IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2019i1p66-d300092.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Knowledge Mapping Analysis of Rural Landscape Using CiteSpace

Author

Listed:
  • Yunong Wu

    (Department of Landscape Architecture, College of Horticulture and Forestry, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China
    Key Laboratory of Urban Agriculture in Central China, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Wuhan 430000, China)

  • Huijie Wang

    (Wuhan Landscape Construction development (Group) CO., LTD., Wuhan 430000, China)

  • Zhexiao Wang

    (Department of Landscape Architecture, College of Horticulture and Forestry, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China
    Key Laboratory of Urban Agriculture in Central China, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Wuhan 430000, China)

  • Bin Zhang

    (Department of Landscape Architecture, College of Horticulture and Forestry, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China
    Key Laboratory of Urban Agriculture in Central China, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Wuhan 430000, China)

  • Burghard C. Meyer

    (Institute of Geography, Faculty of Physics and Earth Sciences, Leipzig University, 04103 Leipzig, Germany)

Abstract

This study visualizes and quantifies extant publications of rural landscape research (RLR) in Web of Science using CiteSpace for a wide range of research topics, from a multi-angle analysis of the overall research profile, while providing a method and approach for quantitative analysis of massive literature data. First, it presents the number of papers published, subject distribution, author network, the fundamental condition of countries, and research organizations involved in RLR through network analysis. Second, it identifies the high-frequency and high betweenness-centrality values of the basic research content of RLR through keyword co-occurrence analysis and keyword time zones. Finally, it identifies research fronts and trending topics of RLR in the decade from 2009 to 2018 by using co-citation clustering, and noun-term burst detection. The results show that basic research content involves protection, management, biodiversity, and land use. Five clearer research frontier pathways and top 20 research trending topics are extracted to show diversified research branch development. All this provides the reader with a general preliminary grasp of RLR, showing that cooperation and analysis involving multiple disciplines, specialties, and angles will become a dominant trend in the field.

Suggested Citation

  • Yunong Wu & Huijie Wang & Zhexiao Wang & Bin Zhang & Burghard C. Meyer, 2019. "Knowledge Mapping Analysis of Rural Landscape Using CiteSpace," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2019:i:1:p:66-:d:300092
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/1/66/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/1/66/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholas Gill & Peter Klepeis & Laurie Chisholm, 2010. "Stewardship among lifestyle oriented rural landowners," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(3), pages 317-334.
    2. Ilaria Zambon & Agostino Ferrara & Rosanna Salvia & Enrico Maria Mosconi & Luigi Fici & Rosario Turco & Luca Salvati, 2018. "Rural Districts between Urbanization and Land Abandonment: Undermining Long-Term Changes in Mediterranean Landscapes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-17, April.
    3. Abram, Nicola K. & Meijaard, Erik & Ancrenaz, Marc & Runting, Rebecca K. & Wells, Jessie A. & Gaveau, David & Pellier, Anne-Sophie & Mengersen, Kerrie, 2014. "Spatially explicit perceptions of ecosystem services and land cover change in forested regions of Borneo," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 116-127.
    4. Raymond, Christopher M. & Bryan, Brett A. & MacDonald, Darla Hatton & Cast, Andrea & Strathearn, Sarah & Grandgirard, Agnes & Kalivas, Tina, 2009. "Mapping community values for natural capital and ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1301-1315, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wilfrid Azan & Yuan Li, 2023. "Scientific knowledge production of blockchain: A bibliometric and lexicometric review," Post-Print hal-04180386, HAL.
    2. Xiaona Guo & Ruishan Chen & Qiang Li & Michael E. Meadows, 2021. "Achieving Win–Win Solutions in Telecoupled Human–Land Systems," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-15, March.
    3. Yanyi Zhu & Youpei Hu, 2023. "The Correlation between Urban Form and Carbon Emissions: A Bibliometric and Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-28, September.
    4. Yan Han & Yuehui Liang, 2023. "Scientific Knowledge Map Study of Therapeutic Landscapes and Community Open Spaces: Visual Analysis with CiteSpace," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-19, October.
    5. Wei Wang & Yun Gao & Adrian Pitts & Lili Dong, 2023. "A Bibliometric Analysis of Neighborhood Sense of Community," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-18, February.

    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. Shoyama, Kikuko & Yamagata, Yoshiki, 2016. "Local perception of ecosystem service bundles in the Kushiro watershed, Northern Japan – Application of a public participation GIS tool," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 139-149.
    2. Paudyal, Kiran & Baral, Himlal & Burkhard, Benjamin & Bhandari, Santosh P. & Keenan, Rodney J., 2015. "Participatory assessment and mapping of ecosystem services in a data-poor region: Case study of community-managed forests in central Nepal," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 81-92.
    3. Zuzana Drillet & Tze Kwan Fung & Rachel Ai Ting Leong & Uma Sachidhanandam & Peter Edwards & Daniel Richards, 2020. "Urban Vegetation Types are Not Perceived Equally in Providing Ecosystem Services and Disservices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-14, March.
    4. Cooke, Benjamin & Corbo-Perkins, Gabriella, 2018. "Co-opting and resisting market based instruments for private land conservation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 172-181.
    5. Yuan Liu & Sihai Liu & Kun Xing, 2024. "Assessment of Ecosystem Services and Exploration of Trade-Offs and Synergistic Relationships in Arid Areas: A Case Study of the Kriya River Basin in Xinjiang, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-21, March.
    6. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    7. Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Rechciński, Marcin & Tusznio, Joanna & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2022. "Divergent or convergent? Prioritization and spatial representation of ecosystem services as perceived by conservation professionals and local leaders," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    8. Ping Shen & Lijuan Wu & Ziwen Huo & Jiaying Zhang, 2023. "A Study on the Spatial Pattern of the Ecological Product Value of China’s County-Level Regions Based on GEP Evaluation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-18, February.
    9. Aritta Suwarno & Meine van Noordwijk & Hans-Peter Weikard & Desi Suyamto, 2018. "Indonesia’s forest conversion moratorium assessed with an agent-based model of Land-Use Change and Ecosystem Services (LUCES)," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 211-229, February.
    10. Evans, Nicole M. & Carrozzino-Lyon, Amy L. & Galbraith, Betsy & Noordyk, Julia & Peroff, Deidre M. & Stoll, John & Thompson, Aaron & Winden, Matthew W. & Davis, Mark A., 2019. "Integrated ecosystem service assessment for landscape conservation design in the Green Bay watershed, Wisconsin," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    11. Loc, Ho Huu & Park, Edward & Thu, Tran Ngoc & Diep, Nguyen Thi Hong & Can, Nguyen Trong, 2021. "An enhanced analytical framework of participatory GIS for ecosystem services assessment applied to a Ramsar wetland site in the Vietnam Mekong Delta," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    12. Dennis, Matthew & James, Philip, 2017. "Ecosystem services of collectively managed urban gardens: Exploring factors affecting synergies and trade-offs at the site level," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 17-26.
    13. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    14. J. Carl Ureta & Lucas Clay & Marzieh Motallebi & Joan Ureta, 2020. "Quantifying the Landscape’s Ecological Benefits—An Analysis of the Effect of Land Cover Change on Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-20, December.
    15. Jennifer Hodbod & Emma Tebbs & Kristofer Chan & Shubhechchha Sharma, 2019. "Integrating Participatory Methods and Remote Sensing to Enhance Understanding of Ecosystem Service Dynamics Across Scales," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-30, August.
    16. Ilaria Zambon & Artemi Cerdà & Filippo Gambella & Gianluca Egidi & Luca Salvati, 2019. "Industrial Sprawl and Residential Housing: Exploring the Interplay between Local Development and Land-Use Change in the Valencian Community, Spain," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-18, September.
    17. Liu, Peng & Jiang, Shiwei & Zhao, Lianjun & Li, Yunxi & Zhang, Pingping & Zhang, Li, 2017. "What are the benefits of strictly protected nature reserves? Rapid assessment of ecosystem service values in Wanglang Nature Reserve, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 70-78.
    18. Sinare, Hanna & Gordon, Line J. & Enfors Kautsky, Elin, 2016. "Assessment of ecosystem services and benefits in village landscapes – A case study from Burkina Faso," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PA), pages 141-152.
    19. Arriagada, Rodrigo & Villaseñor, Adrián & Rubiano, Eliana & Cotacachi, David & Morrison, Judith, 2018. "Analysing the impacts of PES programmes beyond economic rationale: Perceptions of ecosystem services provision associated to the Mexican case," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 116-127.
    20. Cooper, Nigel & Brady, Emily & Steen, Helen & Bryce, Rosalind, 2016. "Aesthetic and spiritual values of ecosystems: Recognising the ontological and axiological plurality of cultural ecosystem ‘services’," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 218-229.

    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:12:y:2019:i:1:p:66-:d:300092. 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.