Skip to main content

A “review” of policy sciences: bibliometric analysis of authors, references, and topics during 1970–2017

Abstract

Even as Policy Sciences celebrates its fiftieth anniversary, there is no systematic account of the research that has been published in the journal. This article reports the findings of a bibliometric analysis of 1027 publications in this journal during 1970–2017. It identifies the authors who have contributed to the journal, the works that have influenced them, and the topics they have studied.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1: Co-authorship network of authors with three or more publications in this journal.
Fig. 2: Heat map of publications by countries in which authors are based.
Fig. 3: Co-citation network of scholars referenced on 20 or more instances in this journal.
Fig. 4: Co-citation network of sources referenced on 20 or more instances in this journal.
Fig. 5: Co-occurrence network of the most relevant terms occurring in the title or abstract of 10 or more articles published in this journal.
Fig. 6: Word cloud of terms pertaining to policy areas in titles and abstracts of publications of this journal.

Notes

  1. This query also returned chapters from a book on “Sustainable Forestry from Monitoring and Modelling to Knowledge Management and Policy Science,” which were explicitly excluded from the bibliometric dataset.

  2. VOSviewer is a software for bibliometric analysis based on the visualisation of similarities (VOS) technique. It constructs a two-dimensional map in which the distance between nodes (for example, authors, publications, sources, or terms) is a measure of similarity.

  3. Variants of author names, institute names, cited references, and terms were synonymized using thesauri developed by the author. Also, uninteresting terms were omitted from the analysis using a thesaurus developed by the author. These are available upon request.

References

  • Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics (Vol. Book, Whole). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, C. J., & Howlett, M. (1992). The lessons of learning: Reconciling theories of policy learning and policy change. Policy Sciences, 25(3), 275–294. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, G. D., & DeLeon, P. (1983). The foundations of policy analysis (Vol. Book, Whole). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunner, R. D. (1991). The policy movement as a policy problem. Policy Sciences, 24(1), 65–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00146465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunner, R. D. (2002). Finding common ground: Governance and natural resources in the American West. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunner, R. D. (2006). A paradigm for practice. Policy Sciences, 39(2), 135–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-006-9012-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunner, R. D., & Ascher, W. (1992). Science and social responsibility. Policy Sciences, 25(3), 295–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138787.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craft, J., & Howlett, M. (2012). Policy formulation, governance shifts and policy influence: Location and content in policy advisory systems. Journal of Public Policy, 32(2), 79. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X12000049.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craft, J., & Howlett, M. (2013). The dual dynamics of policy advisory systems: The impact of externalization and politicization on policy advice. Policy and Society, 32(3), 187–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polsoc.2013.07.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • deLeon, P. (1992). The democratization of the policy sciences. Public Administration Review, 52(2), 125–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeLeon, P. (1997). Democracy and the policy sciences (Vol. Book, Whole). Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dror, Y. (1970). Prolegomena to policy sciences. Policy Sciences, 1(1), 135–150. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00145198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, F. (1980). Politics, values, and public policy: The problem of methodology (Vol. Book, Whole). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy: Discursive politics and deliberative practices (Vol. Book, Whole). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S., Read, S., & Combs, B. (1978). How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits. Policy Sciences, 9(2), 127–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00143739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hajer, M. (2003). Policy without polity? Policy analysis and the institutional void. Policy Sciences, 36(2), 175–195. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024834510939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howlett, M. (2009). Governance modes, policy regimes and operational plans: A multi-level nested model of policy instrument choice and policy design. Policy Sciences, 42(1), 73–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, B. D., & Baumgartner, F. R. (2005). The politics of attention: How government prioritizes problems (Vol. Book, Whole). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasswell, H. D. (1970a). The emerging conception of the policy sciences. Policy Sciences, 1(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00145189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lasswell, H. D. (1970b). Must science serve political power? American Psychologist, 25(2), 117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lasswell, H. D. (1971). A pre-view of policy sciences. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasswell, H. D., & Kaplan, A. (1950). Power and society: A framework for political inquiry (Vol. 2, Book, Whole). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations (Vol. Book, Whole). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action (Vol. Book, Whole). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity (Vol. Book, Whole). Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressman, J. L., & Wildavsky, A. B. (1973). How great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quade, E. S. (1970). Why policy sciences? Policy Sciences, 1(1), 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00145188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier, P. A. (1988). An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences, 21(2–3), 129–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00136406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (1993). Policy change and learning: an advocacy coalition approach (Vol. Book, Whole). Boulder, Colo: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1983). Reason in human affairs (Vol. Book, Whole). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1985). Human nature in politics: The dialogue of psychology with political science. The American Political Science Review, 79(2), 293–304. https://doi.org/10.2307/1956650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tijssen, R. J. W. (1992). Cartography of science: Scientometric mapping with multidimensional scaling methods. Leiden, Netherlands: DSWO Press, Leiden University.

  • van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2007). VOS: A new method for visualizing similarities between objects. In: R. Decker, & H. J. Lenz (Eds.), Advances in data analysis: Proceedings of the 30th annual conference of the Gesellschaft für Klassifikation e.V., Freie Universität Berlin, March 810, 2006, (pp. 299–306). Berlin: Springer.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verbeek, A., Debackere, K., Luwel, M., & Zimmermann, E. (2002). Measuring progress and evolution in science and technology–I: The multiple uses of bibliometric indicators. International Journal of Management Reviews, 4(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2370.00083.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wildavsky, A. B. (1964). The politics of the budgetary process (Vol. Book, Whole). Boston: Little, Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wildavsky, A. B. (1979). Speaking truth to power: The art and craft of policy analysis (Vol. Book, Whole). Boston: Little, Brown.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nihit Goyal.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Goyal, N. A “review” of policy sciences: bibliometric analysis of authors, references, and topics during 1970–2017. Policy Sci 50, 527–537 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-017-9300-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-017-9300-6

Keywords

  • Bibliometric analysis
  • Co-citation analysis
  • Co-occurrence analysis
  • Policy sciences
  • Policy studies
  • Public policy