IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v97y2013i3d10.1007_s11192-013-1009-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Co-word based thematic analysis of renewable energy (1990–2010)

Author

Listed:
  • Luz M. Romo-Fernández

    (University of Extremadura)

  • Vicente P. Guerrero-Bote

    (University of Extremadura)

  • Félix Moya-Anegón

    (CSIC, CCHS, IPP, SCImago Group)

Abstract

This article describes an analysis of keywords which was aimed at revealing publication patterns in the field of renewable energy, including the temporal evolution of its different research lines over the last two decades. To this end, we first retrieved the records of the sample, then we processed the keywords to resolve their obvious problems of synonymy and to limit the study to those most used. The final results showed a clear increase in scientific production related to alternative energies, and a structure corresponding to five major clusters which, at a finer level of resolution, were decomposed into 22. We analyzed the structure of the clusters and their temporal evolution, paying particular attention to uncovering the bursty periods of the different lines of research.

Suggested Citation

  • Luz M. Romo-Fernández & Vicente P. Guerrero-Bote & Félix Moya-Anegón, 2013. "Co-word based thematic analysis of renewable energy (1990–2010)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(3), pages 743-765, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:97:y:2013:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-013-1009-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-013-1009-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-013-1009-5
    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/s11192-013-1009-5?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. Loet Leydesdorff & Félix de Moya-Anegón & Vicente P. Guerrero-Bote, 2010. "Journal maps on the basis of Scopus data: A comparison with the Journal Citation Reports of the ISI," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(2), pages 352-369, February.
    2. Vicente P. Guerrero-Bote & Rocío Gómez-Crisóstomo & Luz María Romo-Fernández & Félix Moya-Anegón, 2009. "Visibility and responsibility of women in research papers through the order of signatures: the case of the University of Extremadura, 1990–2005," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(1), pages 225-238, October.
    3. Sandra Miguel & Zaida Chinchilla-Rodriguez & Félix de Moya-Anegón, 2011. "Open access and Scopus: A new approach to scientific visibility from the standpoint of access," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(6), pages 1130-1145, June.
    4. Éric Archambault & David Campbell & Yves Gingras & Vincent Larivière, 2009. "Comparing bibliometric statistics obtained from the Web of Science and Scopus," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(7), pages 1320-1326, July.
    5. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2010. "Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 523-538, August.
    6. Mark William Neff & Elizabeth A. Corley, 2009. "35 years and 160,000 articles: A bibliometric exploration of the evolution of ecology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(3), pages 657-682, September.
    7. Nees Jan van Eck & Ludo Waltman & Rommert Dekker & Jan van den Berg, 2010. "A comparison of two techniques for bibliometric mapping: Multidimensional scaling and VOS," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(12), pages 2405-2416, December.
    8. Félix Moya-Anegón & Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez & Benjamín Vargas-Quesada & Elena Corera-Álvarez & Francisco José Muñoz-Fernández & Antonio González-Molina & Victor Herrero-Solana, 2007. "Coverage analysis of Scopus: A journal metric approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 73(1), pages 53-78, October.
    9. Juan Gorraiz & Christian Gumpenberger & Martin Wieland, 2011. "Galton 2011 revisited: a bibliometric journey in the footprints of a universal genius," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(2), pages 627-652, August.
    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. Laura Serrano & Antonio Sianes & Antonio Ariza-Montes, 2019. "Using Bibliometric Methods to Shed Light on the Concept of Sustainable Tourism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-25, December.
    2. Faraji, Omid & Ezadpour, Mostafa & Rahrovi Dastjerdi, Alireza & Dolatzarei, Ehsan, 2022. "Conceptual structure of balanced scorecard research: A co-word analysis," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    3. Manuel Castriotta & Michela Loi & Elona Marku & Ludovica Moi, 2021. "Disentangling the corporate entrepreneurship construct: conceptualizing through co-words," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 2821-2863, April.
    4. Ivan Jarić & Jelena Knežević-Jarić & Mirjana Lenhardt, 2014. "Relative age of references as a tool to identify emerging research fields with an application to the field of ecology and environmental sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(2), pages 519-529, August.
    5. Bhatnagar, S. & Sharma, D., 2022. "Evolution of green finance and its enablers: A bibliometric analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    6. Manuel Castriotta & Michela Loi & Elona Marku & Luca Naitana, 2019. "What’s in a name? Exploring the conceptual structure of emerging organizations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(2), pages 407-437, February.
    7. Peng Wang & Fang-Wei Zhu & Hao-Yang Song & Jian-Hua Hou & Jin-Lan Zhang, 2018. "Visualizing the Academic Discipline of Knowledge Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-28, March.
    8. Na Kyeong Lee & Yukyeong Han & Wei Xong & Min Song, 2020. "Two layer-based trajectory analysis of the research trend in automotive fuel industry," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 1701-1719, September.
    9. Anna D’Auria & Marco Tregua & Tiziana Russo Spena & Francesco Bifulco, 2017. "Multiple Context of Innovation: Insights from Literature," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(02), pages 1-15, April.
    10. 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.
    11. Liaquat Hossain & Faezeh Karimi & Rolf T. Wigand & John W. Crawford, 2015. "Evolutionary longitudinal network dynamics of global zoonotic research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(2), pages 337-353, May.

    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. Darja Maslić Seršić & Marina Martinčević & Maja Jokić, 2021. "The contribution of CEE authors to psychological science: a comparative analysis of papers published in CEE and non-CEE journals indexed by Scopus in the period 1996—2013," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1453-1469, February.
    2. 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.
    3. Romo-Fernández, Luz M. & López-Pujalte, Cristina & Guerrero Bote, Vicente P. & Moya-Anegón, Félix, 2011. "Analysis of Europe’s scientific production on renewable energies," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 2529-2537.
    4. Leydesdorff, Loet & Rafols, Ismael, 2012. "Interactive overlays: A new method for generating global journal maps from Web-of-Science data," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 318-332.
    5. Filippo Corsini & Rafael Laurenti & Franziska Meinherz & Francesco Paolo Appio & Luca Mora, 2019. "The Advent of Practice Theories in Research on Sustainable Consumption: Past, Current and Future Directions of the Field," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-19, January.
    6. Shiji Chen & Clément Arsenault & Yves Gingras & Vincent Larivière, 2015. "Exploring the interdisciplinary evolution of a discipline: the case of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1307-1323, February.
    7. María Pinto & Rosaura Fernández-Pascual & David Caballero-Mariscal & Dora Sales, 2020. "Information literacy trends in higher education (2006–2019): visualizing the emerging field of mobile information literacy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1479-1510, August.
    8. Ciarli, Tommaso & Ràfols, Ismael, 2019. "The relation between research priorities and societal demands: The case of rice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 949-967.
    9. Wirapong Chansanam & Chunqiu Li, 2022. "Scientometrics of Poverty Research for Sustainability Development: Trend Analysis of the 1964–2022 Data through Scopus," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-19, April.
    10. Teja Koler-Povh & Primož Južnič & Goran Turk, 2014. "Impact of open access on citation of scholarly publications in the field of civil engineering," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1033-1045, February.
    11. Perez-Vega, Rodrigo & Hopkinson, Paul & Singhal, Aishwarya & Mariani, Marcello M., 2022. "From CRM to social CRM: A bibliometric review and research agenda for consumer research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 1-16.
    12. Sandra Miguel & Ely Francina Tannuri de Oliveira & Maria Cláudia Cabrini Grácio, 2016. "Scientific Production on Open Access: A Worldwide Bibliometric Analysis in the Academic and Scientific Context," Publications, MDPI, vol. 4(1), pages 1-15, January.
    13. Holman Ospina-Mateus & Leonardo Augusto Quintana Jiménez & Francisco J. Lopez-Valdes & Katherinne Salas-Navarro, 2019. "Bibliometric analysis in motorcycle accident research: a global overview," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 793-815, November.
    14. Ying Huang & Wolfgang Glänzel & Lin Zhang, 2021. "Tracing the development of mapping knowledge domains," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 6201-6224, July.
    15. Ludo Waltman & Nees Jan Eck, 2012. "A new methodology for constructing a publication-level classification system of science," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(12), pages 2378-2392, December.
    16. Tomasz Zema & Adam Sulich, 2022. "Models of Electricity Price Forecasting: Bibliometric Research," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-18, August.
    17. Andrea Mervar & Maja Jokić, 2022. "Core-periphery nexus in the EU social sciences: bibliometric perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(10), pages 5793-5817, October.
    18. Ennas, Gianfranco & Di Guardo, Maria Chiara, 2015. "Features of top-rated gold open access journals: An analysis of the scopus database," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 79-89.
    19. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    20. Maxim N. Kotsemir & Tatiana E. Kuznetsova & Elena G. Nasybulina & Anna G. Pikalova, 2015. "Empirical Analysis of Multinational S&T Collaboration Priorities –The Case of Russia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 53/STI/2015, National Research University Higher School of Economics.

    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:97:y:2013:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-013-1009-5. 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.