3.9 Article

EXPLORING THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE BODIES OF LITERATURE PERTAINING TO SOCIOTECHNICAL TRANSITIONS AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT (PART 1): A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS

期刊

出版社

SOUTHERN AFRICAN INST INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING
DOI: 10.7166/33-1-2564

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa [106962]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose of this bibliometric analysis is to investigate the overlap or disconnect between the literature on technology management and socio-technical transitions. The study found no concrete evidence or significant similarity in foundational concepts used in both bodies of literature. Further research and efforts are needed to integrate these concepts.
The purpose of the bibliometric analysis documented in this article is to investigate the degree of overlap or disconnect between the bodies of literature pertaining to technology management and socio-technical transitions. There is a general agreement in the literature that technology has an indispensable role to play in realising the promise of sustainable societies; this paper considers a specific relationship within this technology-social context - namely, the link between technology management and socio-technical transitions. The importance and value of integrating the concepts of technology management and socio-technical transitions have been highlighted in the literature. However, the extent to which these concepts have been considered together and/or the extent to which they are disconnected has not been elucidated. This study thus considers the respective scientific networks, compares them from a number of bibliometric perspectives, and concludes that no concrete evidence of integration or significant similarity in foundational concepts used in both bodies of literature is evident; and so the study further highlights the need for more research efforts that focus on both bodies of knowledge to support and enable efforts to integrate the concepts of technology management and socio- technical transitions.

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

3.9
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