Cortext platform

@article{Zhao2021,

title = {Is coronavirus-related research becoming more interdisciplinary? A perspective of co-occurrence analysis and diversity measure of scientific articles},

author = {Yi Zhao and Lifan Liu and Chengzhi Zhang},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121344},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-11-08},

urldate = {2021-11-08},

journal = {Technological Forecasting and Social Change},

volume = {121344},

abstract = {The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a significant repercussion on the health, economy, politics and environment, making coronavirus-related issues more complicated and difficult to adequately address by relying on a single field. Interdisciplinary research can provide an effective solution to complex issues in the related field of coronavirus. However, whether coronavirus-related research becomes more interdisciplinary still needs corroboration. In this study, we investigate interdisciplinary status of the coronavirus-related fields via the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset (CORD-19). To this end, we calculate bibliometric indicators of interdisciplinarity and apply a co-occurrence analysis method. The results show that co-occurrence relationships between cited disciplines have evolved dynamically over time. The two types of co-occurrence relationships, Immunology and Microbiology & Medicine and Chemical Engineering & Chemistry, last for a long time in this field during 1990–2020. Moreover, the number of disciplines cited by coronavirus-related research increases, whereas the distribution of disciplines is uneven, and this field tends to focus on several dominant disciplines such as Medicine, Immunology and Microbiology, Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology. We also measure the disciplinary diversity of COVID-19 related papers published from January to December 2020; the disciplinary variety shows an upward trend, while the degree of disciplinary balance shows a downward trend. Meanwhile, the comprehensive index 2Ds demonstrates that the degree of interdisciplinarity in coronavirus field decreases between 1990 and 2019, but it increases in 2020. The results help to map the interdisciplinarity of coronavirus-related research, gaining insight into the degree and history of interdisciplinary cooperation.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Tancoigne2021,

title = {Produire du savoir en contexte alpin. Recherches collaboratives en microbiologie laitière, 1960-aujourd’hui},

author = {Elise Tancoigne},

url = {https://journals.openedition.org/rga/9249},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.4000/rga.9249},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-10-28},

urldate = {2021-10-28},

journal = {Revue de géographie alpine},

abstract = {Les environnements de montagne sont de longue date le lieu et la cible de politiques de recherches dites partenariales, qui privilégient des approches en co-construction de problématiques de recherche, entre acteurs du développement, professionnels et scientifiques. Les recherches portant sur les filières laitières françaises des Alpes et du Jura sont exemplaires de cette situation. En prenant l’exemple de la microbiologie laitière et l’émergence de la notion de « terroir microbien » dans les Alpes et le Jura, je propose dans cet article de répondre à la question suivante : comment produit-on du savoir en contexte alpin ? Dans une première partie, je présenterai les différentes formes prises par ces recherches collaboratives depuis les années 1960. Dans une seconde partie, je montrerai comment la notion de « terroir microbien » a pu émerger au sein de ces dispositifs de recherche et je développerai l’idée que ces recherches participatives restent toutefois des formes minoritaires d’élaboration des connaissances en microbiologie. Je m’appuierai pour ce travail sur une analyse de la littérature réflexive publiée par ces différents projets de recherche ainsi que sur des analyses scientométriques et un travail sur archives effectués entre 2016 et 2020 dans les Alpes du Nord.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Barrella2021,

title = {Scient metrics analysis of mangrove studies from 1980 to 2020 },

author = {Walter Barrella and Deborah Ferraz R},

url = {https://medcraveonline.com/JAMB/scient-metrics-analysis-of-mangrove-studies-from-1980-to-2020.html},

doi = {10.15406/jamb.2021.10.00320},

issn = {2378-3184},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-09-28},

urldate = {2021-09-28},

journal = {Journal of Aquaculture & Marine Biology},

volume = {10},

issue = {4},

pages = {188-192},

abstract = {Mangroves are complex transition ecosystems studied and affected by human activities.. This work sought information on articles in scientific journals related to environmental impacts and their forms of management and restoration and those focused on biodiversity conservation. To answer this question, we developed this work based on a scient metric survey of production with a focus on impacts and environmental and Biodiversity responses on mangroves in the last forty years (1980 to 2020), comparing mainly the global scientific production and the production in America, listing areas of research concentration, and journal, period, country and region of publication of papers. With this survey, we could observe a standardization of the research classification area and publication periods, although checking the journals found a great variety of these. As for the regionalization of studies, we could observe that, globally, the region that most contributes to the advancement in this theme is Asia; however, the country that collaborates the most, in isolation, is the United States. Although there is a diversification regarding the specific theme, the scientific production on mangroves with an environmental focus and in Biodiversity followed a global pattern in the studied period.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Lowans2021,

title = {What is the state of the art in energy and transport poverty metrics? A critical and comprehensive review},

author = {Christopher Lowans and Dylan Furszyfer Del Rio and Benjamin K. Sovacool and David Rooney and Aoife M. Foley},

url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988321002668},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105360},

issn = {0140-9883},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-09-01},

urldate = {2021-09-01},

journal = {Energy Economics},

volume = {101},

pages = {105360},

abstract = {This review investigates the state of the art in metrics used in energy (or fuel) and transport poverty with a view to assessing how these overlapping concepts may be unified in their measurement. Our review contributes to ongoing debates over decarbonisation, a politically sensitive and crucial aspect of the energy transition, and one that could exacerbate patterns of inequality or vulnerability. Up to 125 million people across the European Union experience the effects of energy poverty in their daily lives. A more comprehensive understanding of the breadth and depth of these conditions is therefore paramount. This review assessed 1,134 articles and critically analysed a deeper sample of 93. In terms of the use of metrics, we find that multiple indicators are better than any single metric or composite. We find work remains to be conducted in the transport poverty sphere before energy poverty metrics can be fully unified with those of transport poverty, namely the stipulation of travel standards. Without such standards, our ability to unify the metrics of both fields and potentially alleviate both conditions simultaneously is limited. The difficulties in defining necessary travel necessitate the further use of vulnerability lenses and holistic assessments focused on energy and transport services.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}