IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v119y2019i1d10.1007_s11192-019-03024-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Knowledge generation in the wake of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster

Author

Listed:
  • Kiran Kaur

    (University of Malaya)

  • Kwan Hoong Ng

    (University of Malaya)

  • Ray Kemp

    (Ray Kemp Consulting)

  • Yin Yee Ong

    (University of Malaya)

  • Zaharah Ramly

    (University of Malaya)

  • Ai Peng Koh

    (University of Malaya)

Abstract

A disaster is a crisis situation that causes significant harm to humans, the environment, the economy, and impacts upon society’s ability to cope both during the event and with the aftermath. A disaster may escalate rapidly to reach unpredicted consequences. They can be naturally occurring, or man-made, or a combination of the two. In this study we have focused on the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident of 2011 that subsequently unleashed a floodgate of scientific activities, including basic and applied research, technology development, policy reform, inter-disciplinary collaboration, citizen science and re-strategization of research networks. In this context, a bibliometric study has been conducted on 5455 publications on the Fukushima disaster indexed by Scopus for the 2011–2017 period. The aim is to identify key papers in the field, the most substantive contributors to the literature, and to begin to map out the emergence of a body of knowledge resulting from the disaster. The findings present main national and international collaborators on Fukushima disaster related research, as well as an indication of the major research themes evolving over the immediate years following the event. This allows for a deeper understanding of the longitudinal impact of a disaster on society and upon the international research community and its deliberations.

Suggested Citation

  • Kiran Kaur & Kwan Hoong Ng & Ray Kemp & Yin Yee Ong & Zaharah Ramly & Ai Peng Koh, 2019. "Knowledge generation in the wake of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 149-169, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:119:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-019-03024-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-019-03024-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-019-03024-z
    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/s11192-019-03024-z?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. O. Mryglod & Yu. Holovatch & R. Kenna & B. Berche, 2016. "Quantifying the evolution of a scientific topic: reaction of the academic community to the Chornobyl disaster," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(3), pages 1151-1166, March.
    2. A. Abrizah & A. N. Zainab & K. Kiran & R. G. Raj, 2013. "LIS journals scientific impact and subject categorization: a comparison between Web of Science and Scopus," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(2), pages 721-740, February.
    3. Ali Gazni & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Fereshteh Didegah, 2012. "Mapping world scientific collaboration: Authors, institutions, and countries," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(2), pages 323-335, February.
    4. Ali Gazni & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Fereshteh Didegah, 2012. "Mapping world scientific collaboration: Authors, institutions, and countries," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(2), pages 323-335, February.
    5. Qi Wang, 2018. "A bibliometric model for identifying emerging research topics," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 69(2), pages 290-304, February.
    6. Wang, Qiang & Li, Rongrong & He, Gang, 2018. "Research status of nuclear power: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 90-96.
    7. Wang, Qiang & Chen, Xi & Yi-chong, Xu, 2013. "Accident like the Fukushima unlikely in a country with effective nuclear regulation: Literature review and proposed guidelines," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 126-146.
    8. Noorhidawati Abdullah & Siti Hajar Mohd Roffeei & Yusniza Kamarulzaman & Farrah Dina Yusop & Azian Madun & Kwan Hoong Ng, 2015. "Evaluating the performance of electromagnetic fields (EMF) research work (2003–2013)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 261-278, October.
    9. Juan Zhang & Qi Yu & Fashan Zheng & Chao Long & Zuxun Lu & Zhiguang Duan, 2016. "Comparing keywords plus of WOS and author keywords: A case study of patient adherence research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(4), pages 967-972, April.
    10. Nan Zhang & Shanshan Wan & Peiling Wang & Peng Zhang & Qiang Wu, 2018. "A bibliometric analysis of highly cited papers in the field of Economics and Business based on the Essential Science Indicators database," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(2), pages 1039-1053, August.
    11. Lutz Bornmann & Andreas Thor & Werner Marx & Hermann Schier, 2016. "The application of bibliometrics to research evaluation in the humanities and social sciences: An exploratory study using normalized Google Scholar data for the publications of a research institute," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(11), pages 2778-2789, November.
    12. Ole Ellegaard & Johan A. Wallin, 2015. "The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1809-1831, December.
    13. S. Phineas Upham & Henry Small, 2010. "Emerging research fronts in science and technology: patterns of new knowledge development," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(1), pages 15-38, April.
    14. Srinivasan, T.N. & Gopi Rethinaraj, T.S., 2013. "Fukushima and thereafter: Reassessment of risks of nuclear power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 726-736.
    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. Peter van den Besselaar & Ulf Sandström, 2019. "Measuring researcher independence using bibliometric data: A proposal for a new performance indicator," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-20, March.
    2. Abramo, Giovanni & D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea & Di Costa, Flavia, 2019. "Diversification versus specialization in scientific research: Which strategy pays off?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 82, pages 51-57.
    3. Cathelijn J F Waaijer & Benoît Macaluso & Cassidy R Sugimoto & Vincent Larivière, 2016. "Stability and Longevity in the Publication Careers of U.S. Doctorate Recipients," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-15, April.
    4. Constance Poitras & Vincent Larivière, 2023. "Research mobility to the United States: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(4), pages 2601-2614, April.
    5. Marian-Gabriel Hâncean & Matjaž Perc & Jürgen Lerner, 2021. "The coauthorship networks of the most productive European researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 201-224, January.
    6. Önder, Ali Sina & Schweitzer, Sascha & Yilmazkuday, Hakan, 2021. "Specialization, field distance, and quality in economists’ collaborations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    7. Li, Jingjing & Zhang, Jian & Li, Huajiao & Jiang, Meihui, 2018. "Network and community structure in a scientific team with high creative performance," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 508(C), pages 702-709.
    8. Peng Liu & Haoxiang Xia, 2015. "Structure and evolution of co-authorship network in an interdisciplinary research field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(1), pages 101-134, April.
    9. Shuo Xu & Liyuan Hao & Xin An & Hongshen Pang & Ting Li, 2020. "Review on emerging research topics with key-route main path analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 607-624, January.
    10. Rahman, Mohammad Tariqur & Regenstein, Joe Mac & Kassim, Noor Lide Abu & Haque, Nazmul, 2017. "The need to quantify authors’ relative intellectual contributions in a multi-author paper," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 275-281.
    11. Ortega, José Luis & Aguillo, Isidro F., 2013. "Institutional and country collaboration in an online service of scientific profiles: Google Scholar Citations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 394-403.
    12. María Bordons & Borja González-Albo & Javier Aparicio & Luz Moreno, 2015. "The influence of R&D intensity of countries on the impact of international collaborative research: evidence from Spain," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1385-1400, February.
    13. Lu, Kun & Yang, Guancan & Wang, Xue, 2022. "Topics emerged in the biomedical field and their characteristics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    14. Chaocheng He & Jiang Wu & Qingpeng Zhang, 2021. "Characterizing research leadership on geographically weighted collaboration network," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 4005-4037, May.
    15. 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.
    16. Myriam González-Limon & Asuncion Rodríguez-Ramos Isabel Novo-Corti, 2022. "Minimun Wage: A Bibliometric Analysis of this Research Topic," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(3), pages 401-417.
    17. Louise C. O'Keefe & Karen H. Frith & Elizabeth Barnby, 2017. "Nurse faculty as international research collaborators," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(1), pages 119-125, March.
    18. Ali Sina Önder & Sascha Schweitzer & Hakan Yilmazkuday, 2021. "Field Distance and Quality in Economists’ Collaborations," Working Papers in Economics & Finance 2021-04, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth Business School, Economics and Finance Subject Group.
    19. Contu, Davide & Strazzera, Elisabetta & Mourato, Susana, 2016. "Modeling individual preferences for energy sources: The case of IV generation nuclear energy in Italy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 37-58.
    20. Manganote, Edmilson J.T. & Araujo, Mariana S. & Schulz, Peter A., 2014. "Visualization of ranking data: Geographical signatures in international collaboration, leadership and research impact," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 642-649.

    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:scient:v:119:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-019-03024-z. 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.