IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v165y2024ics1389934124001047.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Geographical inequalities in global forest science: A bibliometric perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Boshoff, Nelius
  • Ngwenya, Similo
  • Koch, Susanne
  • Dudek, Jonathan
  • Strelnyk, Olena
  • Costas, Rodrigo
  • Uisso, Amani J.

Abstract

This bibliometric study is situated in the context of increasing awareness of inequalities in forest science. It was led by a single, core question: What geographical inequalities structure global forest science and how do they align with the natural geographical distribution of forest areas? Bourdieu's field theory was used to investigate the inequalities, focusing on three types of capital considered important for participation in global science: scientific capital (products of knowledge and acts of recognition), collaboration capital, and funding capital. To operationalise the types of capital for bibliometric analysis, eight regional-level indicators and seven country-level indicators were developed. The Dimensions database served as the data source to extract relevant publications in forest science from 2000 to 2021 based on the database's publication-level field classification. Forest-related research needs were determined using non-bibliometric data, specifically the extent of cover per region and country. This enabled the calculation of disparity ratios between the world shares of forest publications and the world shares of forests. The results highlight persisting inequalities in the distribution of different forms of capital in global science, as well as (mis)alignment with the geographical distribution of forest areas. While the Bourdieusian assumption that “capital breeds capital” seems to apply to two dominant regions (Europe and Northern America), explaining their continued centrality as loci of forest science, it does not seem to apply more generally. The study points to a mismatch between research foci and needs, which is concerning given the importance of place and context in forest science.

Suggested Citation

  • Boshoff, Nelius & Ngwenya, Similo & Koch, Susanne & Dudek, Jonathan & Strelnyk, Olena & Costas, Rodrigo & Uisso, Amani J., 2024. "Geographical inequalities in global forest science: A bibliometric perspective," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:165:y:2024:i:c:s1389934124001047
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103250
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124001047
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103250?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. Sutterlüty, Andrea & Šimunović, Nenad & Hesser, Franziska & Stern, Tobias & Schober, Andreas & Schuster, Kurt Christian, 2018. "Influence of the geographical scope on the research foci of sustainable forest management: Insights from a content analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 142-150.
    2. Ciarli, Tommaso & Ràfols, Ismael, 2019. "The relation between research priorities and societal demands: The case of rice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 949-967.
    3. D'Amato, D. & Korhonen-Kurki, K. & Lyytikainen, V. & Matthies, B.D. & Horcea-Milcu, A-I., 2022. "Circular bioeconomy: Actors and dynamics of knowledge co-production in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    4. Koch, Susanne & Matviichuk, Elena, 2021. "Patterns of inequality in global forest science conferences: An analysis of actors involved in IUFRO World Congresses with a focus on gender and geography," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    5. Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez & Cassidy R Sugimoto & Vincent Larivière, 2019. "Follow the leader: On the relationship between leadership and scholarly impact in international collaborations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-18, June.
    6. Maia Chankseliani, 2023. "Who funds the production of globally visible research in the Global South?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(1), pages 783-801, January.
    7. Koch, Susanne, 2017. "International influence on forest governance in Tanzania: Analysing the role of aid experts in the REDD+ process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 181-190.
    8. Soler, Rosina & Lorenzo, Cristian & González, Joel & Carboni, Lucas & Delgado, Juan & Díaz, Mayra & Toro Manríquez, Mónica D.R. & Alejandro, Huertas Herrera, 2021. "The politics behind scientific knowledge: Sustainable forest management in Latin America," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    9. Qinchang Gui & Chengliang Liu & Debin Du & Dezhong Duan, 2019. "The changing geography of global science," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 51(8), pages 1615-1617, November.
    10. Diego Kozlowski & Vincent Larivière & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Thema Monroe-White, 2022. "Intersectional inequalities in science," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 119(2), pages 2113067119-, January.
    11. Mohsen Fazeli-Varzaneh & Pete Bettinger & Erfan Ghaderi-Azad & Marcin Kozak & Davood Mafi-Gholami & Abolfazl Jaafari, 2021. "Forestry Research in the Middle East: A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-19, July.
    12. Anita Engels & Tina Ruschenburg, 2008. "The uneven spread of global science: Patterns of international collaboration in global environmental change research," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(5), pages 347-360, June.
    13. Mascarello, Júlia & Lehmann, Rosa & Giurca, Alexandru, 2024. "Bioeconomy science collaboration between Brazil and Germany – On equal footing?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    14. Sullivan, Abigail, 2022. "Bridging the divide between rural and urban community-based forestry: A bibliometric review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    15. Lovrić, Marko & Lovrić, Nataša & Mavsar, Robert, 2020. "Mapping forest-based bioeconomy research in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    16. Bullock, Ryan & Lawler, Julia, 2015. "Community forestry research in Canada: A bibliometric perspective," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 47-55.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Dezhong Duan & Qifan Xia, 2022. "From the United States to China? A trade perspective to reveal the structure and dynamics of global electronic‐telecommunications," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 823-847, June.
    2. Hoekman, Jarno & Rake, Bastian, 2024. "Geography of authorship: How geography shapes authorship attribution in big team science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(2).
    3. Andreas Bjurström & Merritt Polk, 2011. "Climate change and interdisciplinarity: a co-citation analysis of IPCC Third Assessment Report," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 525-550, June.
    4. Cuestas-Caza, Javier & Toledo, Lucía & Rodríguez, Fabricio, 2024. "Transcultural bioeconomy governance in a plurinational state: Sumak Kawsay and bio-based production in two Kichwa territories of Ecuador," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    5. Mauricio Alviar & Andrés García-Suaza & Laura Ramírez-Gómez & Simón Villegas-Velásquez, 2021. "Measuring the Contribution of the Bioeconomy: The Case of Colombia and Antioquia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-26, February.
    6. Anna-Lena Rüland & Nicolas Rüffin & Katharina Cramer & Prosper Ngabonziza & Manoj Saxena & Stefan Skupien, 2023. "Science diplomacy from the Global South: the case of intergovernmental science organizations," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(4), pages 782-793.
    7. Nenad Šimunović & Franziska Hesser & Tobias Stern, 2018. "Frame Analysis of ENGO Conceptualization of Sustainable Forest Management: Environmental Justice and Neoliberalism at the Core of Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, September.
    8. Xiaoyan Pan & Hui Wang & Zan Ouyang & Zifan Song & Hongjin Long & Wang Luo, 2022. "Scientometric Analysis on Rice Research under Drought, Waterlogging or Abrupt Drought-Flood Alternation Stress," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-15, September.
    9. Jie Zhang & Bindong Sun & Chuanyang Wang, 2024. "Interplay between Network Position and Knowledge Production of Cities in China Based on Patent Measurement," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-17, October.
    10. Tetere, Vineta & Peerlings, Jack & Dries, Liesbeth, 2023. "The forest-based bioeconomy in Latvia: economic and environmental importance," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 12(4), December.
    11. Guerrero, Jose E. & Hansen, Eric, 2021. "Company-level cross-sector collaborations in transition to the bioeconomy: A multi-case study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    12. Rachele Venanzi & Francesco Latterini & Walter Stefanoni & Damiano Tocci & Rodolfo Picchio, 2022. "Variations of Soil Physico-Chemical and Biological Features after Logging Using Two Different Ground-Based Extraction Methods in a Beech High Forest—A Case Study," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-14, March.
    13. Sandra Miguel & Claudia M. González & Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez, 2024. "Towards a new approach to analyzing the geographical scope of national research. An exploratory analysis at the country level," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(7), pages 3659-3679, July.
    14. 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).
    15. Chaocheng He & Jiang Wu & Qingpeng Zhang, 2021. "Characterizing research leadership on geographically weighted collaboration network," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 4005-4037, May.
    16. Zhou, Sifan & Chai, Sen & Freeman, Richard B., 2024. "Gender homophily: In-group citation preferences and the gender disadvantage," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(1).
    17. A. Velez-Estevez & P. García-Sánchez & J. A. Moral-Munoz & M. J. Cobo, 2022. "Why do papers from international collaborations get more citations? A bibliometric analysis of Library and Information Science papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7517-7555, December.
    18. Zurba, Melanie & Diduck, Alan P. & Sinclair, A. John, 2016. "First Nations and industry collaboration for forest governance in northwestern Ontario, Canada," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 1-10.
    19. Elomina, Jerbelle & Pülzl, Helga, 2021. "How are forests framed? An analysis of EU forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    20. Beland Lindahl, Karin & Sandström, Camilla & Sténs, Anna, 2017. "Alternative pathways to sustainability? Comparing forest governance models," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 69-78.

    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:165:y:2024:i:c:s1389934124001047. 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.