IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i2p795-d1320673.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development Trends in Soil Erosion Fields Based on the Quantitative Evaluation of Innovation Subjects and Innovation Content from 1991 to 2020

Author

Listed:
  • Lihua Zhai

    (Institute of Scientific and Technical Information of China, Beijing 100038, China)

  • Liying Sun

    (Key Laboratory of Water Cycle and Related Land Surface Processes, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Yihui Zhang

    (Key Laboratory of Water Cycle and Related Land Surface Processes, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

Abstract

This paper mainly quantitatively analyzes papers in the field of soil erosion from an objective evaluation perspective. The purpose is to provide researchers in the field of soil and water conservation with a comprehensive understanding of the field. The bibliometric method was used to evaluate the technological innovation and evolution characteristics of soil erosion research. In terms of research scale, China and the United States have an absolute lead in this field. China started late, but the growth rate is faster. The evolution process of soil erosion research is classified into three stages (1991–2000, 2001–2010, and 2011–2020). In terms of innovation subjects (countries and institutions) in soil erosion fields, dominant countries exhibit more concentrated results, with an increase from 57% to 80% with respect to the ratio of the number of output papers in these countries to the total number of output papers in the research field of soil erosion. In contrast, research institutions are increasingly divergent, with a decrease from 36% to 26% with respect to the ratio of the number of output papers in the dominant institutions to the total number of output papers in the research field. The comparison results of the comprehensive innovation strength of major countries indicate that soil erosion research has experienced processes such as domination by the United States, and other countries have caught up via concerted efforts, with China and the USA finally leading comprehensively. The overall leading ability of China and the United States in soil erosion research continues to converge and improve. Belgium and other European countries have small research scale characteristics but greater influence capacities. The study of erosion mechanisms and erosion modelling has always been the main research direction in this field, while the quantitative study of soil erosion on large scales and its effects on element cycling comprises the current main research stream and development trend. The results of the present study could provide scientific support for a better understanding of the evolution of innovation characteristics in the field of soil erosion.

Suggested Citation

  • Lihua Zhai & Liying Sun & Yihui Zhang, 2024. "Development Trends in Soil Erosion Fields Based on the Quantitative Evaluation of Innovation Subjects and Innovation Content from 1991 to 2020," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-15, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:2:p:795-:d:1320673
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/2/795/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/2/795/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sartori, Martina & Philippidis, George & Ferrari, Emanuele & Borrelli, Pasquale & Lugato, Emanuele & Montanarella, Luca & Panagos, Panos, 2019. "A linkage between the biophysical and the economic: Assessing the global market impacts of soil erosion," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 299-312.
    2. Markus Reichstein & Michael Bahn & Philippe Ciais & Dorothea Frank & Miguel D. Mahecha & Sonia I. Seneviratne & Jakob Zscheischler & Christian Beer & Nina Buchmann & David C. Frank & Dario Papale & An, 2013. "Climate extremes and the carbon cycle," Nature, Nature, vol. 500(7462), pages 287-295, August.
    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. Huicai Yang & Shuqin Zhao & Zhanfei Qin & Zhiguo Qi & Xinying Jiao & Zhen Li, 2024. "Differentiation of Carbon Sink Enhancement Potential in the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei Region of China," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-15, March.
    2. Panos Panagos & Pasquale Borrelli & David Robinson, 2020. "FAO calls for actions to reduce global soil erosion," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 25(5), pages 789-790, May.
    3. Yujin Li & Juying Jiao & Zhijie Wang & Binting Cao & Yanhong Wei & Shu Hu, 2016. "Effects of Revegetation on Soil Organic Carbon Storage and Erosion-Induced Carbon Loss under Extreme Rainstorms in the Hill and Gully Region of the Loess Plateau," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-15, April.
    4. Simon Besnard & Nuno Carvalhais & M Altaf Arain & Andrew Black & Benjamin Brede & Nina Buchmann & Jiquan Chen & Jan G P W Clevers & Loïc P Dutrieux & Fabian Gans & Martin Herold & Martin Jung & Yoshik, 2019. "Memory effects of climate and vegetation affecting net ecosystem CO2 fluxes in global forests," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-22, February.
    5. Zbigniew W. Kundzewicz & Adam Choryński & Janusz Olejnik & Hans J. Schellnhuber & Marek Urbaniak & Klaudia Ziemblińska, 2023. "Climate Change Science and Policy—A Guided Tour across the Space of Attitudes and Outcomes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-20, March.
    6. Zheng Fu & Philippe Ciais & I. Colin Prentice & Pierre Gentine & David Makowski & Ana Bastos & Xiangzhong Luo & Julia K. Green & Paul C. Stoy & Hui Yang & Tomohiro Hajima, 2022. "Atmospheric dryness reduces photosynthesis along a large range of soil water deficits," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-10, December.
    7. Isabel Dorado-Liñán & Blanca Ayarzagüena & Flurin Babst & Guobao Xu & Luis Gil & Giovanna Battipaglia & Allan Buras & Vojtěch Čada & J. Julio Camarero & Liam Cavin & Hugues Claessens & Igor Drobyshev , 2022. "Jet stream position explains regional anomalies in European beech forest productivity and tree growth," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-10, December.
    8. Wen, Xiaojie & Yao, Shunbo & Sauer, Johannes, 2022. "Shadow prices and abatement cost of soil erosion in Shaanxi Province, China: Convex expectile regression approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    9. Meenakshi Sharma & Rajesh Kaushal & Prashant Kaushik & Seeram Ramakrishna, 2021. "Carbon Farming: Prospects and Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-15, October.
    10. Amandine Valérie Pastor & Joao Pedro Nunes & Rossano Ciampalini & Haithem Bahri & Mohamed Annabi & Mohamed Chikhaoui & Armand Crabit & Stéphane Follain & Jan Jacob Keizer & Jérôme Latron & Feliciana L, 2022. "ScenaLand: a simple methodology for developing land use and management scenarios," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 27(8), pages 1-29, December.
    11. Patricia Arrogante-Funes & Carlos J. Novillo & Raúl Romero-Calcerrada, 2018. "Monitoring NDVI Inter-Annual Behavior in Mountain Areas of Mainland Spain (2001–2016)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-24, November.
    12. Yuhong Zhao & Ruirui Liu & Zhansheng Liu & Liang Liu & Jingjing Wang & Wenxiang Liu, 2023. "A Review of Macroscopic Carbon Emission Prediction Model Based on Machine Learning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-28, April.
    13. Lopes, António M. & Machado, J.A. Tenreiro, 2017. "Computational comparison and pattern visualization of forest fires," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 407-413.
    14. A. S. Strokov & V. S. Krasilnikova & O. V. Cherkasova, 2022. "Economic Valuation of Recovery and Increased Efficiency in Agricultural Land Use," Studies on Russian Economic Development, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 447-454, August.
    15. Zefeng Chen & Weiguang Wang & Giovanni Forzieri & Alessandro Cescatti, 2024. "Transition from positive to negative indirect CO2 effects on the vegetation carbon uptake," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    16. Wenmin Zhang & Guy Schurgers & Josep Peñuelas & Rasmus Fensholt & Hui Yang & Jing Tang & Xiaowei Tong & Philippe Ciais & Martin Brandt, 2023. "Recent decrease of the impact of tropical temperature on the carbon cycle linked to increased precipitation," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-9, December.
    17. John M. Humphreys & Robert B. Srygley & David H. Branson, 2022. "Geographic Variation in Migratory Grasshopper Recruitment under Projected Climate Change," Geographies, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-19, January.
    18. Qin Liu & Tiange Shi, 2019. "Spatiotemporal Differentiation and the Factors of Ecological Vulnerability in the Toutun River Basin Based on Remote Sensing Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-19, August.
    19. Xiangzhong Luo & Trevor F. Keenan, 2022. "Tropical extreme droughts drive long-term increase in atmospheric CO2 growth rate variability," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-10, December.
    20. Ping, Jiaye & Zhou, Jian & Huang, Kun & Sun, Xiaoying & Sun, Huanfa & Xia, Jianyang, 2021. "Modeling the typhoon disturbance effect on ecosystem carbon storage dynamics in a subtropical forest of China's coastal region," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 455(C).

    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:2:p:795-:d:1320673. 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.