IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v59y2015icp47-55.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Community forestry research in Canada: A bibliometric perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Bullock, Ryan
  • Lawler, Julia

Abstract

A bibliometric analysis of community forestry research outputs in Canada was undertaken to 1) better understand the current status as well as spatial and temporal trends in research published in peer-reviewed journals, 2) identify gaps in the research literature, and 3) provide baseline data to inform future research. For each publication, information on several core metrics was gathered, for example: (i) year of publication, (ii) number of authors, (iii) author affiliation, (iv) gender and role, (v) journal title, (vi) citation count and (vii) keywords. Temporal and spatial trends were analysed to detect periods of heightened activity and geographical focus. Using a systematic and comprehensive approach we identified 85 papers published in peer-reviewed journals between 1935 and 2014. Research output during WWII and 1990 onwards corresponds with the implementation of provincial policy and programs initiated for conservation, economic development, and to resolve social unrest. Notably, most papers analysed originated from social science research, particularly geography, and not forestry or the biophysical sciences presenting a clear disciplinary gap. Findings portray the temporal, spatial, and thematic evolution of community forestry research and policy in Canada.

Suggested Citation

  • Bullock, Ryan & Lawler, Julia, 2015. "Community forestry research in Canada: A bibliometric perspective," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 47-55.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:59:y:2015:i:c:p:47-55
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2015.05.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934115300083
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2015.05.009?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. Anton J. Nederhof, 2006. "Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the Social Sciences and the Humanities: A Review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 66(1), pages 81-100, January.
    2. Castro e Silva, Manuela & Teixeira, Aurora A.C., 2011. "A bibliometric account of the evolution of EE in the last two decades: Is ecological economics (becoming) a post-normal science?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(5), pages 849-862, March.
    3. Olle Persson & Wolfgang Glänzel & Rickard Danell, 2004. "Inflationary bibliometric values: The role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 60(3), pages 421-432, August.
    4. Glenn Ellison, 2002. "Evolving Standards for Academic Publishing: A q-r Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(5), pages 994-1034, October.
    5. Anthony F. J. van Raan, 2005. "Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 62(1), pages 133-143, January.
    6. Leipold, Sina, 2014. "Creating forests with words — A review of forest-related discourse studies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 12-20.
    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. Ryan Bullock & Denis Kirchhoff & Ian Mauro & Morrissa Boerchers, 2018. "Indigenous capacity for collaboration in Canada’s energy, forestry and mining sectors: research metrics and trends," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 883-895, April.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Hua Qin & Martha Bass & Jessica D. Ulrich-Schad & David Matarrita-Cascante & Christine Sanders & Barituka Bekee, 2020. "Community, Natural Resources, and Sustainability: Overview of an Interdisciplinary and International Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-14, February.

    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. Ryan Bullock & Denis Kirchhoff & Ian Mauro & Morrissa Boerchers, 2018. "Indigenous capacity for collaboration in Canada’s energy, forestry and mining sectors: research metrics and trends," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 883-895, April.
    2. Young-Sun Jang & Young Joo Ko, 2019. "How latecomers catch up to leaders in high-energy physics as Big Science: transition from national system to international collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 437-480, April.
    3. Guillermo Armando Ronda-Pupo & Carlos Díaz-Contreras & Guillermo Ronda-Velázquez & Jorge Carlos Ronda-Pupo, 2015. "The role of academic collaboration in the impact of Latin-American research on management," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1435-1454, February.
    4. Mingers, John & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2015. "A review of theory and practice in scientometrics," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(1), pages 1-19.
    5. Brenda Cheang & Chongshou Li & Andrew Lim & Zhenzhen Zhang, 2015. "Identifying patterns and structural influences in the scientific communication of business knowledge," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(1), pages 159-189, April.
    6. Rabishankar Giri & Sabuj Kumar Chaudhuri, 2021. "Ranking journals through the lens of active visibility," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 2189-2208, March.
    7. Domingo Docampo & Lawrence Cram, 2019. "Highly cited researchers: a moving target," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 1011-1025, March.
    8. Abramo, Giovanni & D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea & Di Costa, Flavia, 2021. "The scholarly impact of private sector research: A multivariate analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    9. Justus Haucap & Johannes Muck, 2015. "What drives the relevance and reputation of economics journals? An update from a survey among economists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(3), pages 849-877, June.
    10. Ramón A. Feenstra & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2022. "Philosophers’ appraisals of bibliometric indicators and their use in evaluation: from recognition to knee-jerk rejection," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 2085-2103, April.
    11. Eric, Van den Steen, 2002. "Skill or Luck? Biases of Rational Agents," Working papers 4255-02, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    12. Walters, William H., 2017. "Do subjective journal ratings represent whole journals or typical articles? Unweighted or weighted citation impact?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 730-744.
    13. van der Hoff, Richard & Rajão, Raoni & Leroy, Pieter & Boezeman, Daan, 2015. "The parallel materialization of REDD+ implementation discourses in Brazil," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 37-45.
    14. Charness, Gary & Corominas-Bosch, Margarida & Frechette, Guillaume R., 2007. "Bargaining and network structure: An experiment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 28-65, September.
    15. Olle Persson & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2014. "Discouraging honorific authorship," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1417-1419, February.
    16. Brogaard, Jonathan & Engelberg, Joseph & Parsons, Christopher A., 2014. "Networks and productivity: Causal evidence from editor rotations," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(1), pages 251-270.
    17. Mehdi Rhaiem & Nabil Amara, 2020. "Determinants of research efficiency in Canadian business schools: evidence from scholar-level data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 53-99, October.
    18. M. Ausloos, 2013. "A scientometrics law about co-authors and their ranking: the co-author core," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(3), pages 895-909, June.
    19. Daraio, Cinzia & Bonaccorsi, Andrea & Simar, Léopold, 2015. "Rankings and university performance: A conditional multidimensional approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(3), pages 918-930.
    20. Sándor Soós & Zsófia Vida & András Schubert, 2018. "Long-term trends in the multidisciplinarity of some typical natural and social sciences, and its implications on the SSH versus STM distinction," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 795-822, March.

    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:59:y:2015:i:c:p:47-55. 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.