4.6 Review

Ecotourism and sustainable development: a scientometric review of global research trends

期刊

ENVIRONMENT DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY
卷 25, 期 4, 页码 2977-3003

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10668-022-02190-0

关键词

Ecotourism; Sustainable development; Research trends; Scientometrics; Web of Science; CiteSpace

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study utilizes scientometrics to conduct an in-depth systematic review of research and development in the field of ecotourism. It analyzes the stages and key issues of ecotourism development and presents new insights to readers through visual images.
With the increasing attention and awareness of the ecological environment, ecotourism is becoming ever more popular, but it still brings problems and challenges to the sustainable development of the environment. To solve such challenges, it is necessary to review literature in the field of ecotourism and determine the key research issues and future research directions. This paper uses scientometrics implemented by CiteSpace to conduct an in-depth systematic review of research and development in the field of ecotourism. Two bibliographic datasets were obtained from the Web of Science, including a core dataset and an expanded dataset, containing articles published between 2003 and 2021. Our research shows that ecotourism has been developing rapidly in recent years. The research field of ecotourism spans many disciplines and is a comprehensive interdisciplinary subject. According to the research results, the evolution of ecotourism can be roughly divided into three phases: human disturbance, ecosystem services and sustainable development. It could be concluded that it has entered the third stage of Shneider's four-stage theory of scientific discipline. The research not only identifies the main clusters and their advance in ecotourism research based on high impact citations and research frontier formed by citations, but also presents readers with new insights through intuitive visual images.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据