IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i23p16165-d992712.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Forest Landscape Restoration and Local Stakeholders: A Global Bibliometric Mapping Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Amanda Augusta Fernandes

    (Laboratory of Ecology and Forest Restoration (LERF), Department of Forest Sciences, “Luiz de Queiroz” College of Agriculture, University of São Paulo, Av. Pádua Dias, 11, Piracicaba 13418-900, SP, Brazil)

  • Cristina Adams

    (School of Arts Sciences and Humanities (EACH), University of São Paulo (USP), Av. Arlindo Bétio, 1.000, São Paulo 03828-000, SP, Brazil
    Institute of Energy and Environment (IEE), University of São Paulo (USP), Av. Prof. Luciano Gualberto, 1289—Butantã, São Paulo 05508-010, SP, Brazil)

  • Luciana Gomes de Araujo

    (Institute of Energy and Environment (IEE), University of São Paulo (USP), Av. Prof. Luciano Gualberto, 1289—Butantã, São Paulo 05508-010, SP, Brazil)

  • João Paulo Romanelli

    (Laboratory of Ecology and Forest Restoration (LERF), Department of Forest Sciences, “Luiz de Queiroz” College of Agriculture, University of São Paulo, Av. Pádua Dias, 11, Piracicaba 13418-900, SP, Brazil)

  • João Paulo Bispo Santos

    (Postgraduate in Plant Biology, Department of Plant Biology, Institute of Biology, State University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Zeferino Vaz University City, Campinas 13083-970, SP, Brazil)

  • Ricardo Ribeiro Rodrigues

    (Laboratory of Ecology and Forest Restoration (LERF), Department of Forest Sciences, “Luiz de Queiroz” College of Agriculture, University of São Paulo, Av. Pádua Dias, 11, Piracicaba 13418-900, SP, Brazil)

Abstract

Forest landscape restoration (FLR) has a central place in current global debates about the sustainability of natural resources, climate change mitigation and adaptation, livelihoods and biodiversity conservation. FLR approaches support the involvement of different social actors in participatory decision-making processes. We conducted a bibliometric analysis research to provide an overview of scientific publications in forest restoration, FLR and local stakeholders (LS) studies, and, specifically, examine if the studies (1) recognised the relevance of the local level actors and (2) collected primary and/or secondary data on LS using different methods from related publications since 2000. We used the Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus as bibliographic sources. We analysed five main research aspects: (1) publication year, (2) most productive countries according to the total number of publications, (3) most influential journals and cited papers, (4) most influential authors ranked by number of publications, their respective organisations and country collaborations, and (5) a co-occurrence analysis of countries’ collaborations and keywords. We found that forest restoration, FLR and LS studies have been growing over the years, especially in the last decade. However, only 50% (99 records) of the studies recognised the relevance of the local level actors and also collected primary and/or secondary data through different methods. Authors from organisations in North and South America, and Oceania were the ones with the most publications, with only 20% (4 authors) of the top 20 authors having degrees in social sciences. Studies about “ecosystem services”, “ecological restoration”, “natural regeneration”, “livelihoods”, “Bonn challenge” and “governance” have become the main subject of research along the years within the scope of FLR at the local level. Finally, the results showed the gaps that should be considered in future research to improve the involvement and more direct participation of LS, as well as the participation of interdisciplinary and social science researchers in FLR research teams.

Suggested Citation

  • Amanda Augusta Fernandes & Cristina Adams & Luciana Gomes de Araujo & João Paulo Romanelli & João Paulo Bispo Santos & Ricardo Ribeiro Rodrigues, 2022. "Forest Landscape Restoration and Local Stakeholders: A Global Bibliometric Mapping Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-17, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:23:p:16165-:d:992712
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/23/16165/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/23/16165/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2017. "Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 1053-1070, May.
    2. Éric Archambault & David Campbell & Yves Gingras & Vincent Larivière, 2009. "Comparing bibliometric statistics obtained from the Web of Science and Scopus," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(7), pages 1320-1326, July.
    3. Lokman I. Meho & Kiduk Yang, 2007. "Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 58(13), pages 2105-2125, November.
    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. Ling-Li Li & Guohua Ding & Nan Feng & Ming-Huang Wang & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2009. "Global stem cell research trend: Bibliometric analysis as a tool for mapping of trends from 1991 to 2006," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(1), pages 39-58, July.
    6. Rubí Medina-Mijangos & Luis Seguí-Amórtegui, 2020. "Research Trends in the Economic Analysis of Municipal Solid Waste Management Systems: A Bibliometric Analysis from 1980 to 2019," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-20, October.
    7. Weiwei Zhang & Weihong Qian & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2009. "A bibliometric analysis of research related to ocean circulation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(2), pages 305-316, August.
    8. Haijun Wang & Minyan Liu & Song Hong & Yanhua Zhuang, 2013. "A historical review and bibliometric analysis of GPS research from 1991–2010," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(1), pages 35-44, April.
    9. Kun-Yang Chuang & Ya-Li Huang & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2007. "A bibliometric and citation analysis of stroke-related research in Taiwan," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(2), pages 201-212, August.
    10. Cobo, M.J. & López-Herrera, A.G. & Herrera-Viedma, E. & Herrera, F., 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, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 146-166.
    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. P. K. Priyan & Wakara Ibrahimu Nyabakora & Geofrey Rwezimula, 2023. "A bibliometric review of the knowledge base on financial inclusion," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 1-21, February.
    2. Veronica Paul Kundy & Kamini Shah, 2024. "The knowledge base of financial technology: a bibliometric analysis review," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 4(7), pages 1-22, July.
    3. Antonio Molina-García & Julio Diéguez-Soto & M. Teresa Galache-Laza & Marta Campos-Valenzuela, 2023. "Financial literacy in SMEs: a bibliometric analysis and a systematic literature review of an emerging research field," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 787-826, April.
    4. P. K. Priyan & Wakara Ibrahimu Nyabakora & Geofrey Rwezimula, 2023. "A Bibliometric Review of the Knowledge Base on Capital Structure Decisions," Vision, , vol. 27(2), pages 155-166, April.
    5. Paulina Phoobane & Muthoni Masinde & Tafadzwanashe Mabhaudhi, 2022. "Predicting Infectious Diseases: A Bibliometric Review on Africa," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-20, February.
    6. Roberto Pico-Saltos & Paúl Carrión-Mero & Néstor Montalván-Burbano & Javier Garzás & Andrés Redchuk, 2021. "Research Trends in Career Success: A Bibliometric Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-24, April.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Andrés Martínez-Medina & Sonia Morales-Calvo & Vicenta Rodríguez-Martín & Víctor Meseguer-Sánchez & Valentín Molina-Moreno, 2022. "Sixteen Years since the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: What Have We Learned since Then?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-21, September.
    10. Paola Bernardi & Alberto Bertello & Canio Forliano & Ludovico Bullini Orlandi, 2022. "Beyond the “ivory tower”. Comparing academic and non-academic knowledge on social entrepreneurship," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 999-1032, September.
    11. Luisa F. Cabeza & Marta Chàfer & Érika Mata, 2020. "Comparative Analysis of Web of Science and Scopus on the Energy Efficiency and Climate Impact of Buildings," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-24, January.
    12. Boubaker, Sabri & Goodell, John W. & Kumar, Satish & Sureka, Riya, 2023. "COVID-19 and finance scholarship: A systematic and bibliometric analysis," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    13. Hang Wen & Yi Huang, 2012. "Trends and performance of oxidative stress research from 1991 to 2010," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(1), pages 51-63, April.
    14. Jinlu Shen & Xiangyu Zhou & Wei Wu & Liang Wang & Zhenying Chen, 2023. "Worldwide Overview and Country Differences in Metaverse Research: A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-25, February.
    15. Manuel Castriotta & Michela Loi & Elona Marku & Luca Naitana, 2019. "What’s in a name? Exploring the conceptual structure of emerging organizations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(2), pages 407-437, February.
    16. Vítor Vasata Macchi Silva & José Luis Duarte Ribeiro & Gonzalo Rubén Alvarez & Sonia Elisa Caregnato, 2019. "Competence-Based Management Research in the Web of Science and Scopus Databases: Scientific Production, Collaboration, and Impact," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-21, September.
    17. Kun Shi & Yi Zhou & Zhen Zhang, 2021. "Mapping the Research Trends of Household Waste Recycling: A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-23, May.
    18. Martha María Mayes-Ramírez & Francisco Jesús Gálvez-Sánchez & Ángel Fermín Ramos-Ridao & Valentín Molina-Moreno, 2023. "Urban Waste: Visualizing the Academic Literature through Bibliometric Analysis and Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-24, January.
    19. Yingjin Song & Ruiyi Li & Guanyi Chen & Beibei Yan & Lei Zhong & Yuxin Wang & Yihang Li & Jinlei Li & Yingxiu Zhang, 2021. "Bibliometric Analysis of Current Status on Bioremediation of Petroleum Contaminated Soils during 2000–2019," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-20, August.
    20. Lutz Bornmann & Robin Haunschild & Sven E. Hug, 2018. "Visualizing the context of citations referencing papers published by Eugene Garfield: a new type of keyword co-occurrence analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 427-437, February.

    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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:23:p:16165-:d:992712. 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.