MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3120500450 · doi:10.1139/er-2020-0085

The historical footprint and future challenges of water-energy-food nexus research: a bibliometric review towards sustainable development

2021· review· en· W3120500450 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xinxueqi Han, Yong Zhao, Xuerui Gao, Yubao Wang, Shan Jiang, Yongnan Zhu, Tingli An

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Reviews · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater-Energy-Food Nexus Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNexus (standard)SustainabilityInterdependenceSustainable developmentResource (disambiguation)Scope (computer science)Water energyWater resourcesEnvironmental resource managementRegional scienceComputer sciencePolitical scienceSociologyEconomicsSocial scienceNatural resource economicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The water–energy–food (WEF) nexus has emerged as a frontier issue in interdisciplinary research and is one of the most complex sustainability challenges that the world is faced with today. In this review, we ask: (i) how can the interdependent relationships among water, energy, and food resources be identified? (ii) what methods have been applied to understand these relationships? and (iii) what are the future opportunities and challenges for the WEF nexus development? To answer these questions, we provide a critical assessment of the relevant literature from Web of Science database on WEF nexus published between 2008 and 2019 using a bibliometric analysis. Using the resulting 396 published articles, we systematically reviewed the concept and the bibliometric characteristics of the WEF nexus research to assess the development footprint. Based on the most popular topics and research methods found in these publications, we discussed the major research limitations as well as future opportunities and challenges for WEF research. An examination of internal and external relationships among topics showed that the three most recent hot areas of WEF nexus research include (i) water, energy, and food, (ii) policy-making and resource management, and (iii) system models and methods. Specifically, considering that no one method can solve all problems, we innovatively summarized the application scope and the advantages and disadvantages of each method, with a particular focus on the WEF nexus models. This was undertaken to support readers in choosing a scientific method to analyze the specific WEF nexus related issues. We anticipate that complex interdependence mechanisms, data uncertainty, analytical model development, and in-depth policy implementation will pose the greatest challenges for future WEF nexus research; however, these challenges will also generate better research opportunities. This bibliometric review highlights that to increase understanding of complex WEF systems and formulating optimal strategies to manage them is of great significance for environmental and social sustainability.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.138
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.187 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ReviewsSame topicWater-Energy-Food Nexus StudiesFrench-language works237,207