IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/oropre/v69y2021i5p1487-1508.html

Operations Research : Topics, Impact, and Trends from 1952–2019

Author

Listed:
  • Angelito Calma

    (Williams Centre for Learning Advancement, Faculty of Business and Economics, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria 3010, Australia)

  • William Ho

    (Department of Management and Marketing, Faculty of Business and Economics, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria 3010, Australia)

  • Lusheng Shao

    (Department of Management and Marketing, Faculty of Business and Economics, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria 3010, Australia)

  • Huashan Li

    (Department of Management and Marketing, Faculty of Business and Economics, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria 3010, Australia)

Abstract

This paper is a retrospective look at 68 years of publication output of Operations Research , revealing changes in its publications, its authors, and their impact over time and how these changes might affect researchers and practitioners in the present. A total of 5,440 journal articles from its inception in 1952 to 2019 are used. The analysis initially focuses on the most studied topics and then continues with the top research methods and research problems investigated. The top contributing countries and authors to the most investigated research problems are also studied. The results indicate that mathematical programming is the most common research method, whereas inventory is the most investigated problem. However, investigations related to pricing are growing significantly. The United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom publish the most papers, with the United States and Canada having similar publication profiles per capita. Inventory is the most popular research problem studied by North American, Asian, and Middle Eastern countries, whereas European countries focus on scheduling problems. In order to understand the latest research trend, we visualize the networks of the last 10 years of Operations Research that show dynamic programming as the most used method and pricing as the most studied problem. We further visualize the coauthor networks on both dynamic programming and pricing to identify the most significant clusters of researchers and the topics these research clusters collaborate on. Finally, we provide researchers information about where Operations Research is and where it is likely heading.

Suggested Citation

  • Angelito Calma & William Ho & Lusheng Shao & Huashan Li, 2021. "Operations Research : Topics, Impact, and Trends from 1952–2019," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 69(5), pages 1487-1508, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:oropre:v:69:y:2021:i:5:p:1487-1508
    DOI: 10.1287/opre.2021.2139
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/opre.2021.2139
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/opre.2021.2139?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Laengle, Sigifredo & Merigó, José M. & Miranda, Jaime & Słowiński, Roman & Bomze, Immanuel & Borgonovo, Emanuele & Dyson, Robert G. & Oliveira, José Fernando & Teunter, Ruud, 2017. "Forty years of the European Journal of Operational Research: A bibliometric overview," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(3), pages 803-816.
    2. Zhang, Yi & Shang, Lining & Huang, Lu & Porter, Alan L. & Zhang, Guangquan & Lu, Jie & Zhu, Donghua, 2016. "A hybrid similarity measure method for patent portfolio analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 1108-1130.
    3. Dengsheng Wu & Yongjia Xie & Qianzhi Dai & Jianping Li, 2016. "A Systematic Overview of Operations Research/Management Science Research in Mainland China: Bibliometric Analysis of the Period 2001–2013," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 33(06), pages 1-26, December.
    4. Victor M. Zavala & Kibaek Kim & Mihai Anitescu & John Birge, 2017. "A Stochastic Electricity Market Clearing Formulation with Consistent Pricing Properties," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 557-576, June.
    5. Harry B. Back, 1974. "A Comparison of Operations Research and Management Science Based on Bibliographic Citations," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 4(2), pages 42-52, February.
    6. Yang, Siluo & Han, Ruizhen & Wolfram, Dietmar & Zhao, Yuehua, 2016. "Visualizing the intellectual structure of information science (2006–2015): Introducing author keyword coupling analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 132-150.
    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. Jabir Ali & Tabassum Ali, 2024. "Circular economy and agriculture: mapping scientific productivity, research pattern and future research direction," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(12), pages 30063-30108, December.
    2. Hussain, Walayat & Merigó, José M. & Rahimi, Iman & Lev, Benjamin, 2025. "Half a century of Omega – The International Journal of Management Science: A bibliometric analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).

    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. Hussain, Walayat & Merigó, José M. & Rahimi, Iman & Lev, Benjamin, 2025. "Half a century of Omega – The International Journal of Management Science: A bibliometric analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    2. Martha Flores-Sosa & José M. Merigó & Kenia Sanchez-Valenzuela, 2025. "30 years of the Journal of Heuristics: a bibliometric analysis," Journal of Heuristics, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 1-55, March.
    3. Munan Li, 2018. "Classifying and ranking topic terms based on a novel approach: role differentiation of author keywords," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 77-100, July.
    4. Liao, Huchang & Tang, Ming & Li, Zongmin & Lev, Benjamin, 2019. "Bibliometric analysis for highly cited papers in operations research and management science from 2008 to 2017 based on Essential Science Indicators," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 223-236.
    5. Song Yanhui & Lei Lixin, 2024. "Inventor bibliographic-patent-coupling analysis and inventor-patent-classification-coupling analysis: a comparative analysis based on NPE," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(2), pages 745-765, February.
    6. Xiao Zhou & Lu Huang & Yi Zhang & Miaomiao Yu, 2019. "A hybrid approach to detecting technological recombination based on text mining and patent network analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 699-737, November.
    7. Wipatkrut, Pattharaporn & Su, Hsin-Ning, 2025. "Exploring the impact of technological convergence on General-Purpose Technologies: A multi-level generality perspective," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    8. Gaviria-Marin, Magaly & Merigó, José M. & Baier-Fuentes, Hugo, 2019. "Knowledge management: A global examination based on bibliometric analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 194-220.
    9. Xuefeng Wang & Huichao Ren & Yun Chen & Yuqin Liu & Yali Qiao & Ying Huang, 2019. "Measuring patent similarity with SAO semantic analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 1-23, October.
    10. Kai Hu & Huayi Wu & Kunlun Qi & Jingmin Yu & Siluo Yang & Tianxing Yu & Jie Zheng & Bo Liu, 2018. "A domain keyword analysis approach extending Term Frequency-Keyword Active Index with Google Word2Vec model," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1031-1068, March.
    11. Satish Kumar & Filomena Maggino & Raj V. Mahto & Riya Sureka & Leonardo Salvatore Alaimo & Weng Marc Lim, 2022. "Social Indicators Research: A Retrospective Using Bibliometric Analysis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 162(1), pages 413-448, July.
    12. Yi Bu & Binglu Wang & Win-bin Huang & Shangkun Che & Yong Huang, 2018. "Using the appearance of citations in full text on author co-citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 275-289, July.
    13. Wang, Xiaoguang & He, Jing & Huang, Han & Wang, Hongyu, 2022. "MatrixSim: A new method for detecting the evolution paths of research topics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    14. Leslier Valenzuela-Fernández & Manuel Escobar-Farfán, 2022. "Zero-Waste Management and Sustainable Consumption: A Comprehensive Bibliometric Mapping Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-24, December.
    15. Javad Khazaei & Golbon Zakeri & Shmuel S. Oren, 2017. "Single and Multisettlement Approaches to Market Clearing Under Demand Uncertainty," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(5), pages 1147-1164, October.
    16. Dejian Yu & Sun Meng, 2018. "An overview of biomass energy research with bibliometric indicators," Energy & Environment, , vol. 29(4), pages 576-590, June.
    17. P. K. Priyan & Wakara Ibrahimu Nyabakora & Geofrey Rwezimula, 2023. "A bibliometric review of the knowledge base on financial inclusion," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 1-21, February.
    18. Rosa Maria Arnaldo Valdés & Serhat Burmaoglu & Vincenzo Tucci & Luiz Manuel Braga da Costa Campos & Lucia Mattera & Víctor Fernando Gomez Comendador, 2019. "Flight Path 2050 and ACARE Goals for Maintaining and Extending Industrial Leadership in Aviation: A Map of the Aviation Technology Space," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-24, April.
    19. Sabrina Petersohn & Thomas Heinze, 2018. "Professionalization of bibliometric research assessment. Insights from the history of the Leiden Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS)," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 565-578.
    20. Hao Wang & Sanhong Deng & Xinning Su, 2016. "A study on construction and analysis of discipline knowledge structure of Chinese LIS based on CSSCI," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1725-1759, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:inm:oropre:v:69:y:2021:i:5:p:1487-1508. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.