Research status and evolution trend of carbon footprint: Based on social network perspective

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-9479.2019.06.2018333

Abstract

Abstract:

Greenhouse gas(GHG) reduction has become the consensus all over the world. As an important tool of GHG management, carbon footprint has been developing rapidly over the past two decades. However, existing research lacks summary of its evolution and development. This article selects the journal data of Web of Science, and retrieves 8840 related articles with carbon footprint from 1996 to 2017, which is then conducted by qualitative and quantitative analysis. The results showed that: ① The United States contribute the most to the carbon footprint literature with 2 275 publications, and have the highest h index (83) and citation frequency (34 803); ② The developing countries such as China and India has been improving rapidly in published papers over the past 10 years significantly, and their amount are ranked top 10 globally. ③ The h index of Dutch is the largest in sharing of total publications; ④ University of California is the most productive organization, with 222 publications and significant international cooperation. Finally, this paper divides the carbon footprint research into three phases. Based on the keyword co-occurrence analysis, the research identifies the hot spots changes in carbon footprint research and predicts its future research trends.

Key words: carbon footprint, social network, bibliometrics, greenhouse gases

摘要：

温室气体减排已成为世界各国的共识，碳足迹分析作为温室气体管理的工具，在过去二十多年来发展迅速，然而国内外现有研究缺乏对其演化发展的归纳总结。因此，本文选取Web of science收录的期刊数据为研究对象，检索出1996—2017年有关碳足迹的相关文献8840篇，并对此进行了定性和定量分析。结果表明：①美国对碳足迹文献的贡献最大，拥有2275篇出版物以及最高的h指数（83）和被引频次（34803）；②中国和印度等发展中国家近10年发文量增长显著，都位于全球发文量前十的国家中；③荷兰的h指数占总出版物的比重最大；④加利福尼亚大学是该领域最具生产力的机构，拥有222篇出版物，且国际合作水平显著。最后，论文将碳足迹研究分为三个阶段，基于关键词共现分析，厘清碳足迹研究的热点变化，并预测其未来研究趋势。

关键词: 碳足迹, 社会网络, 文献计量, 温室气体

Heng LI, Ning WANG, Zongshui WANG, Wentao LIU. Research status and evolution trend of carbon footprint: Based on social network perspective[J]. World Regional Studies, 2019, 28(6): 132-144.

黎恒, 王宁, 王宗水, 刘文涛. 碳足迹研究现状与演变：基于社会网络视角分析[J]. 世界地理研究, 2019, 28(6): 132-144.

Figures/Tables 9

References 54

1	Hartmann D, Tank A, Rusticucci M. IPCC fifth assessment report, climate change 2013: the physical science basis. In: IPCC AR5; 2013.
2	Team C W, Pachauri R K, Meyer L A. Climate change 2014: Synthesis report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Journal of Romance Studies, 2014, 4(2):85-88.
3	Wackernagel M, Rees W. Our Ecological Footprint: reducing human impact on the earth. New Society Pub, 1996.
4	Pandey D, Agrawal M, Pandey J S. Carbon footprint: current methods of estimation. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2011, 178(1-4): 135-160.
5	Gan Y, Liang C, Hamel C, et al. Strategies for reducing the carbon footprint of field crops for semiarid areas. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 2011, 31(4):643-656.
6	Liu C, Cutforth H, Chai Q, et al. Farming tactics to reduce the carbon footprint of crop cultivation in semiarid areas. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 2016, 36(4):69.
7	张丹,张卫峰.低碳农业与农作物碳足迹核算研究述评.资源科学, 2016,38(7):1395-1405.
8	Pirlo G. Cradle-to-farm gate analysis of milk carbon footprint: a descriptive review. Italian Journal of Animal Science, 2012, 11(1):108-118.
9	师帅,李翠霞,李媚婷.畜牧业"碳排放"到"碳足迹"核算方法的研究进展.中国人口·资源与环境, 2017,27(6):36－41.
10	王永琴,周叶,张荣.碳排放影响因子与碳足迹文献综述:基于研究方法视角.环境工程,2017,35(1):155-159.
11	耿涌,董会娟,郗凤明,等.应对气候变化的碳足迹研究综述.中国人口·资源与环境,2010,20(10):6-12.
12	王微,林剑艺,崔胜辉,等.碳足迹分析方法研究综述.环境科学与技术,2010,33(7):71-78.
13	Xu Z, Sun D W, Zhang Z, et al. Research developments in methods to reduce carbon footprint of cooking operations: A review. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 2015, 44(1):49-57.
14	董雪旺,张捷,章锦河,等.区域旅游业碳排放和旅游消费碳足迹研究述评.生态学报,2016,36(2):554-568.
15	Nilsson A E, Aragonés M M, Torralvo F A, et al. A review of the carbon footprint of Cu and Zn production from primary and secondary sources. minerals, 2017,7(9):168.
16	Pritchard A. Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics?. Journal of Documentation, 1969,25(4):348-349.
17	林聚仁. 社会网络分析:理论、方法与应用. 北京:北京师范大学出版社,2009.
18	Du H, Li B, Brown M A, et al. Expanding and shifting trends in carbon market research: a quantitative bibliometric study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2015,103:104-111.
19	Mao G, Liu X, Du H, et al. Way forward for alternative energy research: A bibliometric analysis during 1994–2013. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2015,48:276-286.
20	Hirsch J E. An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2005, 102(46):16569-16572.
21	Han M Y, Sui X, Huang Z L, et al. Bibliometric indicators for sustainable hydropower development. Ecological Indicators, 2014, 47:231-238.
22	Zheng T, Wang J, Wang Q, et al. A bibliometric analysis of micro/nano-bubble related research: current trends, present application, and future prospects. Scientometrics, 2016, 109(1):53-71.
23	Wiedmann T, Minx J. A Definition of 'Carbon Footprint. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 2009, 92(4):193–195.
24	Wangaabcaa H. Global urbanization research from 1991 to 2009: A systematic research review. Landscape & Urban Planning, 2012, 104(3):299-309.
25	Dehdarirad T, Villarroya A, Barrios M. Research trends in gender differences in higher education and science: a co-word analysis. Scientometrics, 2014, 101(1):273-290.
26	Wang L, Wei Y M, Brown M A, et al. Global transition to low-carbon electricity: A bibliometric analysis. Applied Energy, 2017, 205:57-68.
27	Han M Y, Jia J Y, Wang W. Recent advances in organocatalytic asymmetric synthesis of polysubstituted pyrrolidines. Tetrahedron Letters, 2014, 55(4):784-794.
28	Weisser D. A guide to life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from electric supply technologies. Energy, 2007, 32(9):1543-1559.
29	Page G, Ridoutt B, Bellotti B. Carbon and water footprint tradeoffs in fresh tomato production. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2012, 32(3):219-226.
30	Timmermann V, Dibdiakova J. Greenhouse gas emissions from forestry in East Norway. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2014, 19(9):1593-1606.
31	Karvounis P. A review of desalination potential in Greek Islands using renewable energy sources, a Life cycle assessment of different units. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 2017, 6(2):19-32.
32	Laitner J A. Linking energy efficiency to economic productivity: recommendation for improving the robustness of the American economy. ACEEE, report; 2013.
33	Brown M A, Baer P, Cox M, et al. Evaluating the risks of alternative energy policies: a case study of industrial energy efficiency. Energy Efficiency, 2014, 7(1):1-22.
34	Brown M A, Levine M D, Short W, et al. Scenarios for a clean energy future. Energy Policy,2001, 29:1179–96.
35	Brown M A, Wang Y. Green savings: how policies and markets drive energy efficiency. Praeger, 2015.
36	Du H, Wei L, Brown M A, et al. A bibliometric analysis of recent energy efficiency literatures: an expanding and shifting focus. Energy Efficiency, 2013, 6(1):177-190.
37	Chen J X, Chen J. Supply chain carbon footprinting and responsibility allocation under emission regulations. Journal of Environmental Management, 2017, 188:255-267.
38	Brandenburg M. A hybrid approach to configure eco-efficient supply chains under consideration of performance and risk aspects. Omega, 2017, 70:58-76.
39	Larsen H N, Solli C, Pettersena J. Supply Chain Management – How can We Reduce our Energy/Climate Footprint?. Energy Procedia, 2012, 20(20):354-363.
40	Kremer G E, Haapala K, Murat A, et al. Directions for instilling economic and environmental sustainability across product supply chains. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016, 112:2066-2078.
41	Acquaye A, Feng K, Oppon E, et al. Measuring the environmental sustainability performance of global supply chains: A multi-regional input-output analysis for carbon, sulphur oxide and water footprints. Journal of Environmental Management, 2017, 187:571-585.
42	Pishvaee M S, Razmi J, Torabi S A. Robust possibilistic programming for socially responsible supply chain network design: A new approach. Fuzzy Sets & Systems, 2012, 206(6):1-20.
43	You F, Tao L, Graziano D J, et al. Optimal design of sustainable cellulosic biofuel supply chains: Multiobjective optimization coupled with life cycle assessment and input–output analysis. Aiche Journal, 2012, 58(4):1157-1180.
44	Devika K, Jafarian A, Nourbakhsh V. Designing a sustainable closed-loop supply chain network based on triple bottom line approach: A comparison of metaheuristics hybridization techniques. European Journal of Operational Research, 2014, 235(3):594-615.
45	Santibañezaguilar J E, Gonzálezcampos J B, Ponceortega J M, et al. Optimal planning and site selection for distributed multiproduct biorefineries involving economic, environmental and social objectives. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2014, 65:270-294.
46	Lohwasser R, Madlener R. Economics of CCS for coal plants: Impact of investment costs and efficiency on market diffusion in Europe. Energy Economics, 2012, 34(3):850-863.
47	Chen W, Xu R. Clean coal technology development in China. Energy Policy, 2010, 38(5):2123-2130.
48	Cormos C C. Integrated assessment of IGCC power generation technology with carbon capture and storage (CCS). Energy, 2012, 42(1):434-445.
49	Arranz A M. Hype among low-carbon technologies: Carbon capture and storage in comparison. Global Environmental Change, 2016, 41:124-141.
50	Xi Z J, Zheng D, Yue M. Carbon footprint analysis of a combined cooling heating and power system. Energy Conversion & Management, 2015, 103:36-42.
51	Narayan A, Ponnambalam K. Risk-averse stochastic programming approach for microgrid planning under uncertainty. Renewable Energy, 2017, 101:399-408.
52	Du S, Hu L, Song M. Production optimization considering environmental performance and preference in the cap-and-trade system. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016, 112:1600-1607.
53	Ba K, Dellagi S, Rezg N, et al. Joint optimization of preventive maintenance and spare parts inventory for an optimal production plan with consideration of CO₂ emission. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2016, 149:172-186.
54	Shenoy U V. Targeting and design of energy allocation networks for carbon emission reduction. Chemical Engineering Science, 2010, 65(23):6155-6168.

序号	学科方向	TP	TP R（%）
1	环境科学生态学（Environmental Sciences and Ecology）	4841	54.76
2	工程学（Engineering）	4243	48.00
3	商业经济学（Business Economics）	3009	34.04
4	能源燃料（Energy Fuels）	2655	30.03
5	科学技术其他课题（Science Technology Other Topics）	1987	22.48
6	气象大气科学（Meteorology Atmospheric Sciences）	1466	16.58
7	农业（Agriculture）	1448	16.38
8	计算机科学（Computer Science）	1415	16.01
9	数学（Mathematics）	908	10.27
10	材料科学（Materials Science）	855	9.67

序号	学科方向	TP	TP R（%）
1	环境科学生态学（Environmental Sciences and Ecology）	4841	54.76
2	工程学（Engineering）	4243	48.00
3	商业经济学（Business Economics）	3009	34.04
4	能源燃料（Energy Fuels）	2655	30.03
5	科学技术其他课题（Science Technology Other Topics）	1987	22.48
6	气象大气科学（Meteorology Atmospheric Sciences）	1466	16.58
7	农业（Agriculture）	1448	16.38
8	计算机科学（Computer Science）	1415	16.01
9	数学（Mathematics）	908	10.27
10	材料科学（Materials Science）	855	9.67

序号	机构名称	国家	TP	TP RW（%）	TP RC（%）	TC	h-index
1	加利福尼亚大学	美国	222	2.51	9.75	5249	39
2	中国科学院	中国	174	1.97	10.18	2546	26
3	美国能源部	美国	120	1.36	5.27	2710	32
4	佛罗里达州立大学	美国	88	1.00	3.86	1890	24
5	马里兰大学	美国	84	0.95	3.69	3123	29
6	美国国家航空航天局	美国	81	0.92	3.56	3729	32
7	法国国家科学研究院	法国	77	0.87	28.31	1785	23
8	挪威科技大学	挪威	76	0.86	43.68	2023	25
9	美国农业部	美国	72	0.81	3.16	2722	28
10	悉尼大学	澳大利亚	69	0.78	13.45	3298	29

序号	机构名称	国家	TP	TP RW（%）	TP RC（%）	TC	h-index
1	加利福尼亚大学	美国	222	2.51	9.75	5249	39
2	中国科学院	中国	174	1.97	10.18	2546	26
3	美国能源部	美国	120	1.36	5.27	2710	32
4	佛罗里达州立大学	美国	88	1.00	3.86	1890	24
5	马里兰大学	美国	84	0.95	3.69	3123	29
6	美国国家航空航天局	美国	81	0.92	3.56	3729	32
7	法国国家科学研究院	法国	77	0.87	28.31	1785	23
8	挪威科技大学	挪威	76	0.86	43.68	2023	25
9	美国农业部	美国	72	0.81	3.16	2722	28
10	悉尼大学	澳大利亚	69	0.78	13.45	3298	29

序号	期刊	TP	TP R（%）	h-index	IF（2016-2017）
1	Journal of Cleaner Production	511	5.93	38	5.715
2	International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment	111	1.29	27	3.173
3	Applied Energy	105	1.22	28	7.182
4	Sustainability	103	1.20	14	1.789
5	Journal of Industrial Ecology	84	0.98	22	4.123
6	Agricultural and Forest Meteorology	73	0.85	29	3.887
7	Ecological Economics	71	0.82	32	2.965
8	Ecological Indicators	71	0.82	21	3.898
9	Energy Policy	69	0.80	25	4.140
10	Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews	65	0.76	22	8.058