Title: Uournal of Library and Information Sciences in Agriculture

Title: Uournal of Library and Information Sciences in Agriculture

ISO Abbreviated Title:

JCR Abbreviated Title:

ISSN: 1002-1248

Issues/Year:

Journal Country

Language: Chinese

Publisher:

Publisher Address:

Subject Categories:

: Impact Factor

? Lin, Z. (2006), Study on mangrove forest special topic literature in China. Uournal of Library and Information Sciences in Agriculture, 18 (7), 139-143.

Full Text: 2006\Uou Lib Inf Sci Agr18, 139.pdf

Abstract: On the basis of mangrove forest special topic literature collected by the China Journal Full-text Database and Chinese Scientific and Technological Journal Database (1989~2005), this paper has made a statistic analysis of data volume of mangrove forest researches and the year distribution of periodical categories, author and its core institution, periodical that published the paper, periodical category, bibliographic content, etc. by bibliometric method. From the angle of bibliographic study, it has reflected the current situation and development trend of mangrove forest research.

Keywords: Mangrove Forest, Bibliographic Study, Literature Source, Bibliometric Analysis, China

? Zhang, S.J. (2006), Study on the volume and quality of SCI-Tech papers of the university during 2001～2003. Uournal of Library and Information Sciences in Agriculture, 18 (7), 144-146.

Full Text: 2006\Uou Lib Inf Sci Agr18, 144.pdf

Abstract: Through the bibliometric analysis of the academic paper volume and quality of the university during the period from 2001 to 2003, the paper has revealed the existing problems in research in the university, methods for solutions and future development orientation.

Keywords: SCI-Tech Papers, Productivity, Bibliometric Analysis

Title: Urban Ecosystems

ISO Abbreviated Title:

JCR Abbreviated Title:

ISSN: 1083-8155

Issues/Year:

Journal Country

Language: Chinese

Publisher:

Publisher Address:

Subject Categories:

: Impact Factor

Notes: TTopic

? Young, R. and Wolf, S. (2006), Goal attainment in urban ecology research: A bibliometric review 1975-2004. Urban Ecosystems, 9 (3), 179-193.

Full Text: 2006\Urb Eco9, 179.pdf

Abstract: We analyze a core literature of urban ecology (all articles published in Urban Ecology and Urban Ecosystems from 1975-2004, n = 261) to support a reflexive analysis of the field. We structure this critical analysis based on criteria derived from programmatic statements made by scientific societies, research funding organizations and academic institutions regarding what urban ecology should be. Specifically, we assess the extent to which the literature reflects, and has evolved to reflect, a commitment tocenter dot strengthen and expand the discipline of ecologycenter dot create a transdisciplinary enterprise, andcenter dot contribute to social and ecological wellbeing through applied research and policy engagement.Findings indicate that the literature strongly reflects these commitments, as these three tenets usefully describe the field and its evolution. We do, however, identify a tendency over time toward a more strictly disciplinary orientation. Ecological science is increasingly dominant and threatens to crowd out other scientific perspectives. This trend suggests that the field is maturing in the institutional sense, but perhaps at the cost of intellectual diversity, which many believe to be the basis of innovative solutions.

Keywords: Analysis, Bibliometric, Commitment, Cost, Criteria, Diversity, Ecology, Evolution, Field, Funding, Institutions, Literature, Policy, Research, Research Funding, Review, Science, Social, Solutions, Structure, Support, Trend, Urban

? Dooling, S., Graybill, J. and Greve, A. (2007), Response to Young and Wolf: Goal attainment in urban ecology research. Urban Ecosystems, 10 (3), 339-347.

Full Text: 2007\Urb Eco10, 339.pdf

Abstract: Our critique focuses on the poorly defined key concepts, methodological inconsistencies, circular research design, and over-reaching substantive claims made by Young and Wolf. We suggest that Young and Wolf have provided an assessment of the Urban Ecosystems journal, not of urban ecology as a field. We conclude by identifying questions to guide a bibliometric analysis that focuses on a collaborative and interdisciplinary future of urban ecology (how are participating disciplines contributing to urban ecological research and scholarship; what theories and conceptual frameworks are being used, and how are these theories being tested and modified; and what mixed methodologies are being developed to collect data to address complex urban issues that are inherently interdisciplinary). We take seriously Young and Wolf’s call for a “fundamental discussion as to if and how the intentions of the field have been or need to be updated” and argue that such a discussion requires a more inclusive, rigorous, and meaningful identification of the “core” of urban ecology literature than provided.

Keywords: Analysis, Assessment, Bibliometric, Bibliometric Analysis, Data, Design, Ecology, Field, Identification, Interdisciplinary, Journal, Literature, Methodologies, Modified, Research, Research Design, Scholarship, Urban

? Young, R.F. and Wolf, S.A. (2007), Toward a pragmatic program for critical urban ecology. Urban Ecosystems, 10 (3), 349-354.

Full Text: 2007\Urb Eco10, 349.pdf

Abstract: Our essay responds to the critique of Dooling et al. (Urban Ecosystems in press, 2007) of our previously published article “Goal attainment in urban ecology research: a bibliometric review 1975-2004 (Young and Wolf, Urban Ecosystems, 9:179-193, 2006). We identify our critics’ concerns as rooted in a project of deconstruction of scientific inquiry and a redefinition of the boundaries separating academic disciplines from each other and science from society. While we identify important differences with our critics, we largely support this critical project, as evidenced by our previously published empirical research. In exploring the relationship between critical and positivist approaches to urban ecology research and how we might work toward an integration of nature and society in thought and action, we defend pragmatic approaches to empirical research as well as disciplinary projects as legitimate and essential elements of urban ecology research. We argue in favor of theoretical and methodological pluralism. Rather than define urban ecology through exclusionary projects that would limit the scope and significance of urban ecology research, we reaffirm our call for diverse sets of actors inside and outside university settings to engage and support each other in order to develop and strengthen analysis and pursuit of sustainability.

Keywords: Analysis, Bibliometric, Boundaries, Ecology, Integration, Research, Review, Science, Scope, Significance, Society, Support, Sustainability, University, Urban, Work