IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i3p623-d200666.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Imbalances between the Quantity and Quality of China’s Solar Energy Research

Author

Listed:
  • Rongrong Li

    (School of Management & Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China
    School of Economics & Management, China University of Petroleum (East China), Qingdao 266580, China)

  • Xuefeng Wang

    (School of Management & Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China)

Abstract

China’s solar energy industry is developing rapidly and China’s solar energy research is experiencing a high speed of development alongside it. Is China’s solar energy research growth quantity-driven (paper-driven) or quality-driven (citation-driven)? Answering this question is important for China’s solar research field and industrial sector, and has implications for China’s other renewable research programs. Applying statistical methods, the citation analysis method, and web of science data, this study investigated China’s solar energy research between 2007 and 2015 from two perspectives: quantity (numbers of papers) and quality (number of paper citations). The results show that the number of Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-E) papers on solar energy in China has grown rapidly, surpassing the United States to become the world leader in 2015. However, the growth rate in scientific production was consistently higher than the growth rate of the number of times cited. When considering the average number of times a paper was cited among the top ten countries researching solar energy, China was in last place from 2007 to 2015. Further, the impact and effectiveness of China’s papers were below the world average from 2010 to 2015, and experienced a sharp decreasing trend. These results suggest that China’s solar energy research is a quantitatively driven model, with a mismatch between quantity and quality. New policies should be introduced to encourage high-quality research and achieve a balance between quantity and quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Rongrong Li & Xuefeng Wang, 2019. "Imbalances between the Quantity and Quality of China’s Solar Energy Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-15, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:3:p:623-:d:200666
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/3/623/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/3/623/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chen, Wei & Liu, Wenjing & Geng, Yong & Brown, Mark T. & Gao, Cuixia & Wu, Rui, 2017. "Recent progress on emergy research: A bibliometric analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 1051-1060.
    2. Lutz Bornmann, 2014. "How are excellent (highly cited) papers defined in bibliometrics? A quantitative analysis of the literature," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(2), pages 166-173.
    3. Yaoyang, Xu & Boeing, Wiebke J., 2013. "Mapping biofuel field: A bibliometric evaluation of research output," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 82-91.
    4. Dragan Ivanović & Hui-Zhen Fu & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2015. "Publications from Serbia in the Science Citation Index Expanded: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 145-160, October.
    5. Chen, Hua-Qi & Wang, Xiuping & He, Li & Chen, Ping & Wan, Yuehua & Yang, Lingyun & Jiang, Shuian, 2016. "Chinese energy and fuels research priorities and trend: A bibliometric analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 966-975.
    6. Yu, Hao & Wei, Yi-Ming & Tang, Bao-Jun & Mi, Zhifu & Pan, Su-Yan, 2016. "Assessment on the research trend of low-carbon energy technology investment: A bibliometric analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 960-970.
    7. Bensi Dong & Guoqiang Xu & Xiang Luo & Yi Cai & Wei Gao, 2012. "A bibliometric analysis of solar power research from 1991 to 2010," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 1101-1117, December.
    8. Rongzhen Ma & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2016. "Comparison of environmental laws publications in Science Citation Index Expanded and Social Science Index: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(1), pages 227-239, October.
    9. Jingjing Zhang & Yan Yan & Jiancheng Guan, 2015. "Scientific relatedness in solar energy: a comparative study between the USA and China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1595-1613, February.
    10. Lutz Bornmann & Caroline Wagner & Loet Leydesdorff, 2015. "BRICS countries and scientific excellence: A bibliometric analysis of most frequently cited papers," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(7), pages 1507-1513, July.
    11. de Paulo, Alex Fabianne & Porto, Geciane Silveira, 2017. "Solar energy technologies and open innovation: A study based on bibliometric and social network analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 228-238.
    12. M. A. Martínez & M. Herrera & E. Contreras & A. Ruíz & E. Herrera-Viedma, 2015. "Characterizing highly cited papers in Social Work through H-Classics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1713-1729, February.
    13. Richard Klavans & Kevin W. Boyack, 2017. "Which Type of Citation Analysis Generates the Most Accurate Taxonomy of Scientific and Technical Knowledge?," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(4), pages 984-998, April.
    14. Mao, Guozhu & Zou, Hongyang & Chen, Guanyi & Du, Huibin & Zuo, Jian, 2015. "Past, current and future of biomass energy research: A bibliometric analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1823-1833.
    15. Wang, Yuan & Lai, Nan & Zuo, Jian & Chen, Guanyi & Du, Huibin, 2016. "Characteristics and trends of research on waste-to-energy incineration: A bibliometric analysis, 1999–2015," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 95-104.
    16. Kevin W. Boyack & Henry Small & Richard Klavans, 2013. "Improving the accuracy of co-citation clustering using full text," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(9), pages 1759-1767, September.
    17. Bornmann, Lutz & Schier, Hermann & Marx, Werner & Daniel, Hans-Dieter, 2012. "What factors determine citation counts of publications in chemistry besides their quality?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 11-18.
    18. Wang, Qiang & Chen, Xi, 2015. "Energy policies for managing China’s carbon emission," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 470-479.
    19. Sanz-Casado, Elias & Lascurain-Sánchez, Maria Luisa & Serrano-Lopez, Antonio Eleazar & Larsen, Birger & Ingwersen, Peter, 2014. "Production, consumption and research on solar energy: The Spanish and German case," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 733-744.
    20. Dragan Ivanović & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2014. "Independent publications from Serbia in the Science Citation Index Expanded: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 603-622, October.
    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. Imran, Muhammad & Haglind, Fredrik & Asim, Muhammad & Zeb Alvi, Jahan, 2018. "Recent research trends in organic Rankine cycle technology: A bibliometric approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P1), pages 552-562.
    2. Hache, Emmanuel & Palle, Angélique, 2019. "Renewable energy source integration into power networks, research trends and policy implications: A bibliometric and research actors survey analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 23-35.
    3. Katarzyna Sanak-Kosmowska & Jan W. Wiktor, 2021. "The Morphology and Differentiation of the Content of International Debate on Renewable Energy. A Bibliometric Analysis of Web of Science, Scopus, and Twitter," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-23, October.
    4. Takahiro Kawamura & Katsutaro Watanabe & Naoya Matsumoto & Shusaku Egami & Mari Jibu, 2018. "Funding map using paragraph embedding based on semantic diversity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(2), pages 941-958, August.
    5. Dejian Yu & Sun Meng, 2018. "An overview of biomass energy research with bibliometric indicators," Energy & Environment, , vol. 29(4), pages 576-590, June.
    6. Seyed Mahmoud Zanjirchi & Mina Rezaeian Abrishami & Negar Jalilian, 2019. "Four decades of fuzzy sets theory in operations management: application of life-cycle, bibliometrics and content analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(3), pages 1289-1309, June.
    7. Hernández-Escobedo, Quetzalcoatl & Perea-Moreno, Alberto-Jesús & Manzano-Agugliaro, Francisco, 2018. "Wind energy research in Mexico," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 719-729.
    8. Khadija Sarquah & Satyanarayana Narra & Gesa Beck & Edward A. Awafo & Edward Antwi, 2022. "Bibliometric Analysis; Characteristics and Trends of Refuse Derived Fuel Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-18, February.
    9. Lutz Bornmann & Alexander Tekles & Loet Leydesdorff, 2019. "How well does I3 perform for impact measurement compared to other bibliometric indicators? The convergent validity of several (field-normalized) indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 1187-1205, May.
    10. Wang, Qiang & Li, Rongrong, 2017. "Research status of shale gas: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 715-720.
    11. Wenjie Zhang & Hongping Yuan, 2019. "A Bibliometric Analysis of Energy Performance Contracting Research from 2008 to 2018," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-23, June.
    12. Tahamtan, Iman & Bornmann, Lutz, 2018. "Core elements in the process of citing publications: Conceptual overview of the literature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 203-216.
    13. Xiaowei Ma & Mei Wang & Chuandong Li, 2019. "A Summary on Research of Household Energy Consumption: A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, December.
    14. Yueran Duan & Qing Guan, 2021. "Predicting potential knowledge convergence of solar energy: bibliometric analysis based on link prediction model," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 3749-3773, May.
    15. Dutra, Luciana da Silva & Costa Cerqueira Pinto, Martina & Cipolatti, Eliane Pereira & Aguieiras, Erika Cristina G. & Manoel, Evelin Andrade & Greco-Duarte, Jaqueline & Guimarães Freire, Denise Maria , 2022. "How the biodiesel from immobilized enzymes production is going on: An advanced bibliometric evaluation of global research," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    16. de Paulo, Alex Fabianne & Porto, Geciane Silveira, 2017. "Solar energy technologies and open innovation: A study based on bibliometric and social network analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 228-238.
    17. Tian-Yuan Huang & Liying Yang, 2022. "Superior identification index: Quantifying the capability of academic journals to recognize good research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(7), pages 4023-4043, July.
    18. Brito, Ricardo & Rodríguez-Navarro, Alonso, 2018. "Research assessment by percentile-based double rank analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 315-329.
    19. Sitaram Devarakonda & Dmitriy Korobskiy & Tandy Warnow & George Chacko, 2020. "Viewing computer science through citation analysis: Salton and Bergmark Redux," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 271-287, October.
    20. JingJing Zhang & Jiancheng Guan, 2017. "Scientific relatedness and intellectual base: a citation analysis of un-cited and highly-cited papers in the solar energy field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 141-162, January.

    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:11:y:2019:i:3:p:623-:d:200666. 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.