IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v120y2020ics1389934119304678.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Four decades of innovation research in forestry and the forest-based industries – A systematic literature review

Author

Listed:
  • Weiss, Gerhard
  • Ludvig, Alice
  • Živojinović, Ivana

Abstract

This article conducts a systematic literature review of journal articles on innovation in forestry and forest-based industries. We include international, English language, peer-reviewed research articles included in the scientific databases Scopus and Web of Science since the 1980s. Our search for articles that specifically mention “innovation/innovativeness” and “forest/wood/timber” from a social science perspective resulted in 230 studies. Our analysis provides a quantitative overview of institutional contexts, science fields, methods, and topical orientations. On the basis of qualitative content analyses, we also describe the historical development of the research field, summarize the main insights for the central research themes on firm and system levels, and illustrate the state-of-knowledge for selected innovation fields. We conclude with research trends and gaps with regard to the applied research approaches and methods. Overall, the established concepts and approaches from innovation research are well received in forest sector innovation studies, although newer trends could be taken up more progressively. The analysed articles apply various quantitative and qualitative methods and are dominated by country and (sub-)sectoral case studies. A greater variety of methods could enrich the knowledge base and a stronger application of comparative analyses across countries and sectors could substantiate previous findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Weiss, Gerhard & Ludvig, Alice & Živojinović, Ivana, 2020. "Four decades of innovation research in forestry and the forest-based industries – A systematic literature review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:120:y:2020:i:c:s1389934119304678
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102288
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934119304678
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102288?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Feliciano, D. & Blagojević, D. & Böhling, K. & Hujala, T. & Lawrence, A. & Lidestav, G. & Ludvig, A. & Turner, T. & Weiss, G. & Zivojinovic, I., 2019. "Learning about forest ownership and management issues in Europe while travelling: The Travellab approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 32-42.
    2. Jan Inge Jenssen & Erlend Nybakk, 2013. "Inter-Organizational Networks And Innovation In Small, Knowledge-Intensive Firms: A Literature Review," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(02), pages 1-27.
    3. Rennings, Klaus, 2000. "Redefining innovation -- eco-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 319-332, February.
    4. Nelson, Richard R. & Winter, Sidney G., 1993. "In search of useful theory of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 108-108, April.
    5. Philippe Mongeon & Adèle Paul-Hus, 2016. "The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(1), pages 213-228, January.
    6. Nijnik, Maria & Nijnik, Anatoliy & Sarkki, Simo & Muñoz-Rojas, Jose & Miller, David & Kopiy, Serhiy, 2018. "Is forest related decision-making in European treeline areas socially innovative? A Q-methodology enquiry into the perspectives of international experts," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 210-219.
    7. Bryan Campbell, 2010. "Environment And Sustainable Development," CIRANO Papers 2010n-04speciala, CIRANO.
    8. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    9. Gomes, Leonardo Augusto de Vasconcelos & Facin, Ana Lucia Figueiredo & Salerno, Mario Sergio & Ikenami, Rodrigo Kazuo, 2018. "Unpacking the innovation ecosystem construct: Evolution, gaps and trends," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 30-48.
    10. Lovrić, Marko & Lovrić, Nataša & Mavsar, Robert, 2020. "Mapping forest-based bioeconomy research in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gerhard Weiss & Alice Ludvig & Ivana Živojinović, 2023. "Embracing the Non-Wood Forest Products Potential for Bioeconomy—Analysis of Innovation Cases across Europe," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-20, January.
    2. Weiss, Gerhard & Hansen, Eric & Ludvig, Alice & Nybakk, Erlend & Toppinen, Anne, 2021. "Innovation governance in the forest sector: Reviewing concepts, trends and gaps," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    3. Štěrbová, Martina & Výbošťok, Jozef & Šálka, Jaroslav, 2021. "A classification of eco-innovators: Insights from the Slovak forestry service sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    4. Louda, Jiří & Dubová, Lenka & Špaček, Martin & Brnkaľáková, Stanislava & Kluvánková, Tatiana, 2023. "Factors affecting governance innovations for ecosystem services provision: Insights from two self-organized forest communities in Czechia and Slovakia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    5. Arnould, Maxence & Morel, Laure & Fournier, Meriem, 2022. "Embedding non-industrial private forest owners in forest policy and bioeconomy issues using a Living Lab concept," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    6. Callegari, Beniamino & Nybakk, Erlend, 2022. "Schumpeterian theory and research on forestry innovation and entrepreneurship: The state of the art, issues and an agenda," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    7. Fugeray-Scarbel, Aline & Irz, Xavier & Lemarié, Stéphane, 2023. "Innovation in forest tree genetics: A comparative economic analysis in the European context," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    8. Giurca, Alexandru & Befort, Nicolas, 2023. "Deconstructing substitution narratives: The case of bioeconomy innovations from the forest-based sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    9. Meinhold, Kathrin & Dumenu, William Kwadwo & Darr, Dietrich, 2022. "Connecting rural non-timber forest product collectors to global markets: The case of baobab (Adansonia digitata L.)," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    10. Dmuchowski, Wojciech & Baczewska-Dąbrowska, Aneta H. & Gworek, Barbara, 2024. "The role of temperate agroforestry in mitigating climate change: A review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    11. Mager, Elena & Iurato, Chiara & Schanz, Heiner, 2023. "Depicting wood-based sectors to inform policymaking: A structural modeling approach centering on networks of markets," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Weiss, Gerhard & Hansen, Eric & Ludvig, Alice & Nybakk, Erlend & Toppinen, Anne, 2021. "Innovation governance in the forest sector: Reviewing concepts, trends and gaps," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    2. Durán-Romero, Gemma & López, Ana M. & Beliaeva, Tatiana & Ferasso, Marcos & Garonne, Christophe & Jones, Paul, 2020. "Bridging the gap between circular economy and climate change mitigation policies through eco-innovations and Quintuple Helix Model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    3. Simon Zaby, 2019. "Science Mapping of the Global Knowledge Base on Microfinance: Influential Authors and Documents, 1989–2019," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-21, July.
    4. Jaspreet Kaur & Madhu Vij & Ajay Kumar Chauhan, 2023. "Signals influencing corporate credit ratings—a systematic literature review," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 50(1), pages 91-114, March.
    5. Turgut Karakose & Ibrahim Kocabas & Ramazan Yirci & Stamatios Papadakis & Tuncay Yavuz Ozdemir & Murat Demirkol, 2022. "The Development and Evolution of Digital Leadership: A Bibliometric Mapping Approach-Based Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-26, December.
    6. Pattarin Sanguankaew & Vichita Vathanophas Ractham, 2019. "Bibliometric Review of Research on Knowledge Management and Sustainability, 1994–2018," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-20, August.
    7. Philip Hallinger & Ray Wang, 2020. "The Evolution of Simulation-Based Learning Across the Disciplines, 1965–2018: A Science Map of the Literature," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 51(1), pages 9-32, February.
    8. Astrid Kainzbauer & Parisa Rungruang & Philip Hallinger, 2021. "How Does Research on Sustainable Human Resource Management Contribute to Corporate Sustainability: A Document Co-Citation Analysis, 1982–2021," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, October.
    9. Alexandra Gottinger & Luana Ladu & Rainer Quitzow, 2020. "Studying the Transition towards a Circular Bioeconomy—A Systematic Literature Review on Transition Studies and Existing Barriers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-25, October.
    10. Huixian Shen & Ivan Ka Wai Lai, 2022. "Souvenirs: A Systematic Literature Review (1981–2020) and Research Agenda," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, June.
    11. Emilio Abad-Segura & Alfonso Infante-Moro & Mariana-Daniela González-Zamar & Eloy López-Meneses, 2021. "Blockchain Technology for Secure Accounting Management: Research Trends Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(14), pages 1-26, July.
    12. Prattana Punnakitikashem & Philip Hallinger, 2019. "Bibliometric Review of the Knowledge Base on Healthcare Management for Sustainability, 1994–2018," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, December.
    13. Bao Hoang Nguyen & Robin C. Sickles & Valentin Zelenyuk, 2021. "What do we know from the vast literature on efficiency and productivity in healthcare? A Systematic Review and Bibliometric Analysis," CEPA Working Papers Series WP092021, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    14. Suparak Suriyankietkaew & Phallapa Petison, 2019. "A Retrospective and Foresight: Bibliometric Review of International Research on Strategic Management for Sustainability, 1991–2019," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-27, December.
    15. Celeste Vong & Paulo Rita & Nuno António, 2021. "Health-Related Crises in Tourism Destination Management: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-28, December.
    16. Yue Guiling & Siti Aisyah Panatik & Mohammad Saipol Mohd Sukor & Noraini Rusbadrol & Li Cunlin, 2022. "Bibliometric Analysis of Global Research on Organizational Citizenship Behavior From 2000 to 2019," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, February.
    17. Shome, Samik & Hassan, M. Kabir & Verma, Sushma & Panigrahi, Tushar Ranjan, 2023. "Impact investment for sustainable development: A bibliometric analysis," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 770-800.
    18. Saïd Echchakoui, 0. "Why and how to merge Scopus and Web of Science during bibliometric analysis: the case of sales force literature from 1912 to 2019," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    19. María Huertas González-Serrano & Vicente Añó Sanz & Rómulo Jacobo González-García, 2020. "Sustainable Sport Entrepreneurship and Innovation: A Bibliometric Analysis of This Emerging Field of Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-26, June.
    20. Joselyne Solórzano & Fernando Morante-Carballo & Néstor Montalván-Burbano & Josué Briones-Bitar & Paúl Carrión-Mero, 2022. "A Systematic Review of the Relationship between Geotechnics and Disasters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-31, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:120:y:2020:i:c:s1389934119304678. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.