IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i24p16818-d1004088.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Landscapes of Sustainability in the Library and Information Science: Collaboration Insights

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Małgorzata Kamińska

    (Institute of Culture Studies, University of Silesia in Katowice, ul. Uniwersytecka 4, 40-007 Katowice, Poland)

  • Łukasz Opaliński

    (Scientific Information Center, Rzeszow University of Technology Library, 35-959 Rzeszów, Poland)

  • Łukasz Wyciślik

    (Department of Applied Informatics, Faculty of Automatic Control, Electronics and Computer Sciences, Silesian University of Technology, 44-100 Gliwice, Poland)

Abstract

Despite the fact that the concept of sustainable development was born as early as the late 1980s, in the field of library and information science there has been a significant growth in interest only in recent years. This observation inspired the authors to explore this particular area with regards to productivity both in quantitative and qualitative terms. One of the important factors influencing scientific productivity is broadly understood research collaboration. Interestingly, in the scholarly literature dealing with the topics of scientific productivity, the researchers are most often representatives of the LIS field who study, also applying bibliometric methods, various scientific disciplines. However, so far there have been no studies on scientific collaboration concentrated around the discipline of sustainable library and information science (LIS) itself. Therefore, in this paper, the authors present the results of research into the phenomenon of co-authorship in this specific area. The results indicate not only the most important collaborating entities contributing to the research field and trends in research cooperation, but also verify certain general hypotheses put forward in the areas of the fundamental sustainable development of the discipline of sustainable LIS.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Małgorzata Kamińska & Łukasz Opaliński & Łukasz Wyciślik, 2022. "The Landscapes of Sustainability in the Library and Information Science: Collaboration Insights," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-23, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:24:p:16818-:d:1004088
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/24/16818/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/24/16818/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sooksiri Wichaisri & Apichat Sopadang, 2018. "Trends and Future Directions in Sustainable Development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(1), pages 1-17, January.
    2. Lingfei Wu & Dashun Wang & James A. Evans, 2019. "Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology," Nature, Nature, vol. 566(7744), pages 378-382, February.
    3. Aria, Massimo & Cuccurullo, Corrado, 2017. "bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 959-975.
    4. Perianes-Rodriguez, Antonio & Waltman, Ludo & van Eck, Nees Jan, 2016. "Constructing bibliometric networks: A comparison between full and fractional counting," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 1178-1195.
    5. Caroline S. Wagner & Travis A. Whetsell & Loet Leydesdorff, 2017. "Growth of international collaboration in science: revisiting six specialties," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(3), pages 1633-1652, March.
    6. Branco Ponomariov & Craig Boardman, 2016. "What is co-authorship?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1939-1963, December.
    7. 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.
    8. Saeed-Ul Hassan & Peter Haddawy & Jia Zhu, 2014. "A bibliometric study of the world’s research activity in sustainable development and its sub-areas using scientific literature," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(2), pages 549-579, May.
    9. Donald deB. Beaver, 2004. "Does collaborative research have greater epistemic authority?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 60(3), pages 399-408, August.
    10. Jonas Lundberg & Göran Tomson & Inger Lundkvist & John Sk?r & Mats Brommels, 2006. "Collaboration uncovered: Exploring the adequacy of measuring university-industry collaboration through co-authorship and funding," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 69(3), pages 575-589, December.
    11. Chenwei Zhang & Yi Bu & Ying Ding & Jian Xu, 2018. "Understanding scientific collaboration: Homophily, transitivity, and preferential attachment," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 69(1), pages 72-86, January.
    12. Franceschet, Massimo & Costantini, Antonio, 2010. "The effect of scholar collaboration on impact and quality of academic papers," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 540-553.
    13. Donald Deb. Beaver, 2001. "Reflections on Scientific Collaboration (and its study): Past, Present, and Future," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 52(3), pages 365-377, November.
    14. Grit Laudel, 2002. "What do we measure by co-authorships?," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 3-15, April.
    15. Derek De Solla Price, 1976. "A general theory of bibliometric and other cumulative advantage processes," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 27(5), pages 292-306, September.
    16. Blaise Cronin, 2001. "Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices?," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 52(7), pages 558-569.
    17. Jie Zhu & Weijian Hua, 2017. "Visualizing the knowledge domain of sustainable development research between 1987 and 2015: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 893-914, February.
    18. Katz, J. Sylvan & Martin, Ben R., 1997. "What is research collaboration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, March.
    19. Yang Li & Huajiao Li & Nairong Liu & Xueyong Liu, 2018. "Important institutions of interinstitutional scientific collaboration networks in materials science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 85-103, October.
    20. William W. Hood & Concepción S. Wilson, 2001. "The Literature of Bibliometrics, Scientometrics, and Informetrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 52(2), pages 291-314, October.
    21. Dorte Henriksen, 2018. "What factors are associated with increasing co-authorship in the social sciences? A case study of Danish Economics and Political Science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1395-1421, March.
    22. Ali Uzun, 2004. "Assessing internationality of scholarly journals through foreign authorship patterns: the case of major journals in information science, and scientometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 61(3), pages 457-465, November.
    23. Angela Repanovici & Cristina Salcă Rotaru & Cristinel Murzea, 2021. "Development of Sustainable Thinking by Information Literacy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-21, January.
    24. Nuno Quental & Júlia M. Lourenço, 2012. "References, authors, journals and scientific disciplines underlying the sustainable development literature: a citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(2), pages 361-381, February.
    25. Giulio Cainelli & Mario A. Maggioni & T. Erika Uberti & Annunziata Felice, 2015. "The strength of strong ties: How co-authorship affect productivity of academic economists?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 673-699, January.
    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. Magdalena Bemke-Świtilnik & Aneta Drabek & Anna Małgorzata Kamińska & Adam Smoliński, 2020. "Research Collaboration Patterns in Sustainable Mining—A Co-Authorship Analysis of Publications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-16, June.
    2. Sameer Kumar, 2018. "Ethical Concerns in the Rise of Co-Authorship and Its Role as a Proxy of Research Collaborations," Publications, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-9, August.
    3. Andrea Fronzetti Colladon & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Peter A. Gloor, 2020. "Predicting the future success of scientific publications through social network and semantic analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 357-377, July.
    4. Cristina Arhiliuc & Raf Guns, 2023. "Disciplinary collaboration rates in the social sciences and humanities: what is the influence of classification type?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3419-3436, June.
    5. Dongqing Lyu & Kaile Gong & Xuanmin Ruan & Ying Cheng & Jiang Li, 2021. "Does research collaboration influence the “disruption” of articles? Evidence from neurosciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 287-303, January.
    6. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    7. Paul-Hus, Adèle & Mongeon, Philippe & Sainte-Marie, Maxime & Larivière, Vincent, 2017. "The sum of it all: Revealing collaboration patterns by combining authorship and acknowledgements," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 80-87.
    8. Dorte Henriksen, 2016. "The rise in co-authorship in the social sciences (1980–2013)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 455-476, May.
    9. Qin Zhang & Juneman Abraham & Hui-Zhen Fu, 2020. "Collaboration and its influence on retraction based on retracted publications during 1978–2017," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 213-232, October.
    10. Claudia N. Gonzalez Brambila & Renata Herrerias, 2024. "Assessing the impact of collaborative authorship in Business Economics in Latin America," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(7), pages 4623-4660, July.
    11. Chen, Kaihua & Zhang, Yi & Fu, Xiaolan, 2019. "International research collaboration: An emerging domain of innovation studies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 149-168.
    12. Oliver Wieczorek & Markus Eckl & Madeleine Bausch & Erik Radisch & Christoph Barmeyer & Malte Rehbein, 2021. "Better, Faster, Stronger: The Evolution of Co-authorship in International Management Research Between 1990 and 2016," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(4), pages 21582440211, November.
    13. Thelwall, Mike & Sud, Pardeep, 2016. "National, disciplinary and temporal variations in the extent to which articles with more authors have more impact: Evidence from a geometric field normalised citation indicator," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 48-61.
    14. Barry Bozeman & Daniel Fay & Catherine Slade, 2013. "Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 1-67, February.
    15. Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez & Anuska Ferligoj & Sandra Miguel & Luka Kronegger & Félix Moya-Anegón, 2012. "Blockmodeling of co-authorship networks in library and information science in Argentina: a case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 699-717, December.
    16. Pu Han & Jin Shi & Xiaoyan Li & Dongbo Wang & Si Shen & Xinning Su, 2014. "International collaboration in LIS: global trends and networks at the country and institution level," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 53-72, January.
    17. Branco Ponomariov & Craig Boardman, 2016. "What is co-authorship?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1939-1963, December.
    18. Ding, Ying, 2011. "Scientific collaboration and endorsement: Network analysis of coauthorship and citation networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 187-203.
    19. Marjan Cugmas & Anuška Ferligoj & Luka Kronegger, 2016. "The stability of co-authorship structures," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(1), pages 163-186, January.
    20. Marian-Gabriel Hâncean & Matjaž Perc & Jürgen Lerner, 2021. "The coauthorship networks of the most productive European researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 201-224, January.

    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:24:p:16818-:d:1004088. 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.