Cortext platform

@article{nokey,

title = {What the Analysis of 136 Studies from 1960 to 2020 Tells Us About Comparative Regionalism Studies},

author = {Saad Chiekh Ahmed El Maaly},

url = {http://www.economicissues.org.uk/Files/2022/EI_Sept2022_maaly.pdf},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-09-01},

journal = {Economic Issues},

volume = {22},

issue = {2},

pages = {31-85},

abstract = {In recent years (from the late 1990s to 2020), the number of studies comparing regional integration processes around the world has increased significantly. However, the number of papers aiming to group and analyse these studies in order to determine the main trends in the field is still very limited. We attempt to fill this gap by analysing 136 studies (journal articles, book chapters, institutional reports, working papers, research centre publications and university papers such as dissertations and theses) from 1960 to 2020. In this article, we identify the main terms used in comparative regionalism studies and their evolution. We present the historical development of the field and identify the main organisations that are often compared in these studies. We also present the main points of comparison and the methods used in these studies, and discuss the case of the European integration model in comparative regionalism studies (the n=1 problem). This work creates and analyses one of the largest databases available on comparative regionalism studies. It can therefore facilitate the work of students and researchers interested in comparative regionalism and contribute to the development of this field of research.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{nokey,

title = {Agriculture at the Landscape Level: Scientific Background and Literature Overview},

author = {Davide Rizzo and Marta Debolini and Claudine Thenail and Sylvie Lardon and Elisa Marraccini },

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05263-7_1},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-09-01},

urldate = {2022-09-01},

journal = {Landscape Agronomy},

pages = {1–23},

abstract = {Addressing agriculture at the landscape level leads to dealing with agricultural landscapes, defined here as landscapes that contain mainly agricultural land uses. In this chapter, we focus on how agronomy and other disciplines have addressed to date agriculture beyond field and farm management. The landscape agronomy framework suggests that addressing agriculture at the landscape level allows farmers to be included with other stakeholders involved in spatially explicit management of natural resources. This framework also bridges gaps with other disciplines that work to describe and understand agricultural landscapes and their management. In addition to this qualitative summary of the scientific background, we present results of a bibliometric analysis that used the CorTexT platform to explore research keywords, (inter)disciplinary bridges and emerging issues related to these topics. The results highlighted the emergence of climate change, ecosystem services and management practices in the literature related to agronomic terms, especially when landscape is explicitly mentioned in publications’ titles, abstracts or keywords. In the end, we draw conclusions about potential improvements to this conceptual framework and introduce the structure of the present book about advances and challenges of a territorial approach to agricultural issues.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Carrillo2022,

title = {Academic dependency: the influence of the prevailing international biomedical research agenda on Argentina’s CONICET},

author = {Mercedes García Carrillo and Federico Testoni and Marc-André Gagnon and Cecilia Rikap and Matías Blaustein},

url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2405844022027694

https://www.cell.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2405-8440%2822%2902769-4},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11481},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-09-01},

urldate = {2022-09-01},

journal = {Heliyon},

volume = {8},

abstract = {Background

The prevailing health and biomedical sciences (HBMS) research agenda, not only determined by leading academic institutions but also by large pharmaceutical companies, has been shown to prioritize the exploration of novel pharmacological interventions over the study of the socio-environmental factors influencing illness onset and progression. The aim of this investigation is to quantitatively explore whether and to what extent the prevailing international HBMS research agenda and the key actors setting this agenda influence research in non-core countries.

Methods

We used the Web of Science database and the CorText platform to proxy the HBMS research agenda of a prestigious research institution from Latin America: Argentina’s National Research Council (CONICET). We conducted a bibliometric and lexical analysis of 16,309 HBMS academic articles whereby CONICET was among the authors' affiliations. The content of CONICET’s agenda was represented through co-occurrence network maps of the most frequent concatenation of terms found in titles, keywords, and abstracts. We compared our findings with previous reports on the international HBMS research agenda.

Results

In line with the results previously reported for the prevailing international agenda, we found that terms linked to molecular biology and cancer research hegemonize CONICET’s HBMS research agenda, whereas terms connecting HBMS research with socio-environmental cues are marginal. However, we also found differences with the international agenda: CONICET's HBMS agenda shows a marginal presence of terms linked to translational medicine, while terms associated with categories such as pathogens, plant research, agrobiotechnology, and food industry are more represented than in the prevailing agenda.

Conclusions

CONICET’s HBMS research agenda shares topics, priorities, and methodologies with the prevailing HBMS international research agenda. However, CONICET's HBMS research agenda is internally heterogeneous, appearing to be mostly driven by a combination of elements that not only reflect academic dependency (the adoption of the prevailing research agenda by non-core research institutions) but also local economic determinants associated with Argentina’s place in the international division of labor as an exporter of primary goods.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Malanski2022b,

title = {International research on labor in agri-food value chains: A bibliometric review from web of science},

author = {Priscila Duarte Malanski and Sandra Mara de Alencar Schiavi and Benoît Dedieu and Julio Cesar Damasceno},

url = {https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03833144/document},

doi = {https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2022.852178},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-09-01},

urldate = {2022-09-01},

journal = {Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems},

volume = {6},

pages = {852178},

abstract = {Value chains are an important driver for the current labor dynamics in the agri-food sector, and agri-food value chain sustainability strongly depends on decent work conditions. An increasing literature body have been investigated the interactions between chain agents and how it impacted labor issues. Our aim was to map the scientific landscape of the scientific knowledge on labor in agri-food value chains. We performed a bibliometric review of 343 articles indexed in the Web of Science based on descriptive and network analysis of articles metadata, which covered authors, journals, citation times, keywords and countries. We showed that labor in agri-food value chains has an international audience, despite that knowledge production was largely built by a restraint leading scientific network. Overall, the scientific knowledge is organized into four main research domains on labor in agri-food value chains: (1) labor governance in global value chains through standards, (2) employment in value chains and impacts on socioeconomic conditions of rural areas, (3) gender issues and value chains, (4) labor and upgrading in global value chains. The controversies in the international literature regarding labor issues in the agri-food value chains, and blind spots of current research are discussed.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}