Home⇛International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research⇛vol. 6 no. 11 (2025)

Integrating Socioeconomic and Ecological Perspectives: A Bibliometric Study on Sustainability and Resource Management

Adrian P. Maroma | Rowena May T. David

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

This study performs a detailed bibliometric analysis to trace the evolu-tion of sustainability and livelihood research, mapping key ideas, inter-disciplinary connections, and the thematic shift from purely economic models to integrated frameworks encompassing social and ecological resilience, adaptive governance, and institutional dynamics. Using a structured approach with Scopus data, co-citation and co-word analyses were performed via VOSviewer and Bibliometrix. This process, guided by strict criteria, generated citation networks and keyword co occur-rence visualizations to map the field's intellectual and thematic struc-ture. Findings confirm the enduring influence of foundational frame-works, notably the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF) and Ostrom's Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework. Re-sults indicate an accelerating trend toward interdisciplinary teamwork, sustainability education, entrepreneurship, and the role of digital tech-nologies in enhancing livelihood resilience.These findings offer useful insights for policymakers, educators, and industry players. They high-light the need for adaptive governance, technological innovation, and community-led sustainability projects. Additionally, the study points out important research areas, including climate adaptation strategies, gender-inclusive sustainability policies, and digital changes in liveli-hood systems. By connecting theoretical and practical views, this study helps deepen our understanding of the changing landscape of sustaina-bility and resource management. It suggests strategic directions for pro-moting global sustainable development.



References:

  1. Ashley, C., & Carney, D. (1999). Sustainable livelihoods: Lessons from early experience. Department for International Develop-ment (DFID).
  2. Bebbington, A. (2009). Capitals and capabili-ties: A framework for analyzing peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty. World Development, 27(12), 2021–2044. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0743-0167(09)00067-9
  3. Berkes, F., Colding, J., & Folke, C. (Eds.). (2003). Navigating social-ecological sys-tems: Building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511541957
  4. Callon, M., Law, J., & Rip, A. (1983). Mapping the dynamics of science and technology. Macmillan.
  5. Chambers, R., & Conway, G. (1992). Sustaina-ble rural livelihoods: Practical concepts for the 21st century (IDS Discussion Pa-per No. 296). Institute of Development Studies. https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/articles/report/Sustainable_rural_livelihoods_practical_concepts_for_the_21st_century/26473510
  6. Department for International Development. (1999). Sustainable livelihoods guidance sheets. DFID.
  7. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
  8. Dorward, A., Anderson, S., Bernal, Y. N., Patti-son, J., Paz, R., Rushton, J., & Sanchez Vera, E. (2009). Hanging in, stepping up and stepping out: Livelihood aspirations and strategies of the poor. Development in Practice, 19(2), 240–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5177(08)00071-X
  9. van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
  10. van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2014). Visualiz-ing bibliometric networks. In Y. Ding, R. Rousseau, & D. Wolfram (Eds.), Measur-ing scholarly impact: Methods and prac-tice (pp. 285–320). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10377-8_13
  11. Ellis, F. (2000a). Rural livelihoods and diversity in developing countries. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0198297054.001.0001
  12. Ellis, F. (2000b). Rural livelihoods and diversi-ty in developing countries: Evidence and policy implications. Food Policy, 25(4), 365–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-9192(01)00014-8
  13. Engel, S., Pagiola, S., & Wunder, S. (2008). De-signing payments for environmental ser-vices in theory and practice. Ecological Economics, 65(4), 663–674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.03.011
  14. Food and Agriculture Organization of the Unit-ed Nations. (1995). Code of conduct for responsible fisheries. FAO. https://zi.siyzz.com/english/tratop_e/rulesneg_e/fish_e/1995_fao_ccrf.pdf
  15. Gibson-Graham, J. K. (2006). A postcapitalist politics. University of Minnesota Press.
  16. Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the com-mons. Science, 162(3859), 1243–1248. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.162.3859.1243
  17. Hota, P. K., Lenka, S. K., & Samantaray, A. K. (2020). Mapping the intellectual structure of big data analytics: A bibliometric anal-ysis. Global Business Review, 21(1), 205–227. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150918778983
  18. Meadows, D. H. (1998). Indicators and infor-mation systems for sustainable develop-ment: A report to the Balaton Group. In-ternational Institute for Sustainable De-velopment. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/balatonreport.pdf
  19. Merigó, J. M., Mas-Tur, A., Roig-Tierno, N., & Ribeiro-Soriano, D. E. (2018). Intellectual structure and evolution of corporate so-cial responsibility research using biblio-metric techniques. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 35(1), 123–148. https://doi.org/10.1002/cjas.1413
  20. Mingers, J., Jenkins, D., Lilley, S., & Boardman, J. (2012). Using citation analysis to identi-fy influential journals in business and management studies. European Journal of Information Systems, 21(6), 678–690. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2012.18
  21. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807763
  22. Ostrom, E. (2007). Moving beyond panaceas: A multi-tiered diagnostic approach for so-cial-ecological analysis. Environmental Conservation, 34(4), 373–381. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892907003870
  23. Ostrom, E. (2009). A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science, 325(5939), 419–422. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1172133
  24. Persson, O., Glänzel, W., & Danell, R. (2004). Inflationary bibliometric values: The role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators. Scientometrics, 60(3), 421–432. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000034384.35498.7d
  25. Roberts, J. T., Hite, A. B., & Chorev, N. (2015). The globalization and development read-er: Perspectives on development and global change (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
  26. Scoones, I. (1998). Sustainable rural liveli-hoods: A framework for analysis (IDS Working Paper No. 72). Institute of De-velopment Studies. https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/articles/report/Sustainable_Rural_Livelihoods_A_Framework_for_Analysis/26473384
  27. Scoones, I. (2010). Livelihoods perspectives and rural development. In S. M. Borras Jr. (Ed.), Critical perspectives in rural devel-opment studies (p. 26). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315875729-7
  28. Scoones, I. (2015). Sustainable livelihoods and rural development. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315685366
  29. Scoones, I. (2016). The politics of sustainabil-ity and development. Palgrave Communi-cations, 2, 16002. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41271-016-0002-7
  30. Small, H. (1973). Co-citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relation-ship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Sci-ence, 24(4), 265–269. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630240406
  31. Tan Luc, P., Brunet-Manquat, S., & Traoré, P. C. (2020). Bibliometric analysis of research on climate-smart agriculture. Sustainabil-ity, 12(8), 3460. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12083460
  32. Tanner, T., & Mitchell, T. (2008). Entrench-ment or enhancement: Could climate change adaptation help reduce chronic poverty? Global Environmental Change, 18(4), 833–844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.08.011
  33. Transforming Our World. (2015). The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. United Nations. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda
  34. Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organiza-tion. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic