CorText Manager around the world

@article{Hinkelman2023,

title = {Design methodologies and engineering applications for ecosystem biomimicry: An interdisciplinary review spanning cyber, physical, and cyber-physical systems},

author = {Hinkelman, Kathryn and Yang, Yizhi and Zuo, Wangda},

url = {http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-3190/acb520},

doi = {10.1088/1748-3190/acb520},

year  = {2023},

date = {2023-01-20},

journal = {Bioinspiration & Biomimetics},

school = {The Pennsylvania State University},

abstract = {Ecosystem biomimicry is a promising pathway for sustainable development. However, while typical form- and process-level biomimicry is prevalent, system-level ecosystem biomimicry remains a nascent practice in numerous engineering fields. This critical review takes an interdisciplinary approach to synthesize trends across case studies, evaluate design methodologies, and identify future opportunities when applying ecosystem biomimicry to engineering practices, including cyber systems (CS), physical systems (PS), and cyber-physical systems (CPS). After systematically sourcing publications from major databases, the papers were first analyzed at a meta level for their bibliographic context and for statistical correlations among categorical variables. Then, we investigated deeper into the engineering applications and design methodologies. Results indicate that CPS most frequently mimic organisms and ecosystems, while CS and PS frequently mimic populations-communities and molecules-tissues-organ systems, respectively (statistically highly significant). An indirect approach is most often used for mimicry at organizational levels from populations to ecosystems, while a direct approach frequently suits levels from molecules to organisms (highly significant). Dominant themes across engineering applications include symbiotic organism search algorithms for CS and ecological network analysis for CPS, while PS applications are highly diverse. For design methodologies, this work summarizes and details ten well-documented biomimetic process models among literature, which addresses an outdated concern for a lack of systematic methods for ecosystem biomimicry. In addition to the Biomimetics Standard ISO 18458, these methods include the Natural Step and Techno-Ecological Synergy framework, among others. Further, the analyses revealed future opportunities from less utilized design methods (e.g., interdisciplinary teams tackling indirect, ecosystem-level projects) to well-established engineering concepts ready for technological advancement (e.g., implementing membrane computing for physical applications). For future studies, this review provides a comprehensive reference for ecosystem biomimetic design practices and application opportunities across multiple engineering domains.},

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},

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{Taxt2022,

title = {The embedding of universities in innovation ecosystems: The case of marine research at the University of Bergen},

author = {Randi Elisabeth Taxt and Douglas K.R. Robinson and Antoine Schoen and Arnt Fløysand},

url = {https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00291951.2022.2041718},

doi = {10.1080/00291951.2022.2041718},

issn = {0029-1951},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-03-06},

journal = {Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift–Norwegian Journal of Geography},

volume = {76},

issue = {1},

pages = {42–60},

abstract = {While historically the core missions of universities have been research and teaching, it has become increasingly recognised that universities have become significant sources of knowledge and capabilities. This third mission is cementing the role of universities as suppliers of qualified labour and generators of knowledge and technologies that promote innovation in a variety of innovation ecosystems. The main goal of the paper is to illustrate an approach that captures the various contributions of universities to their innovation ecosystems. Often territorially bounded, such links provide insights into the characteristics and geography of the various linkage for a university. With the case of the University of Bergen and its role within the marine innovation ecosystem of Western Norway, this ‘ecosystem fingerprint’, can be seen as a useful means to clarify the third mission of universities through the linkages and interdependencies with various actors. The authors demonstrate that a university can act both as a global pipeline provider and take active part in the local buzz, providing this concept with new empirical insight. The authors conclude that the university is highly embedded in both the marine innovation ecosystem and the knowledge ecosystem, but with linkages extended to interconnected business ecosystems.},

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},

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{deRaymond2021,

title = {Systemic risk and food security. Emerging trends and future avenues for research},

author = {Antoine Bernard de Raymond and Arlène Alpha and Tamara Ben-Ari and Benoît Daviron and Thomas Nesme and Gilles Tétart},

url = {http://agri.ckcest.cn/file1/M00/02/DB/Csgk0WC5rL2ALdKRABEk1jUjpcE370.pdf},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2021.100547},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-05-14},

journal = {Global Food Security},

abstract = {The unanticipated international food price spike of 2008 has raised concerns about global food security. Might food  systems  lastingly  fail  to  supply, trade,  and  distribute  food?  Might  widespread unsustainable  agricultural practices irreversibly alter ecosystems? Or might large scale food shortages trigger political unrest? To answer these questions, we reflect upon the concept of systemic risk and conduct a review of the literature on systemic risks and food security. First, we present the concept of systemic risk and current trends in systemic risk research. 

We then analyze contributions on systemic risk and food security. We first show that the literature has so far focused  on  a)  agricultural  production  and  correlated  yield-losses,  and  on  ways  of  pooling  risk  at  regional  or global-level, and b) the role of international trade in increasing or decreasing systemic risk. We then identify avenues for further research, highlighting the impact of intensive farming on ecosystems. Finally, we discuss the concept of systemic risk: we show that scholars need to be careful when assuming that there exists just one global food system; we show that systemic risk can be understood in various ways, beyond the domino effect paradigm.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Alaimo2019,

title = {Platforms as service ecosystems: Lessons from social media },

author = {Cristina Alaimo and Jannis Kallinikos and Erika Valderrama},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1177/0268396219881462},

year  = {2019},

date = {2019-10-21},

journal = {Journal of Information Technology},

volume = {35},

abstract = {The growing business expansion of social media platforms is changing their identity and transforming the practices of networking, data and content sharing with which social media have been commonly associated. We empirically investigate these shifts in the context of TripAdvisor and its evolution since its very establishment. We trace the mutations of the platform along three stages we identify as search engine, social media platform and end-to-end service ecosystem. Our findings reveal the underlying patterns of data types, technological functionalities and actor configurations that punctuate the business expansion of TripAdvisor and lead to the formation of its service ecosystem. We contribute to the understanding of the current trajectory in which social media find themselves as well as to the literature on platforms and ecosystems. We point out the importance of services that develop as commercially viable and constantly updatable data bundles out of diverse and dynamic data types. Such services are essential to the making of the complementarities that are claimed to underlie ecosystem formation.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{deEspécie2019,

title = {Ecosystem services and renewable power generation: A preliminary literature review},

author = {Mariana de Assis Espécie and Pedro Ninôde Carvalho and Maria Fernanda Bacile Pinheiro and Vinicius Mesquita Rosenthal and Leyla A. Ferreira da Silva and Mariana Rodrigues de Carvalhaes Pinheiro and Silvana Andreoli Espig and Carolina Fiorillo Mariani and Elisângela Medeiros de Almeida and Federica Natasha Ganança Abreu dos Santos Sodré},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.03.076},

year  = {2019},

date = {2019-09-01},

journal = {Renewable Energy},

volume = {140},

pages = {39-51},

abstract = {The term ecosystem services describes a relatively novel approach that directly associates the environment to the provision of human well-being, a concept to which renewable power generation is intrinsically connected. In light of this, the present work characterizes the evolution of the ecosystem services approach as it relates to power generation from renewable sources and identifies trends that have being applied in the field worldwide. The baseline data for the analyses were retrieved from queries of an online scientific database, from which articles that contained the term “ecosystem services” and terms related to renewable energy sources were selected. Chiefly influenced by the publication of reference documents on this issue, the literature review that supported this study demonstrates some trends regarding the ecosystem services approach to renewables, most of which are related to hydropower, including the following: (i) concerns about the degree of dependence that hydropower facilities have on forest conservation; (ii) the relevance of watershed land management for reducing soil erosion to enhance energy generation by hydropower plants; (iii) the emergence of environmentally friendly operational schemes to preserve and/or alleviate the impacts of hydropower plants on river ecosystem services; (iv) the adoption of payment for ecosystem services as an instrument to foment land use strategies that benefit hydropower generation by the engagement of different stakeholders; and (v) the use of economic valuation methods as means to address trade-off scenarios between energy generation and the maintenance of certain ecosystem services. In this process, universities, governments, companies, nongovernmental organizations and even the United Nations have been engaged in different manners of discussions as a reflection of the different positions they have assumed on the subject. The results gathered indicate that there are still opportunities to improve the ecosystem services approach by extending its use to the early stages of renewable energy facilities planning, such as the environmental impact assessments of these projects.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Akkari2018,

title = {Textual Analysis of Published Research Articles on the Environmental Impacts of Land-Use Change},

author = {Monia El Akkari and Mélanie Sandoval and Sophie Le Perchec and Olivier Réchauchère},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96289-4_2},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-01-01},

urldate = {2018-01-01},

journal = { Sustainable Agriculture Reviews},

volume = {30},

pages = {15-38},

abstract = {Regardless of the scale considered, land use is determined by a variety of factors relating to both local soil and climatic conditions and socioeconomic considerations (population growth, food and energy requirements, public policies, etc.). Changes in land use resulting from shifts in these factors over time will have environmental consequences. We conducted a review of the scientific literature to identify the degree to which environmental assessments take direct and indirect land-use change into account. A textual analysis was completed on a collection of 5730 scientific articles, published between 1975 and 2015 and listed in the WoS™ database, addressing the relationship between reorganizations of agricultural and forestry systems, or spatial planning, direct and indirect land-use change resulting from these reorganizations; and environmental impacts. By identifying the most frequently used words or groups of words within this corpus (focusing on the title, abstract, and keywords fields), the textual analysis platform CorTexT Manager (Platform developed by IFRIS (the Institute for Research and Innovation in Society, based in the Paris region) assembles diagrams, or “maps,” of occurrence and co-occurrence for these terms, which can then be used to identify the principal themes addressed in the corpus based on clusters of proximate keywords. Eight clusters were so identified: two focused on climate change and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems (thus corresponding both to an aspect of the biophysical context and an environmental impact linked to a reorganization); one associated a reorganization (biofuel production) with a dominant environmental impact (the effects of greenhouse gas emissions); three were centered on keywords related to other types of reorganizations (urbanization, grassland management, forestry management); and two focused on environmental impacts on biodiversity and water resources. The five “thematic identifiers” showing the highest number of occurrences were greenhouse gas emission, land-use policy, biofuel, farm system, and pasture land, suggesting that the theme “GHG impacts of biofuel production” is the most prevalent. A more detailed textual analysis of articles in the cluster relating to non-food biomass production (1785 articles) was also conducted, and confirmed the growing importance, notably since 2005–2006, of research linking the bioenergy production, land-use change, and climate impacts from greenhouse gas emissions. Reorganizations toward non-food biomass production also help explain the presence of degraded lands among the most frequently occurring terms in the corpus. Life-cycle analysis is the most important assessment methodology used to evaluate the environmental impacts of bioenergy production.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{prost2017echanges,

title = {Les échanges virtuels entre agriculteurs : un soutien à leurs transitions professionnelles ?},

author = {Magali Prost and Lorène Prost and Marianne Cerf},

url = {https://www.cairn.info/revue-raisons-educatives-2017-1-page-129.htm},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-01-01},

urldate = {2017-01-01},

journal = {Raisons éducatives},

number = {1},

pages = {129-154},

publisher = {Université de Genève},

abstract = {Depuis la fin du XXe siècle, le modèle français de production agricole est remis en question : construit pour augmenter la productivité par hectare et par travailleur, il est maintenant reconnu en partie responsable de la dégradation de l’environnement et de la santé des travailleurs agricoles (Meynard, Dedieu, & Bos, 2012 ; Millenium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005). Dans ce contexte, il existe une volonté de promouvoir une agriculture qui permette une production agricole économiquement viable, socialement équitable, et ne nuisant ni à l’environnement ni à la santé. Aller vers une telle agriculture implique de profonds changements, notamment une reconfiguration des situations de travail et des conditions d’exercice des métiers des acteurs du monde agricole, et en particulier des agriculteurs (e.g. Coquil, 2014). En effet, si les agriculteurs ont toujours été confrontés à un environnement de travail ouvert et dynamique (Cerf & Sagory, 2004), la révolution agricole qui a suivi la Seconde Guerre mondiale a cherché à atténuer cette spécificité. L’usage de pesticides, d’engrais chimiques, de l’irrigation, l’amélioration des variétés et leur adaptation à ces produits a permis un contrôle des facteurs de production et l’obtention de rendements stables et élevés. Revenir aujourd’hui à une forme d’agriculture qui favorise des régulations naturelles, dite agroécologique, réexpose les agriculteurs à de l’incertitude, du non-contrôlable, des phénomènes complexes sur lesquels ils ne disposent pas forcément de connaissances stabilisées. Qui plus est, si des connaissances scientifiques existent pour aborder ces questions, elles sont souvent très partielles, et parfois font l’objet de controverses au sein du monde scientifique. Il ne s’agit donc pas, ou pas seulement, de favoriser la transmission de ces connaissances scientifiques. Par ailleurs, même s’il existe des agriculteurs qui ont déjà mis en place une pratique agroécologique, il ne s’agit pas non plus uniquement de transmettre leur expertise à d’autres. Pourquoi ? Parce que tout dépend du projet de vie et de travail de l’agriculteur, des moyens de production dont il dispose, des conditions pédoclimatiques de son exploitation, des possibilités de commercialisation, etc. Pour réussir sa transition professionnelle, chaque agriculteur doit donc revoir en profondeur son activité pour combiner de façon renouvelée son projet, ses moyens de production, ses débouchés, ses modes d’action.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{ruiz2015indicators,

title = {Indicators of agricultural intensity and intensification: a review of the literature},

author = {Irune Ruiz-Martinez and Elisa Marraccini and Marta Debolini and Enrico Bonari},

url = {https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01277628},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-01-01},

journal = {Italian Journal of Agronomy},

volume = {10},

number = {2},

pages = {74--84},

abstract = {Since the 1960s, research has dealt with agricultural intensification (AI) as a solution to ensure global food security. Recently, sustainable intensification (SI) has increasingly been used to describe those agricultural and farming systems that ensure adequate ecosystem service provision. Studies differ in terms of the application scales and methodologies, thus we aim to summarize the main findings from the literature on how AI and SI are assessed, from the farm to global levels. Our literature review is based on 7865 papers selected from the Web of Science database and analysed using CorText software. A further selection of 105 relevant papers was used for an in-depth full-text analysis on: i) farming systems studied; ii) related ecosystem services; iii) indicators of intensity; and iv) temporal and spatial scales of analysis. Through this two-step analysis we were able to highlight three main research gaps in the AI research indicators. Firstly, the farming systems analysed for assessing AI are often quite simplified or monoculture-oriented, and they do not take the diversity and complex organisation of farming systems into account. Secondly, these studies mainly focus on northern countries or developing countries, whereas there is a gap of knowledge in Mediterranean areas, which are the areas with a high complexity of farming systems and diversity in ecosystem services. Finally, AI is mostly assessed through nitrogen inputs and economic yield, which are used the most both at very local and global levels. Intermediate regional or local levels, which are relevant for policy implementation and local planning, are often neglected. },

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{granjou2014making,

title = {Making taxonomy environmentally relevant. Insights from an all taxa biodiversity inventory},

author = {Celine Granjou and Isabelle Mauz and Marc Barbier and Philippe Breucker},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2014.01.004},

year  = {2014},

date = {2014-01-01},

journal = {Environmental Science & Policy},

volume = {38},

pages = {254-262},

publisher = {Elsevier},

abstract = {For several decades taxonomy has been marginalized in academic labs and universities. Today, rising concerns over biodiversity and ecosystem services are creating an unprecedented opportunity for it to be viewed as a crucially relevant field. This article aims to scrutinize how the biodiversity concerns entail new collaboration designs between taxonomists and nature managers and between taxonomists and ecologists. Our key point is that taxonomy's environmental relevance is not given: instead, taxonomic data have to be made relevant by taxonomists and their partners in specific collaborative and organizational arrangements. The article draws on an empirical study of an All Taxa Biodiversity Inventory (ATBI) in a national park in the French Alps, including an ethnographic survey combined with scientometric analysis. It was found that the collaboration initiated in the ATBI between taxonomists, ecologists and the park managers was paved with disappointments and reorientations because it partly failed to address the tension between a taxonomic and an ecological approach to the relevance of taxonomic data. The rise of biodiversity and ecosystem services concerns constitutes a “double-edged sword” for taxonomists: while there is greater opportunity for taxonomists to render their work visible through new research collaboration arrangements with ecologists, it also entails a risk that they remain mere data providers for nature managers and ecologists interested in ecosystem functioning.},

note = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2014.01.004},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{tancoigne2014place,

title = {The place of agricultural sciences in the literature on ecosystem services},

author = {Elise Tancoigne and Marc Barbier and Jean-Philippe Cointet and Guy Richard},

year  = {2014},

date = {2014-01-01},

journal = {Ecosystem Services},

volume = {10},

pages = {35-48},

publisher = {Elsevier},

abstract = {We performed a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the scientific literature on ecosystem services in order to help tracing a research agenda for agricultural sciences. The ecosystem services concept now lies at the heart of current developments to address global environmental change. Do agricultural sciences generate knowledge that covers this emerging theme? An analysis of scientific production allowed us to return to the ecological origins of this concept and see how little it has been appropriated by agricultural sciences until now, despite major focus on the issue of agro-ecosystems in the literature. Agricultural sciences tend to be more active in the field of environmental services, defined as services rendered by humans to ecosystems. The main studied services are those which have already been clearly identified and which act in synergy. Less attention is paid to the antagonisms between different services. These findings call for the implementation of agricultural research programmes that will consider the socio-agro-ecosystem as a whole and broaden the traditional issues addressed by agricultural sciences. We insist on three main management and operational issues that needs to be overcome if this is to be done: working at the landscape scale, increasing inter-disciplinary collaborations and take uncertainties into account.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}