IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i11p2083-d977360.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ecosystem Services Provided by Pastoral Husbandry: A Bibliometric Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Juan Manuel Mancilla-Leytón

    (Departamento de Biología Vegetal y Ecología, Facultad de Biología, Universidad de Sevilla, 41012 Seville, Spain
    Instituto Interuniversitario Andaluz en Robótica y Sistemas Inteligentes, “Robotics and Intelligent Systems” (RIS), Universidad de Sevilla, C/Torricelli 18–20, 41092 Seville, Spain)

  • Djamila Gribis

    (Departamento de Biología Vegetal y Ecología, Facultad de Biología, Universidad de Sevilla, 41012 Seville, Spain)

  • Claudio Pozo-Campos

    (Departamento de Biología Vegetal y Ecología, Facultad de Biología, Universidad de Sevilla, 41012 Seville, Spain)

  • Eduardo Morales-Jerrett

    (Departamento de Agronomía, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería Agronómica, Universidad de Sevilla, 41013 Seville, Spain)

  • Yolanda Mena

    (Departamento de Agronomía, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería Agronómica, Universidad de Sevilla, 41013 Seville, Spain)

  • Jesús Cambrollé

    (Departamento de Biología Vegetal y Ecología, Facultad de Biología, Universidad de Sevilla, 41012 Seville, Spain
    Instituto Interuniversitario Andaluz en Robótica y Sistemas Inteligentes, “Robotics and Intelligent Systems” (RIS), Universidad de Sevilla, C/Torricelli 18–20, 41092 Seville, Spain)

  • Ángel Martín Vicente

    (Departamento de Biología Vegetal y Ecología, Facultad de Biología, Universidad de Sevilla, 41012 Seville, Spain)

Abstract

The ecosystem services provided by the age-old activity of husbandry are presently declining or seriously endangered. The situation is particularly serious for regulation services and for certain cultural services given their growing dependence on external inputs. This work performs a bibliometric analysis for the purpose of identifying the certainties and gaps associated with the different ecosystems generated by pastoral husbandry, and confirms the pressing challenges that the livestock industry is facing in the current context of global change. Two different tools, Scopus and VOSviewer, have been implemented to analyze 2230 documents published between 1961 and 2021 that include the terms “grazing” and “service”. The information required for the bibliometric analysis of authorship, country of origin, field of study and number of citations, among other categories, was drawn from the documents to the effect of evidencing their general thematic relationships. Finally, the current state of the ecosystem services currently provided by pastoral husbandry—provisioning, regulation, cultural and support services—was assessed. The results showed a greater abundance of scientific literature on provisioning and regulation services than on cultural and support services. An increase in the number of publications from the beginning of the 21st century was confirmed. The United States stands out as the country with the largest scientific production, and environmental sciences is the most prominent field in the study of ecosystem services. A recent larger academic effort to encourage the promotion of ecosystem services from the institutions has also been observed, as well as to include them as a factor in the development of environmental policies, which is described as the greatest challenge for the future of this discipline. Among other possible solutions, the new European Union agricultural subsidies—the so-called eco-schemes—appear to be essential for that effort to bear fruit as soon as possible.

Suggested Citation

  • Juan Manuel Mancilla-Leytón & Djamila Gribis & Claudio Pozo-Campos & Eduardo Morales-Jerrett & Yolanda Mena & Jesús Cambrollé & Ángel Martín Vicente, 2022. "Ecosystem Services Provided by Pastoral Husbandry: A Bibliometric Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-13, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:11:p:2083-:d:977360
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/11/2083/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/11/2083/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Donthu, Naveen & Kumar, Satish & Mukherjee, Debmalya & Pandey, Nitesh & Lim, Weng Marc, 2021. "How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 285-296.
    2. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    3. C. Terrer & R. P. Phillips & B. A. Hungate & J. Rosende & J. Pett-Ridge & M. E. Craig & K. J. Groenigen & T. F. Keenan & B. N. Sulman & B. D. Stocker & P. B. Reich & A. F. A. Pellegrini & E. Pendall &, 2021. "A trade-off between plant and soil carbon storage under elevated CO2," Nature, Nature, vol. 591(7851), pages 599-603, March.
    4. Sara Muñoz Vallés & Juan Manuel Mancilla-Leytón & Eduardo Morales-Jerrett & Yolanda Mena, 2021. "Natural Carbon Sinks Linked to Pastoral Activity in S Spain: A Territorial Evaluation Methodology for Mediterranean Goat Grazing Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-15, May.
    5. Eduardo Morales-Jerrett & Juan Manuel Mancilla-Leytón & Manuel Delgado-Pertíñez & Yolanda Mena, 2020. "The Contribution of Traditional Meat Goat Farming Systems to Human Wellbeing and Its Importance for the Sustainability of This Livestock Subsector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-23, February.
    6. Nahlik, Amanda M. & Kentula, Mary E. & Fennessy, M. Siobhan & Landers, Dixon H., 2012. "Where is the consensus? A proposed foundation for moving ecosystem service concepts into practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 27-35.
    7. Martina K Linnenluecke & Mauricio Marrone & Abhay K Singh, 2020. "Conducting systematic literature reviews and bibliometric analyses," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 45(2), pages 175-194, May.
    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. Jan Wiers & Didier Chabaud, 2022. "Bibliometric analysis of immigrant entrepreneurship research 2009–2019," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 12(1), pages 441-464, December.
    2. Bolaños-Valencia, Ingrid & Villegas-Palacio, Clara & López-Gómez, Connie Paola & Berrouet, Lina & Ruiz, Aura, 2019. "Social perception of risk in socio-ecological systems. A qualitative and quantitative analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Bordt, Michael, 2018. "Discourses in Ecosystem Accounting: A Survey of the Expert Community," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 82-99.
    4. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    5. Albérico Travassos Rosário & Joana Carmo Dias & Hélder Ferreira, 2023. "Bibliometric Analysis on the Application of Fuzzy Logic into Marketing Strategy," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-22, July.
    6. Stapleton, L.M. & Hanna, P. & Ravenscroft, N. & Church, A., 2014. "A flexible ecosystem services proto-typology based on public opinion," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 83-90.
    7. Bahareh Mansouri & Subhasmita Sahu & M. Ali Ülkü, 2023. "Toward Greening City Logistics: A Systematic Review on Corporate Governance and Social Responsibility in Managing Urban Distribution Centers," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-20, March.
    8. Mohammed H. Alzard & Hilal El-Hassan & Tamer El-Maaddawy & Marwa Alsalami & Fatma Abdulrahman & Ashraf Aly Hassan, 2022. "A Bibliometric Analysis of the Studies on Self-Healing Concrete Published between 1974 and 2021," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-22, September.
    9. Darko B. Vuković & Senanu Dekpo-Adza & Stefana Matović, 2025. "AI integration in financial services: a systematic review of trends and regulatory challenges," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-29, December.
    10. Sandip Solanki & Seema Singh & Meeta Joshi, 2023. "A Bibliometric Analysis of the International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy: 2013-2022," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 13(5), pages 260-270, September.
    11. Bartkowski, Bartosz & Lienhoop, Nele & Hansjürgens, Bernd, 2015. "Capturing the complexity of biodiversity: A critical review of economic valuation studies of biological diversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1-14.
    12. Mohammad Sahabuddin & Md. Nazmus Sakib & Md. Mahbubur Rahman & Adamu Jibir & Mochammad Fahlevi & Mohammed Aljuaid & Sandra Grabowska, 2023. "The Evolution of FinTech in Scientific Research: A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-16, April.
    13. Sascha Kraus & Ricarda B. Bouncken & Alba Yela Aránega, 2024. "The burgeoning role of literature review articles in management research: an introduction and outlook," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 299-314, February.
    14. Claudia Kettner-Marx & Angela Köppl & Sigrid Stagl, 2014. "Towards an Operational Measurement of Socio-ecological Performance. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 52," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 47154, March.
    15. Tommaso Feraco & Nicole Casali, 2025. "20 Years of Character Strengths: A Bibliometric Review," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 1-22, March.
    16. Kambo, Amrita & Drogemuller, Robin & Yarlagadda, Prasad K.D.V., 2019. "Assessing Biophilic Design Elements for ecosystem service attributes – A sub-tropical Australian case," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    17. Ahmed, Shamima & Alshater, Muneer M. & Ammari, Anis El & Hammami, Helmi, 2022. "Artificial intelligence and machine learning in finance: A bibliometric review," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    18. Tufan Özsoy & Konuralp Sezgili, 2024. "Exploring the Current Practices and Future Directions in Project Management Education and Training," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(1), pages 21582440241, March.
    19. Nápoles-Vértiz, Sonia & Caro-Borrero, Angela, 2024. "Conceptual diversity and application of ecosystem services and disservices: A systematic review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    20. Oğuzhan Öztürk & Rıdvan Kocaman & Dominik K. Kanbach, 2024. "How to design bibliometric research: an overview and a framework proposal," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 18(11), pages 3333-3361, November.

    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:11:y:2022:i:11:p:2083-:d:977360. 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.