Comparing Chinese and international studies of riparian forests: A bibliometric survey (1981–2014)

Abstract

A bibliometric analysis based on the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases was conducted to identify the differences between Chinese and international studies of riparian forests as well as their future research directions. The analysis included publication output, geographical and institutional patterns, research priorities and hot topics. International riparian forests research has experienced notable growth over the past three decades, while Chinese research did not expand rapidly until 2000. The United States housed 16 of the 20 most active institutions in riparian forests research, while the Chinese Academy of Sciences ranked 20th among the most active institutions. The priorities of international research included focuses on multiple scales and ecological processes in riparian forests. In comparison, Chinese research was strongly regional in scope and prioritized large-scale inland river basins and desert riparian forests. For both international and Chinese research, the hot topics were dynamic changes in riparian forests and the human impact on riparian forests ecosystems, which may become priority areas for future research. However, compared to international studies, fewer Chinese studies have tried to predict future scenarios ofriparian forests. Therefore, this subject may be a direction for future Chinese riparian forests research.