IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i6p2335-d1607216.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Has Environmental Sociology Research Effectively Responded to the Urgent Need for Environmental Governance in China? A Study Based on Bibliometric Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Yushuo Chen

    (State Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China)

  • Yanru Fang

    (State Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China)

  • Tao Wang

    (State Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China)

  • Runpu Liu

    (State Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China)

  • Afrane Sandylove

    (School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300350, China)

  • Shuan Peng

    (School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300350, China)

  • Xuefang Wu

    (State Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China)

  • Pingjian Yang

    (State Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China)

Abstract

China has made significant progress in environmental protection. As the country advances towards modernizing its environmental governance, environmental sociology plays an increasingly crucial role. This study employs a bibliometric analysis of 3867 publications from the Web of Science Core Collection (1972–2023) and CNKI (1990–2023) to reveal the disparities between Chinese and international environmental sociology research, with a particular focus on assessing the contributions of environmental sociology to environmental governance in China. The findings reveal several key insights. The results show a steady increase in global research output, with the United States (42.79%) and the United Kingdom (11.15%) leading in publication volume. While international research has expanded interdisciplinary collaboration, Chinese studies remain highly concentrated. The findings also reveal a growing tension between internationalization and localization in Chinese environmental sociology. Since 2017, publications in international journals have surged, while domestic publications have declined, reflecting scholars’ prioritization of global recognition over local policy engagement. However, language barriers and limited interdisciplinary integration—with over 80% of scholars rooted in philosophy and sociology—restrict the discipline’s ability to address complex governance challenges. Institutional influence remains imbalanced. Renmin University, Hohai University, and the Ocean University of China contribute 42.72% of domestic publications, yet no Chinese institution ranks among the global top 10, and citation impact lags behind leading Western institutions. This contrasts with international research, which tends to focus on global environmental issues, whereas Chinese research emphasizes localized case studies. Our analysis identifies a notable gap in Chinese research’s understanding and study of environmental governance experiences. It is recommended to strengthen the role of environmental sociology throughout the governance process from public opinion collection to policy formulation, policy implementation, dynamic feedback, and post-implementation evaluation.

Suggested Citation

  • Yushuo Chen & Yanru Fang & Tao Wang & Runpu Liu & Afrane Sandylove & Shuan Peng & Xuefang Wu & Pingjian Yang, 2025. "Has Environmental Sociology Research Effectively Responded to the Urgent Need for Environmental Governance in China? A Study Based on Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-20, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:6:p:2335-:d:1607216
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/6/2335/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/6/2335/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dong‐Xin Li & Paresha N. Sinha & Sally Kim & Yong‐Ki Lee, 2019. "The role of environmental justice in sustainable development in China," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(1), pages 162-174, January.
    2. Ingolfur Blühdorn & Michael Deflorian, 2019. "The Collaborative Management of Sustained Unsustainability: On the Performance of Participatory Forms of Environmental Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-17, February.
    3. repec:sae:envval:v:24:y:2015:i:3:p:299-320 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Ishihara, Hiroe & Pascual, Unai, 2009. "Social capital in community level environmental governance: A critique," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1549-1562, March.
    5. Yixi Li & Yuan Wang & Xue Rui & Yaxiu Li & Yang Li & Huanzhi Wang & Jian Zuo & Yindong Tong, 2017. "Sources of atmospheric pollution: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(2), pages 1025-1045, August.
    6. Buijs, Arjen & Lawrence, Anna, 2013. "Emotional conflicts in rational forestry: Towards a research agenda for understanding emotions in environmental conflicts," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 104-111.
    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. Bergstén, Sabina & Stjernström, Olof & Pettersson, Örjan, 2018. "Experiences and emotions among private forest owners versus public interests: Why ownership matters," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 801-811.
    2. Lucy Semerjian & Kunle Okaiyeto & Mike O. Ojemaye & Temitope Cyrus Ekundayo & Aboi Igwaran & Anthony I. Okoh, 2021. "Global Systematic Mapping of Road Dust Research from 1906 to 2020: Research Gaps and Future Direction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-21, October.
    3. Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Rosalind & Christie, Michael & Cooper, Nigel & Hockley, Neal & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fazey, Ioan & O’Brien, Liz & Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Ravenscroft, Neil & Raymond, Chris, 2016. "Shared values and deliberative valuation: Future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 358-371.
    4. Iversen, Sara V. & Naomi, van der Velden & Convery, Ian & Mansfield, Lois & Holt, Claire D.S., 2022. "Why understanding stakeholder perspectives and emotions is important in upland woodland creation – A case study from Cumbria, UK," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    5. Yanbin Jiang & Miao Fan & Ronggui Hu & Jinsong Zhao & Yupeng Wu, 2018. "Mosses Are Better than Leaves of Vascular Plants in Monitoring Atmospheric Heavy Metal Pollution in Urban Areas," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-13, May.
    6. Yu Hao & Yingting Wang & Qiuwei Wu & Shiwei Sun & Weilu Wang & Menglin Cui, 2020. "What affects residents' participation in the circular economy for sustainable development? Evidence from China," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(5), pages 1251-1268, September.
    7. Shinichi Kitano, 2020. "Formation Factors and Effects on Common Property Resource Conservation of Community Farms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-19, June.
    8. Yadira Méndez-Lemus & Antonio Vieyra & Lorena Poncela, 2017. "Peri-urban local governance? Intra-government relationships and social capital in a peripheral municipality of Michoacán, Mexico," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 17(1), pages 1-23, January.
    9. Giovanni Esposito & Andrea Felicetti & Andrea Terlizzi, 2023. "Participatory governance in megaprojects: the Lyon–Turin high-speed railway among structure, agency, and democratic participation," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(2), pages 259-273.
    10. Luo, Heng & Ye, Yanmei & Zhou, Chongwu & Zhao, Jinghui, 2024. "Collective participation in conservation easements in rural China: Evidence from the Qianjiangyuan National Park," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    11. Sarah Schomers & Bettina Matzdorf & Claas Meyer & Claudia Sattler, 2015. "How Local Intermediaries Improve the Effectiveness of Public Payment for Ecosystem Services Programs: The Role of Networks and Agri-Environmental Assistance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-31, October.
    12. Eirini Triantafyllidou & Anastasia Zabaniotou, 2022. "From Theory to Praxis: ‘Go Sustainable Living’ Survey for Exploring Individuals Consciousness Level of Decision-Making and Action-Taking in Daily Life Towards a Green Citizenship," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 113-139, March.
    13. Katarina Haugen, 2016. "Contested Lands? Dissonance and Common Ground in Stakeholder Views on Forest Values," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 107(4), pages 421-434, September.
    14. R.W.M.N. Gunasekara & S.P. Premaratne & H.M.S. Priyanath, 2017. "Impact of Social Capital on Livelihood Success of the Members of Community Based Organizations in Sri Lanka," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 7(12), pages 1156-1167, December.
    15. Siddharth Sareen & Steven Wolf, 2020. "Accountability and Sustainability Transitions," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-07, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    16. Brian Witt, 2019. "Evaluating the Effects of a Minimalist Deliberative Framework on the Willingness to Participate in a Payment for Ecosystem Services Program," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-26, June.
    17. Michael Asiedu & Ebenezer Nana Yeboah & David Owusu Boakye, 2021. "Natural Resources and the Economic Growth of West Africa Economies," Applied Economics and Finance, Redfame publishing, vol. 8(2), pages 20-32, March.
    18. Grilli, Gianluca & Curtis, John & Hynes, Stephen & O'Reilly, Paul, 2017. "Anglers’ views on stock conservation: Sea Bass angling in Ireland," Papers WP578, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    19. Mack, Philipp & Kremer, Jakob & Kleinschmit, Daniela, 2023. "Forest dieback reframed and revisited? Forests (re)negotiated in the German media between forestry and nature conservation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    20. Ito, Junichi & Feuer, Hart N. & Kitano, Shinichi & Komiyama, Midori, 2018. "A Policy Evaluation of the Direct Payment Scheme for Collective Stewardship of Common Property Resources in Japan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 141-151.

    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:17:y:2025:i:6:p:2335-:d:1607216. 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.