IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/envsyd/v45y2025i2d10.1007_s10669-025-10010-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Publication patterns and collaborative dynamics of the fish and wildlife research partnership model

Author

Listed:
  • Sarah Vogel

    (University of Maine)

  • Cynthia Loftin

    (US Geological Survey, Cooperative Research Units)

  • Joseph Zydlewski

    (University of Maine
    US Geological Survey, Maine Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Maine)

Abstract

Collaboration and shared governance structures produce research that meets the information and education needs of partners in conservation and natural resource science. These approaches may lead to effective and relevant outcomes by pooling resources and expertise. As environmental challenges evolve, evaluating long-standing research programs for their continued relevance and effectiveness can ensure they are adaptive. The US Geological Survey Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units (CRU) program provides an ideal model system for such evaluation due to its long history, nationwide presence, and formalized multi-institutional partnership structure. Established in 1935, the program facilitates research and education collaborations between federal and state agencies, universities, and non-governmental organizations. We used bibliometric analysis of CRU publications from 2000 to 2019 to evaluate the output and impact of the CRU program by quantifying CRU scientist-authored publication numbers and types, research co-authorship networks, collaboration patterns, and changes in research topics. Over the 20-year period, research publication output by CRU scientists more than doubled while maintaining stable citation impact. Collaboration networks within the CRU program expanded and became more decentralized, with increased international co-author partnerships. Recent research themes evolved from assessment of species-specific responses to studies assessing broader impacts to ecosystems, with climate change impacts emerging as a relevant theme. While the CRU program is nearly 90 years old, these trends demonstrate adaptability to the changing information and research needs and the program’s capacity for continued relevance through impactful, collaborative research.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarah Vogel & Cynthia Loftin & Joseph Zydlewski, 2025. "Publication patterns and collaborative dynamics of the fish and wildlife research partnership model," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 1-17, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:envsyd:v:45:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s10669-025-10010-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s10669-025-10010-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10669-025-10010-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10669-025-10010-9?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gert Sabidussi, 1966. "The centrality index of a graph," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 31(4), pages 581-603, December.
    2. Aria, Massimo & Cuccurullo, Corrado, 2017. "bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 959-975.
    3. Hendrik P. Dalen, 2021. "How the publish-or-perish principle divides a science: the case of economists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1675-1694, February.
    4. Raminta Pranckutė, 2021. "Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-59, March.
    5. Daniele Fanelli & Vincent Larivière, 2016. "Researchers’ Individual Publication Rate Has Not Increased in a Century," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-12, March.
    6. Cynthia Hardy & Nelson Phillips & Thomas B. Lawrence, 2003. "Resources, Knowledge and Influence: The Organizational Effects of Interorganizational Collaboration," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 321-347, March.
    7. Michael H. MacRoberts & Barbara R. MacRoberts, 2018. "The mismeasure of science: Citation analysis," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 69(3), pages 474-482, March.
    8. Vincent Larivière & Stefanie Haustein & Philippe Mongeon, 2015. "The Oligopoly of Academic Publishers in the Digital Era," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, June.
    9. Dag W. Aksnes & Liv Langfeldt & Paul Wouters, 2019. "Citations, Citation Indicators, and Research Quality: An Overview of Basic Concepts and Theories," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(1), pages 21582440198, February.
    10. Jonathan Adams, 2012. "The rise of research networks," Nature, Nature, vol. 490(7420), pages 335-336, October.
    11. van Dalen, Hendrik Peter, 2021. "How the publish-or-perish principle divides a science: The case of economists," Other publications TiSEM a6a5a855-bb5a-4d52-a841-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    12. Lutz Bornmann & Rüdiger Mutz, 2015. "Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(11), pages 2215-2222, November.
    13. Wagner, Caroline S. & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2005. "Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1608-1618, December.
    14. Staša Milojević, 2010. "Power law distributions in information science: Making the case for logarithmic binning," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(12), pages 2417-2425, December.
    15. Katz, J. Sylvan & Martin, Ben R., 1997. "What is research collaboration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, March.
    16. Staša Milojević, 2010. "Power law distributions in information science: Making the case for logarithmic binning," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(12), pages 2417-2425, December.
    17. Lambiotte, R. & Panzarasa, P., 2009. "Communities, knowledge creation, and information diffusion," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 180-190.
    18. Wagner, Caroline S. & Roessner, J. David & Bobb, Kamau & Klein, Julie Thompson & Boyack, Kevin W. & Keyton, Joann & Rafols, Ismael & Börner, Katy, 2011. "Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): A review of the literature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 14-26.
    19. Hicks, Diana, 2012. "Performance-based university research funding systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 251-261.
    20. repec:plo:pone00:0020961 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Erjia Yan & Ying Ding, 2012. "Scholarly network similarities: How bibliographic coupling networks, citation networks, cocitation networks, topical networks, coauthorship networks, and coword networks relate to each other," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(7), pages 1313-1326, July.
    22. Erjia Yan & Ying Ding, 2012. "Scholarly network similarities: How bibliographic coupling networks, citation networks, cocitation networks, topical networks, coauthorship networks, and coword networks relate to each other," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(7), pages 1313-1326, July.
    23. Max W. Callaghan & Jan C. Minx & Piers M. Forster, 2020. "A topography of climate change research," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 10(2), pages 118-123, February.
    24. Okey, Thomas A., 2003. "Membership of the eight Regional Fishery Management Councils in the United States: are special interests over-represented?," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 193-206, May.
    25. Staša Milojević, 2012. "How Are Academic Age, Productivity and Collaboration Related to Citing Behavior of Researchers?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(11), pages 1-13, November.
    26. Vladimir Batagelj & Monika Cerinšek, 2013. "On bibliographic networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(3), pages 845-864, September.
    27. Leydesdorff, Loet & Wagner, Caroline S., 2008. "International collaboration in science and the formation of a core group," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 317-325.
    28. J. Kruskal, 1964. "Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 29(1), pages 1-27, March.
    29. Loet Leydesdorff & Ismael Rafols, 2009. "A global map of science based on the ISI subject categories," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(2), pages 348-362, February.
    30. Christopher W. Belter & Dian J. Seidel, 2013. "A bibliometric analysis of climate engineering research," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(5), pages 417-427, September.
    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. Svein Kyvik & Ingvild Reymert, 2017. "Research collaboration in groups and networks: differences across academic fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 951-967, November.
    2. A. Velez-Estevez & P. García-Sánchez & J. A. Moral-Munoz & M. J. Cobo, 2022. "Why do papers from international collaborations get more citations? A bibliometric analysis of Library and Information Science papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7517-7555, December.
    3. Graf, Holger & Kalthaus, Martin, 2018. "International research networks: Determinants of country embeddedness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1198-1214.
    4. Jyoti Dua & Hiran H. Lathabai & Vivek Kumar Singh, 2023. "Measuring and characterizing research collaboration in SAARC countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(2), pages 1265-1294, February.
    5. Yang Li & Huajiao Li & Nairong Liu & Xueyong Liu, 2018. "Important institutions of interinstitutional scientific collaboration networks in materials science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 85-103, October.
    6. Lili Wang & Xianwen Wang & Niels J. Philipsen, 2017. "Network structure of scientific collaborations between China and the EU member states," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 765-781, November.
    7. Young-Sun Jang & Young Joo Ko, 2019. "How latecomers catch up to leaders in high-energy physics as Big Science: transition from national system to international collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 437-480, April.
    8. Jyoti Dua & Vivek Kumar Singh & Hiran H. Lathabai, 2023. "Measuring and characterizing international collaboration patterns in Indian scientific research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(9), pages 5081-5116, September.
    9. Stanislav Avdeev, 2021. "International collaboration in higher education research: A gravity model approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 5569-5588, July.
    10. Yuan Chih Fu & Marcelo Marques & Yuen-Hsien Tseng & Justin J. W. Powell & David P. Baker, 2022. "An evolving international research collaboration network: spatial and thematic developments in co-authored higher education research, 1998–2018," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(3), pages 1403-1429, March.
    11. Vieira, Elizabeth S. & Cerdeira, Jorge & Teixeira, Aurora A.C., 2022. "Which distance dimensions matter in international research collaboration? A cross-country analysis by scientific domain," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    12. Vasaf, Esmaeil & Sanatkhani, Mahboobeh, 2014. "Dynamic of Publication Network in German Photovoltaic Industry," MPRA Paper 65453, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2012. "Identifying interdisciplinarity through the disciplinary classification of coauthors of scientific publications," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(11), pages 2206-2222, November.
    14. Zuo, Zhiya & Zhao, Kang, 2018. "The more multidisciplinary the better? – The prevalence and interdisciplinarity of research collaborations in multidisciplinary institutions," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 736-756.
    15. Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
    16. Gibson, Elizabeth & Daim, Tugrul U. & Dabic, Marina, 2019. "Evaluating university industry collaborative research centers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 181-202.
    17. Zsolt Kohus & Márton Demeter & László Kun & Eszter Lukács & Katalin Czakó & Gyula Péter Szigeti, 2022. "A Study of the Relation between Byline Positions of Affiliated/Non-Affiliated Authors and the Scientific Impact of European Universities in Times Higher Education World University Rankings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-14, October.
    18. Sung, Kiseo & Park, Kyu-Tae & Lee, Hakyeon, 2024. "Landscaping the digital twin technology: Patent-based networks and technology reference model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    19. Justus Haucap & Nima Moshgbar & W. Benedikt Schmal, 2021. "The impact of the German 'DEAL' on competition in the academic publishing market," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(8), pages 2027-2049, December.
    20. Minsoo Choi & Heejin Lee & Hanah Zoo, 2021. "Scientific knowledge production and research collaboration between Australia and South Korea: patterns and dynamics based on co-authorship," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 683-706, 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:spr:envsyd:v:45:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s10669-025-10010-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.