File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Cross-boundary collaboration in waste management research: A network analysis

TitleCross-boundary collaboration in waste management research: A network analysis
Authors
KeywordsWaste management
Cross boundary research collaboration
Network analysis
Collaboration network
Network structure
Issue Date2018
PublisherElsevier Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eiar
Citation
Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 2018, v. 73, p. 128-141 How to Cite?
AbstractThis paper aims to illustrate the cross-boundary research collaboration (CBRC) landscape of waste management (WM) by various collaboration networks. Through a set of rigorous procedures, a total of 15,396 research papers were extracted from eight subject-related journals published between 1981 and 2016. The authors utilized CiteSpace, a Java programme that helps visualize and dissect patterns in scientific literature, to evaluate the content through individual, institutional, national, and disciplinary perspectives. The evaluations of three former perspectives revealed a steady rise in CBRC within WM over the last thirty-five years, although the overall intensities proved fairly low. Inter-individual collaboration groups were limited to their respective regions and only loosely connected, but as more and more academic institutions and universities engaged in WM research, the number and quality of the collaborations increased. Developed countries, chiefly in North America and Western Europe, comprised the bulk of the WM research, whilst the mounting contributions from developing countries, China in particular, forecasts greater diversity in the future. The analysis also suggested that the intensity of the interdisciplinary collaboration network declined slightly, however, the intensity proved low to begin with. Previous WM research focused more on “hard” technologies than “soft” measures. Future endeavors to encourage CBRC in WM should promote more innovative research to tackle waste challenges globally in a sustainable way.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/260575
ISSN
2017 Impact Factor: 3.054
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.436
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorXu, J-
dc.contributor.authorLu, W-
dc.contributor.authorXue, F-
dc.contributor.authorChen, K-
dc.contributor.authorYe, M-
dc.contributor.authorWang, J-
dc.contributor.authorChen, X-
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-14T08:43:57Z-
dc.date.available2018-09-14T08:43:57Z-
dc.date.issued2018-
dc.identifier.citationEnvironmental Impact Assessment Review, 2018, v. 73, p. 128-141-
dc.identifier.issn0195-9255-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/260575-
dc.description.abstractThis paper aims to illustrate the cross-boundary research collaboration (CBRC) landscape of waste management (WM) by various collaboration networks. Through a set of rigorous procedures, a total of 15,396 research papers were extracted from eight subject-related journals published between 1981 and 2016. The authors utilized CiteSpace, a Java programme that helps visualize and dissect patterns in scientific literature, to evaluate the content through individual, institutional, national, and disciplinary perspectives. The evaluations of three former perspectives revealed a steady rise in CBRC within WM over the last thirty-five years, although the overall intensities proved fairly low. Inter-individual collaboration groups were limited to their respective regions and only loosely connected, but as more and more academic institutions and universities engaged in WM research, the number and quality of the collaborations increased. Developed countries, chiefly in North America and Western Europe, comprised the bulk of the WM research, whilst the mounting contributions from developing countries, China in particular, forecasts greater diversity in the future. The analysis also suggested that the intensity of the interdisciplinary collaboration network declined slightly, however, the intensity proved low to begin with. Previous WM research focused more on “hard” technologies than “soft” measures. Future endeavors to encourage CBRC in WM should promote more innovative research to tackle waste challenges globally in a sustainable way.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherElsevier Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eiar-
dc.relation.ispartofEnvironmental Impact Assessment Review-
dc.subjectWaste management-
dc.subjectCross boundary research collaboration-
dc.subjectNetwork analysis-
dc.subjectCollaboration network-
dc.subjectNetwork structure-
dc.titleCross-boundary collaboration in waste management research: A network analysis-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.emailLu, W: wilsonlu@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailXue, F: xuef@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailChen, K: chenk726@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailChen, X: chenx90@HKUCC-COM.hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityLu, W=rp01362-
dc.identifier.authorityXue, F=rp02189-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.eiar.2018.08.005-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85052613788-
dc.identifier.hkuros290232-
dc.identifier.volume73-
dc.identifier.spage128-
dc.identifier.epage141-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000447480100013-
dc.publisher.placeUnited States-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats