IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i5p539-d557871.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Informed Geoheritage Conservation: Determinant Analysis Based on Bibliometric and Sustainability Indicators Using Ordination Techniques

Author

Listed:
  • Boglárka Németh

    (School of Agriculture and Environment, Volcanic Risk Solutions, Turitea Campus, Massey University, Palmerston North 4442, New Zealand)

  • Károly Németh

    (School of Agriculture and Environment, Volcanic Risk Solutions, Turitea Campus, Massey University, Palmerston North 4442, New Zealand)

  • Jon N. Procter

    (School of Agriculture and Environment, Volcanic Risk Solutions, Turitea Campus, Massey University, Palmerston North 4442, New Zealand)

Abstract

Ordination methods are used in ecological multivariate statistics in order to reduce the number of dimensions and arrange individual variables along environmental variables. Geoheritage designation is a new challenge for conservation planning. Quantification of geoheritage to date is used explicitly for site selection, however, it also carries significant potential to be one of the indicators of sustainable development that is delivered through geosystem services. In order to achieve such a dominant position, geoheritage needs to be included in the business as usual model of conservation planning. Questions about the quantification process that have typically been addressed in geoheritage studies can be answered more directly by their relationships to world development indicators. We aim to relate the major informative geoheritage practices to underlying trends of successful geoheritage implementation through statistical analysis of countries with the highest trackable geoheritage interest. Correspondence analysis (CA) was used to obtain information on how certain indicators bundle together. Multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) was used to detect sets of factors to determine positive geoheritage conservation outcomes. The analysis resulted in ordination diagrams that visualize correlations among determinant variables translated to links between socio-economic background and geoheritage conservation outcomes. Indicators derived from geoheritage-related academic activity and world development metrics show a shift from significant Earth science output toward disciplines of strong international agreement such as tourism, sustainability and biodiversity. Identifying contributing factors to conservation-related decisions helps experts to tailor their proposals for required evidence-based quantification reports and reinforce the scientific significance of geoheritage.

Suggested Citation

  • Boglárka Németh & Károly Németh & Jon N. Procter, 2021. "Informed Geoheritage Conservation: Determinant Analysis Based on Bibliometric and Sustainability Indicators Using Ordination Techniques," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-31, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:5:p:539-:d:557871
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/5/539/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/5/539/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bohringer, Christoph & Jochem, Patrick E.P., 2007. "Measuring the immeasurable -- A survey of sustainability indices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 1-8, June.
    2. Benedetto Lepori & Aldo Geuna & Antonietta Mira, 2019. "Scientific output scales with resources. A comparison of US and European universities," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-18, October.
    3. Vincent Larivière & Chaoqun Ni & Yves Gingras & Blaise Cronin & Cassidy R. Sugimoto, 2013. "Bibliometrics: Global gender disparities in science," Nature, Nature, vol. 504(7479), pages 211-213, December.
    4. Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez & Grisel Zacca-González & Benjamín Vargas-Quesada & Félix Moya-Anegón, 2015. "Latin American scientific output in Public Health: combined analysis using bibliometric, socioeconomic and health indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 609-628, January.
    5. Gemma E. Derrick & Vincenzo Pavone, 2013. "Democratising research evaluation: Achieving greater public engagement with bibliometrics-informed peer review," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 40(5), pages 563-575, April.
    6. Yoshiko Okubo, 1997. "Bibliometric Indicators and Analysis of Research Systems: Methods and Examples," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 1997/1, OECD Publishing.
    7. Måns Nilsson & Dave Griggs & Martin Visbeck, 2016. "Policy: Map the interactions between Sustainable Development Goals," Nature, Nature, vol. 534(7607), pages 320-322, June.
    8. Thed N. Van Leeuwen & Martijn S. Visser & Henk F. Moed & Ton J. Nederhof & Anthony F. J. Van Raan, 2003. "The Holy Grail of science policy: Exploring and combining bibliometric tools in search of scientific excellence," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 57(2), pages 257-280, June.
    9. David Griggs & Mark Stafford-Smith & Owen Gaffney & Johan Rockström & Marcus C. Öhman & Priya Shyamsundar & Will Steffen & Gisbert Glaser & Norichika Kanie & Ian Noble, 2013. "Sustainable development goals for people and planet," Nature, Nature, vol. 495(7441), pages 305-307, March.
    10. Anthony F. J. Raan, 2006. "Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 67(3), pages 491-502, June.
    11. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    12. Iddrisu, Insah & Bhattacharyya, Subhes C., 2015. "Sustainable Energy Development Index: A multi-dimensional indicator for measuring sustainable energy development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 513-530.
    13. Lee Cronbach, 1951. "Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 16(3), pages 297-334, September.
    14. Rami Obeid & Bassam Awad, 2018. "The Effect of Trade Openness on Economic Growth in Jordan: An Analytical Investigation (1992-2015)," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 8(2), pages 219-226.
    15. Zoderer, Brenda Maria & Tasser, Erich & Carver, Steve & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2019. "Stakeholder perspectives on ecosystem service supply and ecosystem service demand bundles," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-1.
    16. M. O. Hill, 1974. "Correspondence Analysis: A Neglected Multivariate Method," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 23(3), pages 340-354, November.
    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. Tan Yigitcanlar & Md. Kamruzzaman, 2015. "Planning, Development and Management of Sustainable Cities: A Commentary from the Guest Editors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(11), pages 1-12, November.
    2. Jan Anton van Zanten & Rob van Tulder, 2021. "Improving companies' impacts on sustainable development: A nexus approach to the SDGS," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(8), pages 3703-3720, December.
    3. Matteo Pedercini & Steve Arquitt & Derek Chan, 2020. "Integrated simulation for the 2030 agenda†," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 36(3), pages 333-357, July.
    4. Gyula Dörgő & Viktor Sebestyén & János Abonyi, 2018. "Evaluating the Interconnectedness of the Sustainable Development Goals Based on the Causality Analysis of Sustainability Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-26, October.
    5. Ingrid Boas & Frank Biermann & Norichika Kanie, 2016. "Cross-sectoral strategies in global sustainability governance: towards a nexus approach," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 449-464, June.
    6. Shannon Rogers & Semra Aytur & Kevin Gardner & Cynthia Carlson, 2012. "Measuring community sustainability: exploring the intersection of the built environment & social capital with a participatory case study," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 2(2), pages 143-153, June.
    7. Daniela C. Momete, 2016. "Building a Sustainable Healthcare Model: A Cross-Country Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-15, August.
    8. Ernest Reig‐Martínez & José A. Gómez‐Limón & Andrés J. Picazo‐Tadeo, 2011. "Ranking farms with a composite indicator of sustainability," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 42(5), pages 561-575, September.
    9. Franks, Jeremy & Frater, Poppy, 2013. "Measuring agricultural sustainability at the farm-level: A pragmatic approach," International Journal of Agricultural Management, Institute of Agricultural Management, vol. 2(4), pages 1-19, July.
    10. Luciano Barcellos-Paula & Iván De la Vega & Anna María Gil-Lafuente, 2021. "The Quintuple Helix of Innovation Model and the SDGs: Latin-American Countries’ Case and Its Forgotten Effects," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-23, February.
    11. Shahryar Rahnamayan & Sedigheh Mahdavi & Kalyanmoy Deb & Azam Asilian Bidgoli, 2020. "Ranking Multi-Metric Scientific Achievements Using a Concept of Pareto Optimality," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-46, June.
    12. Carmen García-Peña & Moneyba González-Medina & Jose Manuel Diaz-Sarachaga, 2021. "Assessment of the Governance Dimension in the Frame of the 2030 Agenda: Evidence from 100 Spanish Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-21, May.
    13. Nessa Winston, 2021. "Sustainable community development: Integrating social and environmental sustainability for sustainable housing and communities," Working Papers 202106, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    14. Else Ragni Yttredal & Nathalie Homlong, 2020. "Perception of Sustainable Development in a Local World Heritage Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-19, October.
    15. Shelby D. Hunt, 2017. "Strategic marketing, sustainability, the triple bottom line, and resource-advantage (R-A) theory: Securing the foundations of strategic marketing theory and research," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 7(1), pages 52-66, June.
    16. Myriam Pham‐Truffert & Florence Metz & Manuel Fischer & Henri Rueff & Peter Messerli, 2020. "Interactions among Sustainable Development Goals: Knowledge for identifying multipliers and virtuous cycles," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(5), pages 1236-1250, September.
    17. Karen Holm Olsen & Fatemeh Bakhtiari & Virender Kumar Duggal & Jørge Villy Fenhann, 2019. "Sustainability labelling as a tool for reporting the sustainable development impacts of climate actions relevant to Article 6 of the Paris Agreement," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 225-251, April.
    18. Viswanatha Reddy Krishna & Venkatesh Paramesh & Vadivel Arunachalam & Bappa Das & Hosam O. Elansary & Arjun Parab & Dendi Damodar Reddy & K. S. Shashidhar & Diaa O. El-Ansary & Eman A. Mahmoud & Moham, 2020. "Assessment of Sustainability and Priorities for Development of Indian West Coast Region: An Application of Sustainable Livelihood Security Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-19, October.
    19. Lena Partzsch, 2023. "Missing the SDGs: Political accountability for insufficient environmental action," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(3), pages 438-450, June.
    20. Lauriane Mouysset & Luc Doyen & François Léger & Frédéric Jiguet & Tim G. Benton, 2018. "Operationalizing Sustainability as a Safe Policy Space," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-9, October.

    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:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:5:p:539-:d:557871. 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.