IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i10p1697-d1500604.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Knowledge Atlas of Cultivated Land Quality Evaluation Based on Web of Science Since the 21st Century (2000–2023)

Author

Listed:
  • Pingluo Xue

    (College of Land Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China)

  • Chongyang Shen

    (College of Land Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China)

  • Huaizhi Tang

    (College of Land Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China)

  • Yunjia Liu

    (College of Land Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China)

  • Yuanfang Huang

    (College of Land Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China)

Abstract

Cultivated land is the most important natural resource for human survival and development. The quality of cultivated land is closely related to grain output, and whether it can guarantee stable food supply is directly related to national food security. Cultivated land quality evaluation is an effective tool for understanding and mastering cultivated land quality. However, few studies have applied bibliometrics to quantitatively and systematically analyze this field. We used VOSviewer 1.6.19 and CiteSpace 6.3.1 software to visually analyze and construct 2478 documents related to cultivated land quality evaluation retrieved from the Web of Science core collection database from 2000 to 2023. Results show that cultivated land quality evaluation is still a popular research field. The collaboration ability among authors is weak and the distribution of institutions and countries publishing in this field is very uneven. In addition, the relevant research has been published in a variety of journals such as agriculture, environment, ecology, and computer technology. The research content is becoming more and more interdisciplinary. Keywords such as “Soil quality”, “Swat”, “Remote sensing”, “Heavy metals” and “Ecosystem services” have become hot topics in this field. In the future, it is necessary to further deepen the connotation of cultivated land quality, develop a long time series dynamic model of cultivated land quality evaluation and monitoring, and enhance the transformation of research results into practical applications.

Suggested Citation

  • Pingluo Xue & Chongyang Shen & Huaizhi Tang & Yunjia Liu & Yuanfang Huang, 2024. "Knowledge Atlas of Cultivated Land Quality Evaluation Based on Web of Science Since the 21st Century (2000–2023)," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-15, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:10:p:1697-:d:1500604
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/10/1697/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/10/1697/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Chaomei Chen, 2006. "CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 57(3), pages 359-377, February.
    3. Zhigao Liu & Yimei Yin & Weidong Liu & Michael Dunford, 2015. "Visualizing the intellectual structure and evolution of innovation systems research: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(1), pages 135-158, April.
    4. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2010. "Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 523-538, August.
    5. Tim Brody & Stevan Harnad & Leslie Carr, 2006. "Earlier Web usage statistics as predictors of later citation impact," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 57(8), pages 1060-1072, June.
    6. Alberto Martín-Martín & Mike Thelwall & Enrique Orduna-Malea & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2021. "Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 871-906, January.
    7. Mengmeng Tang & Cuiting Wang & Chunyang Ying & Shuai Mei & Tong Tong & Youhua Ma & Qiang Wang, 2023. "Research on Cultivated Land Quality Restriction Factors Based on Cultivated Land Quality Level Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-12, May.
    8. Fan Wang & Pengtao Zhang & Guijun Zhang & Jiahao Cui, 2023. "Agricultural Land Quality Evaluation and Utilization Zoning Based on the Production–Ecology–Health Dimension: A Case Study of Huanghua City," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-16, July.
    9. Carvalho, M.M. & Fleury, André & Lopes, Ana Paula, 2013. "An overview of the literature on technology roadmapping (TRM): Contributions and trends," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(7), pages 1418-1437.
    10. Alberto Martín-Martín & Mike Thelwall & Enrique Orduna-Malea & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2021. "Correction to: Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 907-908, January.
    11. Jianhui Dong & Wenju Yun & Kening Wu & Shaoshuai Li & Bingrui Liu & Qiaoyuan Lu, 2023. "Spatio-Temporal Analysis of Cultivated Land from 2010 to 2020 in Long’an County, Karst Region, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-22, February.
    12. Jie Liang & Huihui Zheng & Zhaoyang Cai & Yimin Zhou & Yan Xu, 2022. "Evaluation of Cultivated Land Quality in Semiarid Sandy Areas: A Case Study of the Horqin Zuoyihou Banner," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, September.
    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. Dušan Nikolić & Dragan Ivanović & Lidija Ivanović, 2024. "An open-source tool for merging data from multiple citation databases," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(7), pages 4573-4595, July.
    2. Adriane Cavalieri & João Reis & Marlene Amorim, 2021. "Circular Economy and Internet of Things: Mapping Science of Case Studies in Manufacturing Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-32, March.
    3. Mehdi Toloo & Rouhollah Khodabandelou & Amar Oukil, 2022. "A Comprehensive Bibliometric Analysis of Fractional Programming (1965–2020)," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-21, May.
    4. Fernando Morante-Carballo & Néstor Montalván-Burbano & Maribel Aguilar-Aguilar & Paúl Carrión-Mero, 2022. "A Bibliometric Analysis of the Scientific Research on Artisanal and Small-Scale Mining," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-29, July.
    5. Gaviria-Marin, Magaly & Merigó, José M. & Baier-Fuentes, Hugo, 2019. "Knowledge management: A global examination based on bibliometric analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 194-220.
    6. Mike Thelwall, 2021. "Alternative medicines worth researching? Citation analyses of acupuncture, chiropractic, homeopathy, and osteopathy 1996–2017," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8731-8747, October.
    7. Gabriel Alves Vieira & Jacqueline Leta, 2024. "biblioverlap: an R package for document matching across bibliographic datasets," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(7), pages 4513-4527, July.
    8. Christopher Hansen & Holger Steinmetz & Jörn Block, 2022. "How to conduct a meta-analysis in eight steps: a practical guide," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 1-19, February.
    9. Michael Gusenbauer, 2022. "Search where you will find most: Comparing the disciplinary coverage of 56 bibliographic databases," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2683-2745, May.
    10. Wenting Yang & Jiantong Zhang & Ruolin Ma, 2020. "The Prediction of Infectious Diseases: A Bibliometric Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-19, August.
    11. Liyan Huang & Hong Ching Goh & Rosli Said, 2023. "Understanding the social integration process of rural–urban migrants in urban china: a bibliometrics review," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 1-34, December.
    12. Tiancheng Chi & Zheng Yang, 2024. "Trends in Corporate Environmental Compliance Research: A Bibliometric Analysis (2004–2024)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-28, June.
    13. Ratri Parida & Manoj Kumar Dash & Anil Kumar & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Sunil Luthra & Eyob Mulat‐weldemeskel, 2022. "Evolution of supply chain finance: A comprehensive review and proposed research directions with network clustering analysis," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(5), pages 1343-1369, October.
    14. 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.
    15. Hugo Baier-Fuentes & José M. Merigó & José Ernesto Amorós & Magaly Gaviria-Marín, 2019. "International entrepreneurship: a bibliometric overview," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 385-429, June.
    16. Shir Aviv-Reuven & Ariel Rosenfeld, 2023. "A logical set theory approach to journal subject classification analysis: intra-system irregularities and inter-system discrepancies in Web of Science and Scopus," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(1), pages 157-175, January.
    17. Shashi & Piera Centobelli & Roberto Cerchione & Amit Mittal, 2021. "Managing sustainability in luxury industry to pursue circular economy strategies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 432-462, January.
    18. Dahesh, Mehran Badin & Tabarsa, Gholamali & Zandieh, Mostafa & Hamidizadeh, Mohammadreza, 2020. "Reviewing the intellectual structure and evolution of the innovation systems approach: A social network analysis," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    19. Raminta Pranckutė, 2021. "Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-59, March.
    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:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:10:p:1697-:d:1500604. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.