IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i21p9552-d1512739.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Landscapes of Sustainability in Library and Information Science: Diachronous Citation Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Małgorzata Kamińska

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

  • Łukasz Opaliński

    (Department for Scientific Achievements—Office of Scientometrics, Rzeszow University of Technology, 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

Sustainability issues constitute a distinct subdiscipline of librarianship and information science, with its own areas of study, methods, and areas of application. Despite being nearly 30 years old, there are still divergent opinions on its current phase of development and its links to other scientific disciplines. The authors aim to clarify and summarize the ongoing discussion through citation analysis, shedding light on the lifecycle of research papers in sustainability-oriented library and information science, the current research subjects of focus, the influence of subdomains within the discipline on other scientific areas, and the overall quantitative and qualitative landscape of the discipline. A detailed elucidation of the inquiry’s results is intended to outline the discipline’s cognitive structure and its impact on sustainability science. The lifecycle of disciplinary papers indicates the dynamic development of the field. Sustainability-oriented library and information science is well-established, and its research focus has already been consolidated. The optimal citation window for measuring the impact strength in this discipline is a period of 3 to 4 years. “Culture” and “Education” have been identified as the most forward-looking subdisciplines, whereas “Buildings” and “Collections” exhibit less dynamic growth. The social sustainability pillar is the dominant one, while the environmental pillar is slightly less prominent. The economic pillar is the least represented. Although the majority of information exchange occurs within the discipline, it maintains strong and numerous links with several other fields, including both technical and social sciences, as well as the humanities.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Małgorzata Kamińska & Łukasz Opaliński & Łukasz Wyciślik, 2024. "The Landscapes of Sustainability in Library and Information Science: Diachronous Citation Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-28, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:21:p:9552-:d:1512739
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/21/9552/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/21/9552/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Natsuo Onodera & Fuyuki Yoshikane, 2015. "Factors affecting citation rates of research articles," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(4), pages 739-764, April.
    2. Joseph Sarkis & Chulmo Koo & Richard T. Watson, 2013. "Green information systems & technologies – this generation and beyond: Introduction to the special issue," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 15(5), pages 695-704, November.
    3. Hamid Bouabid & Vincent Larivière, 2013. "The lengthening of papers’ life expectancy: a diachronous analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(3), pages 695-717, December.
    4. Cynthia Lisée & Vincent Larivière & Éric Archambault, 2008. "Conference proceedings as a source of scientific information: A bibliometric analysis," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 59(11), pages 1776-1784, September.
    5. Navonil Mustafee & Korina Katsaliaki & Paul Fishwick, 2014. "Exploring the modelling and simulation knowledge base through journal co-citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(3), pages 2145-2159, March.
    6. Jacqueline C. K. Lam & Richard M. Walker & Peter Hills, 2014. "Interdisciplinarity in Sustainability Studies: A Review," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(3), pages 158-176, May.
    7. Aurel Avramescu, 1979. "Actuality and Obsolescence of Scientific Literature," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 30(5), pages 296-303, September.
    8. Henry Small, 1973. "Co‐citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 24(4), pages 265-269, July.
    9. Dag W. Aksnes, 2006. "Citation rates and perceptions of scientific contribution," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 57(2), pages 169-185, January.
    10. Jesús M. Álvarez-Llorente & Vicente P. Guerrero-Bote & Félix Moya-Anegón, 2024. "New fractional classifications of papers based on two generations of references and on the ASJC scopus scheme," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(6), pages 3493-3515, June.
    11. Pablo Dorta-González & Emilio Gómez-Déniz, 2022. "Modeling the obsolescence of research literature in disciplinary journals through the age of their cited references," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(6), pages 2901-2931, June.
    12. 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.
    13. Lin Zhang & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2017. "A citation-based cross-disciplinary study on literature ageing: part II—diachronous aspects," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1559-1572, June.
    14. Jian Wang, 2013. "Citation time window choice for research impact evaluation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 851-872, March.
    15. Dag W Aksnes, 2003. "Characteristics of highly cited papers," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 159-170, December.
    16. Lin Zhang & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2017. "A citation-based cross-disciplinary study on literature aging: part I—the synchronous approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1573-1589, June.
    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. Onodera, Natsuo, 2016. "Properties of an index of citation durability of an article," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 981-1004.
    2. Aksnes, Dag W. & Rip, Arie, 2009. "Researchers' perceptions of citations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 895-905, July.
    3. Danielle H. Lee, 2019. "Predicting the research performance of early career scientists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(3), pages 1481-1504, December.
    4. Mingyang Wang & Jiaqi Zhang & Guangsheng Chen & Kah-Hin Chai, 2019. "Examining the influence of open access on journals’ citation obsolescence by modeling the actual citation process," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(3), pages 1621-1641, June.
    5. Kayvan Kousha & Mike Thelwall, 2024. "Factors associating with or predicting more cited or higher quality journal articles: An Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST) paper," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 75(3), pages 215-244, March.
    6. Shengzhi Huang & Jiajia Qian & Yong Huang & Wei Lu & Yi Bu & Jinqing Yang & Qikai Cheng, 2022. "Disclosing the relationship between citation structure and future impact of a publication," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(7), pages 1025-1042, July.
    7. Pablo Dorta-González & Emilio Gómez-Déniz, 2022. "Modeling the obsolescence of research literature in disciplinary journals through the age of their cited references," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(6), pages 2901-2931, June.
    8. Zhenyu Gou & Fan Meng & Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez & Yi Bu, 2022. "Encoding the citation life-cycle: the operationalization of a literature-aging conceptual model," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 5027-5052, August.
    9. Hou, Jianhua & Li, Hao & Zhang, Yang, 2024. "Influence of interdisciplinarity of scientific papers on the durability of citation diffusion: A perspective from citation discontinuance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3).
    10. Pei-Shan Chi & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2024. "Two sides of the same coin? Citation obsolescence and impact of different publication types and subject fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(10), pages 6373-6386, October.
    11. Peter Sjögårde & Fereshteh Didegah, 2022. "The association between topic growth and citation impact of research publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 1903-1921, April.
    12. Hui-Zhen Fu & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2013. "Comparison of independent research of China’s top universities using bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(1), pages 259-276, July.
    13. 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.
    14. Mingyang Wang & Zhenyu Wang & Guangsheng Chen, 2019. "Which can better predict the future success of articles? Bibliometric indices or alternative metrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(3), pages 1575-1595, June.
    15. Kenneth Zahringer & Christos Kolympiris & Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes, 2017. "Academic knowledge quality differentials and the quality of firm innovation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(5), pages 821-844.
    16. Waleed M. Sweileh & Sa’ed H. Zyoud & Suleiman Al-Khalil & Samah W. Al-Jabi & Ansam F. Sawalha, 2014. "Assessing the Scientific Research Productivity of the Palestinian Higher Education Institutions," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(3), pages 21582440145, July.
    17. Shubham Sharma & Usha Lenka, 2022. "On the shoulders of giants: uncovering key themes of organizational unlearning research in mainstream management journals," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(6), pages 1599-1695, August.
    18. Fabio S. V. Silva & Peter A. Schulz & Everard C. M. Noyons, 2019. "Co-authorship networks and research impact in large research facilities: benchmarking internal reports and bibliometric databases," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 93-108, January.
    19. Shahzad, Murtuza & Alhoori, Hamed & Freedman, Reva & Rahman, Shaikh Abdul, 2022. "Quantifying the online long-term interest in research," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    20. Jefferson Seide Molléri & Kai Petersen & Emilia Mendes, 2018. "Towards understanding the relation between citations and research quality in software engineering studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 1453-1478, December.

    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:16:y:2024:i:21:p:9552-:d:1512739. 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.