(2), 186-199.  [In Persian].
  39. Kim, H. J., Jeong, Y. K., & Song, M. (2016). Content-and proximity-based author co-citation analysis using citation sentences. Journal of Informetrics, 10(4), 954-966. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.07.007.
  40. Knapczyk, A., Francik, S., Pedryc, N., & Hebda, T. (2018). Bibliometric Analysis of Research trends in Engineering for Rural Development. Jelgava, 23, 700-707. http://dx.doi.org/10.22616/ERDev2018.17.N389.
  41. Lee, Y. F., & Kind, M. (2021). Reducing poverty and inequality in rural areas: key to inclusive development. https://doi.org/10.18356/27081990-106.
  42. Leeuwis, C. (2000). Reconceptualizing Participation for Sustainable Rural Development: Towards a Negotiation Approach. Development and Change, 31, 931-959. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-7660.00184.
  43. Leung, X. Y., Sun, J., & Bai, B. (2017). Bibliometrics of social media research: A co-citation and co-word analysis. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 66, 35-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.06.012.
  44. Li, C., Ojeda-Thies, C., Renz, N., Margaryan, D., Perka, C., & Trampuz, A. (2020). The global state of clinical research and trends in periprosthetic joint infection: A bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Infectious Diseases, 96, 696-709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.05.014.
  45. Li, H., An, H., Wang, Y., Huang, J., & Gao, X. (2016). Evolutionary features of academic articles co-keyword network and keywords co-occurrence network: Based on two-mode affiliation network. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 450, 657-669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2016.01.017.
  46. Li, X., Liu, J., Jia, J., & Yang, H. (2022). Relationship between multifunctionality and rural sustainable development: Insights from 129 counties of the Sichuan Province, China. Chinese Journal of Population, Resources and Environment, 20(3), 285-294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjpre.2022.09.010.
  47. Li, Y., Chen, N., Sullivan, A., Chen, S., & Qin, X. (2023). Changing collaborative networks and transitions in rural sustainable development: qualitative lessons from three villages in China. Ecology and Society, 28(4). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-14249-280402.
  48. Lima, C.O., & Bonetti, J. (2020). Bibliometric analysis of the scientific production on coastal communities’ social vulnerability to climate change and to the impact of extreme events. Nat Hazards 102, 1589–1610. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-020-03974-1.
  49. Liu, L., Cao, C., & Song, W. (2023). Bibliometric Analysis in the Field of Rural Revitalization: Current Status, Progress and Prospects. International Journal of Environmental Research & Public Health, No. 20, 823. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010823.
  50. Liu, C., Liu, Z., Zhang, Z., Li, Y., Fang, R., Li, F., & Zhang, J. (2020). A scientometric analysis and visualization of research on Parkinson’s disease associated with pesticide exposure. Front Public Health 8, 91. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.00091.
  51. Liu, Y., & Li, Y. (2017). Revitalize the world’s countryside. Nature 548, 275–277. https://doi.org/10.1038/548275a.
  52. Liu, Y., Mai, F. & MacDonald, C. (2019).A Big-Data Approach to Understanding the Thematic Landscape of the Field of Business Ethics, 1982–2016. J Bus Ethics 160, 127–150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3806-5.
  53. López-Bonilla, A. (2020). Golf tourism and sustainability: Content analysis and directions for future research. Sustainability, 12, 3616. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093616.
  54. Lu, H., Zhang, W., & Diao, B. (2023). The progress and trend of pro-environmental behaviour research: a bibliometrics-based visualisation analysis. Curr Psychol 42, 6912–6932, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01809-1.
  55. Lu, Y. & Timo de Vries, W. (2021). A Bibliometric and Visual Analysis of Rural Development Research. Sustainability, 13, 6136. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116136.
  56. MacRoberts, M. H., & MacRoberts, B. R. (2018). The mismeasure of science: Citation analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 69(3), 474-482. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23970.
  57. Mollabagher, M., Hassanzadeh, A., Sepehri, M. M., Habib Elahi, A. & Sarabadani, A. (2024). Bibliometric analysis of scientific research streams related to the development of the health care system in the PubMed citation database. Medicine and Purification, 33(1), 49-64. [In Persian].
  58. Muñoz, P., Janssen, F., Nicolopoulou, K. & Hockerts, K. (2018). Advancing sustainable entrepreneurship through substantive research, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 24 (2), 322-332. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-03-2018-427.
  59. Nobakht, Y. (2024). Bibliometric Analysis of Studies in the Policy-Making Field of Facing the COVID-19 Crisis in Iran. Journal of Knowledge-Research Studies, 3(2), 75-91. https://doi.org/10.22034/jkrs.2024.62284.1091[In Persian].
  60. Norris, M.; Oppenheim, C. (2007). Comparing alternatives to the web of science for coverage of the social sciences’ literature. J. Informetr, 1, 161–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2006.12.001.
  61. Pašakarnis, G., & Maliene, V. (2010). Towards sustainable rural development in Central and Eastern Europe: Applying land consolidation. Land use policy, 27(2), 545-549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.07.008.
  62. Pieters, R., & Baumgartner, H. (2002). Who talks to whom? Intra-and interdisciplinary communication of economics journals. Journal of Economic Literature, 40(2), 483-509. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.40.2.483.
  63. Pugliese, P. (2001). Organic farming and sustainable rural development: A multifaceted and promising convergence. Sociologia ruralis, 41(1), 112-130. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9523.00172.
  64. Purvis, B., Mao, Y. & Robinson, D. (2019). Three pillars of sustainability: in search of conceptual origins. Sustain Sci, 14, 681–695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0627-5.
  65. Qiang, Y., Tao, X., Gou, X., Lang, Z., & Liu, H. (2022). Towards a Bibliometric Mapping of Network Public Opinion Studies. Information, 13(1), 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/info13010017.
  66. Ravikumar, S., Agrahari, A. & Singh, S.N. (2015). Mapping the intellectual structure of scientometrics: a co-word analysis of the journal Scientometrics (2005–2010). Scientometrics 102, 929–955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1402-8.
  67. Ribeiro-Navarrete, S., Piñeiro-Chousa, J., & López-Cabarcos, M.Á. (2022). Crowdlending: mapping the core literature and research frontiers. Rev Manag Sci, 16, 2381–2411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-021-00491-8.
  68. Romo-Fernández, L.M., Guerrero-Bote, V.P. & Moya-Anegón, F. (2013). Co-word based thematic analysis of renewable energy (1990–2010). Scientometrics, 97, 743–765. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1009-5.
  69. Rossetto, D.E., Bernardes, R.C., & Borini, F.M. (2018). Structure and evolution of innovation research in the last 60 years: review and future trends in the field of business through the citations and co-citations analysis. Scientometrics, 115, 1329–1363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2709-7.
  70. Saputro, K. E. A., Hasim, Karlinasari, L., & Beik, I. S. (2023). Evaluation of Sustainable Rural Tourism Development with an Integrated Approach Using MDS and ANP Methods: Case Study in Ciamis, West Java, Indonesia. Sustainability, 15(3), 1835. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15031835.
  71. Sattra M. P., Jirarat P. S., Pak W., Rung W., Panya, W. A. L., & Chonlathi P. (2023). Bibliometric analysis of Thai journals indexed in Scopus. Journal of the Library Association of Thailand, 67(1), 177-198. https://so06.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/tla_bulletin/article/view/260267.
  72. Serrano, L., Sianes, A., & Ariza-Montes, A. (2019). Using Bibliometric Methods to Shed Light on the Concept of Sustainable Tourism. Sustainability, 11(24), 6964. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11246964.
  73. Shahid, M. S., Hossain, M., Shahid, S., & Anwar, T. (2023). Frugal innovation as a source of sustainable entrepreneurship to tackle social and environmental challenges. Journal of Cleaner Production, 406, 137050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137050.
  74. Singh, S. and Bharti, N. (2023). Geographical Indication and Rural Sustainable Development: A Bibliometric Analysis. AABFJ, 17(1), 32-50. http://dx.doi.org/10.14453/aabfj.v17i1.03.
  75. Sivakumar, M. V. K., Gommes, R., & Baier, W. (2000). Agrometeorology and sustainable agriculture. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 103(1-2), 11-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1923(00)00115-5.
  76. Small, H. (1999) Visualizing science by citation mapping. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 50(9): 799–813. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(1999)50:9%3C799::AID-ASI9%3E3.0.CO;2-G.
  77. Small, H. (1973). Co-citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24(4), 265–269. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630240406
  78. Soheili, F., Osare, F. and Farajpahlou, A. (2013). Analysis of the structure of social networks co-authored by information science researchers. Journal of Information Processing and Management, 29(1), 191-210. https://doi.org/ 10.35050/JIPM010.2013.008[In Persian].
  79. Stremersch, S., Verniers, I., & Verhoef, P. C. (2007). The quest for citations: Drivers of article impact. Journal of Marketing, 71(3), 171-193. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.71.3.171.
  80. Suban, S.A. (2023), "Bibliometric analysis on wellness tourism – citation and co-citation analysis". International Hospitality Review, 37 (2), 359-383. https://doi.org/10.1108/IHR-11-2021-0072.
  81. Surwase, G., Sagar, A., Kademani, B. S., & Bhanumurthy, K. (2011). Co-citation analysis: An overview. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Anil-Sagar/publication/277119876.
  82. Tang, F., Dai, W.B., & Li, X.L. (2021). Publication trends and hot spots in femo-roacetabular impingement research: a 20-year bibliometric analysis. J. Arthroplasty, 36, 2698–707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2021.03.019.
  83. Tomislav, K. (2018). The concept of sustainable development: From its beginning to the contemporary issues. Zagreb International Review of Economics & Business, 21(1), 67-94. https://doi.org/10.2478/zireb-2018-0005.
  84. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. (2021). World Social Report Reconsidering Rural Development. New York, NY: United Nations. https://www.un.org/development/desa/dspd/world-social-report/2021-2.html.
  85. Van Eck, N. J. & Waltman, L. (2017). Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer, Scientometrics, 111(2), 1053–1070, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2300-7.
  86. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer programfor bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84, 523–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3.
  87. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2014). Visualising bibliometric networks. In Ding Y., Rousseau R., Wolfram D. (Eds.), measuring scholarly impact: Methods and practice (pp. 285–320). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10377-8_13.
  88. Van Eck, N. J., Waltman, L., Dekker, R., and van den Berg, J. (2010). A comparison of two techniques for bibliometric mapping: multidimensional scaling and VOS. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 61, 2405–2416. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21421.
  89. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2009). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84, 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3.
  90. Waltman, L., Van Eck, N. J., & Noyons, E. C. M. (2010). A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks. J. Informet, 4, 629–635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.07.002.
  91. Wang, H.; Liu, H.; Yao, J.Y.; Ye, D.; Lang, Z.; Glowacz, A. (2021). Mapping the knowledge domains of new energy vehicle safety: Informetrics analysis-based studies. J. Energy Storage, 35, 102275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2021.102275.
  92. Wang, J., & Liu, Z. (2014). A bibliometric analysis on rural studies in human geography and related disciplines. Scientometrics, 101, 39–59 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1388-2.
  93. Weinberg, B. H. (1974). Bibliographic coupling: A review. Information Storage and Retrieval, 10(5-6), 189-196. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-0271(74)90058-8.
  94. Wellbrock, W., Roep, D., Mahon, M., Kairyte, E., Nienaber, B., García, M. D. D., & Farrell, M. (2013). Arranging public support to unfold collaborative modes of governance in rural areas. Journal of rural studies, 32, 420-429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2013.10.002.
  95. Widomski, M. K., & Musz-Pomorska, A. (2023). Sustainable Development of Rural Areas in Poland since 2004 in the Light of Sustainability Indicators. Land, 12(2), 508. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12020508.
  96. Xia, DM. Wang, XR. Zhou, PY. et al. (2021). Research progress of heat stroke during 1989–2019: a bibliometric analysis. Military Med Res, 8, 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40779-021-00300-z.
  97. Xia, Q.; Yan, S.; Li, H.; Duan, K.; Zhang, Y. (2022). A Bibliometric Analysis of Knowledge-Hiding Research. Behav. Sci., 12, 122. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12050122.
  98. Yao H, Wan J, Wang C, Li L, Wang J, Li Y, Huang W, Zeng J, Wang Q, Yuan C. (2018). Bibliometric analysis of research on the role of intestinal microbiota in obesity. PeerJ 6: e5091 https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.5091.
  99. Yin, Y.C., Ahmed, J., Nee, A.Y.H. et al. (2023). The rural consumer adoption of sustainable energy: a PLS-SEM-ANN approach of conceptual model development and cross-country validation of Pakistan and Malaysia. Environ Sci Pollut Res, 30, 5881–5902. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-22271-x.
  100. Yu, S., & Mu, Y. (2022). Sustainable Agricultural Development Assessment: A Comprehensive Review and Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability, 14(19), 11824. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141911824.
  101. Yuan, B. Z., Bie, Z. L., & Sun, J. (2021). Bibliometric analysis of cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.) research publications from the horticulture category based on the Web of Science. HortScience, 56(11), 1304-1314. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI16083-21.
  102. Yuheng Li, Hans W., & Liu, W. (2019). Why some rural areas decline while some others do not: An overview of rural evolution in the world. Journal of Rural Studies, 68, 135-143, ISSN 0743-0167, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.03.003.
  103. Zhang, X., Wang, C., & Zhao, H. (2021). A bibliometric analysis of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) research from 2010 to 2019. Ann Palliat Med, 10(4), 3750-3762. http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/apm-20-2050.
  104. Zhang, Y., Yao, J., & Li, W. (2023). Global research trends and hotspots in pharmaceutical care: a bibliometric analysis and visualisation using CiteSpace and VOSviewer. European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy. https://doi.org/10.1136/ejhpharm-2022-003617.
  105. Zhang, C., Fang, Y., Chen, X., & Congshan, T. (2019). Bibliometric Analysis of Trends in Global Sustainable Livelihood Research. Sustainability, 11(4), 1150. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11041150.
  106. Zhang, Q., Kim, E., Yang, C. & Cao, F. (2023). Rural revitalization: a sustainable strategy for the development of the cultural landscape of traditional villages through optimized IPA approach", Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, 13 (1), 66-86. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCHMSD-09-2020-0130.
  107. Zhao, X. (2017). A scientometric review of global BIM research: analysis and visualization. Autom. Constr, 80, 37–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2017.04.002.
  108. Zupic I, Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629.
Journal of Rural Research
Volume 16, Issue 1
April 2025
Pages 1-20

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 24 November 2024
  • Revise Date: 03 March 2025
  • Accept Date: 27 March 2025

Share

How to cite

Statistics