★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★Open research. Global perspectives.
editor@theamericanjournals.comPublisher Home ↗
Social Sciences OPEN ACCESS

Visual Analysis Of Chinese Waste Management Based On Citespace

Hongmei Liu
School Of Public Management, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, China
DOI Crossref DOI 10.37547/tajssei/Volume02Issue08-38
tajssei 2020
VOL. 2 / NO. 08 AUGUST
FULL TEXT PP. 229-241
DOWNLOAD PDF

View all articles in this issue ↗

VOLUME 2
ISSUE 08
YEAR 2020
PAGES 229-241
RESEARCH OVERVIEW

Abstract

The scientometric literature of waste management between 2005—2019 was reviewed. The visualized
co-citation network of its knowledge domain was characterized in terms of thematic concentrations
of co-cited references and emerging trends of surging citations to references through a scientometric
review. The dataset of 281 bibliographic records were search through topic search of Chinese Social
Sciences Citation Index (CSSCI) database. The results show that through analysis, we can find that,
first of all, studying the classification of Chinese urban and rural waste is the primary conceptual
definition that all research faces. Secondly, there have been many results in the research on the
influencing factors of garbage classification. Such articles can get some new research conclusions
through empirical analysis, so such articles can often become classics. Finally, the research hotspots
of waste classification management in China this year are comprehensive treatment and collaborative
treatment.

RESEARCH TOPICS

Keywords

Waste management , scientometric,
SOURCES & SCHOLARSHIP

References

  1. Achillas C, Moussiopoulos N, Karagiannidis
  2. A, Banias G and Perkoulidis G(2013) The use
  3. of multi-criteria decision analysis to tackle
  4. waste management problems: A literature
  5. review. Waste Management & Research
  6. :115–129.
  7. Shang Huping,Liu Hongmei.Evaluation of
  8. the performance of urban community
  9. waste classification and its influencing
  10. factors: a non-interventional study from the
  11. perspective of comprehensive performance
  12. management[J].Journal of Gansu Institute
  13. of Public Administration,2020(02):34-
  14. +125.
  15. Wenger, E.; McDermott, R.; Snyder, W.M.
  16. Cultivating Communities of Practice: A
  17. Guide to Managing Knowledge; Harvard
  18. Business Press: Boston, MA, USA, 2002; pp.
  19. –258.
  20. Chen, C.; Dubin, R.; Kim, M.C. Emerging
  21. trends and new developments in
  22. regenerative medicine:A scientometric
  23. update (2000–2014). Expert Opin. Biol.
  24. Ther. 2014, 14, 1295–1317. [CrossRef]
  25. [PubMed]
  26. Chen, C. The Structure and Dynamics of
  27. Scientific Knowledge. In Mapping Scientific
  28. Frontiers; Springer:London, UK, 2013; pp.
  29. –199.
  30. Xu Lin, Ling Maoliang, Lu Yujie. Study on the
  31. Influencing Factors of Urban Residents’
  32. Waste Classification[J]. Journal of Public
  33. Management,2017,14(01):142-153+160
  34. [17][27] Lu Xianfeng. External pressure
  35. mechanism and induction mechanism in
  36. waste sorting management[J]. Urban
  37. Issues,2013(01):86-91.
  38. [26] Qu Ying.Study on the Influencing
  39. Factors of Urban Residents' Domestic
  40. Waste Source Classification[J].
  41. Mathematical Statistics and
  42. Management,2011,30(01):42-51.
  43. [22] Chen Shaojun,Li Ruchun,Ma Yongbin.
  44. The disagreement between willingness and
  45. behavior: a study on the classification
  46. mechanism of urban household
  47. waste[J].China Population•Resources and
  48. Environment,2015,25(09):168-176.
  49. [28] Tan Wenzhu. The Dilemma of Urban
  50. Domestic Waste and Institutional
  51. Innovation——Taking the Classification
  52. and Management of Domestic Waste in
  53. Taipei City as an Example[J].Urban
  54. Development Research,2011,18(07):95-101.
  55. [25] Chen minxia.Comparison of Domestic
  56. and Foreign Urban Domestic Waste
  57. Charging Experience[J].
  58. Economist,2008(06):92-93.