Annals of Forest Science

, Volume 67, Issue 8, pp 800–800 | Cite as

Exploring research issues in selected forest journals 1979–2008

  • Michèle Kaennel Dobbertin
  • Michael Peter Nobis
Letter to the Editor


  • • Forest science and policy have experienced significant changes under the pressure of global change. Assuming that scientific publications mirror contemporary issues, our objective was to verify whether titles of articles show a temporal trend, and whether it coincides with the new agenda set by sustainable forest management.

  • • We used ISI Web of Science to collect articles published 1979–2008 in 6 peer-reviewed forest(ry) journals (n = 20677). We split titles into strings and processed them to increase the homogeneity of our sample. We applied principal components analysis (PCA) as an indirect gradient analysis. We also searched titles for words related to the social, political and economic components of forestry.

  • • The PCA ordination revealed a dominant and distinct time gradient in the use of title words in our corpus. A few words have disappeared, but those with a positive trend clearly dominate, reflecting an opening of forest science towards more process-oriented research, especially in ecology and environmental and climate change. However, socio-economic aspects are still underrepresented.

  • • In our study, titles of forest(ry) publications increasingly include topics from neighboring natural sciences, but still very few from socio-economic disciplines.


bibliometrics forest research peer-reviewed publications principal component analysis research trends 


  1. Adams W.M., 2006. The future of sustainability: re-thinking environment and development in the twenty-first century, Report of the IUCN Renowned Thinkers Meeting, 29–31 January 2006, http://cmsdata., retrieved on: 2010-06-24.Google Scholar
  2. Andersson F., Angelstam P., Feger K.H., Hasenhauer H., Kräuchi N., Marell A., Matteuci G., Schneider U., and Tabbush P., 2005. A research strategy for sustainable forest management in Europe, Groupement d’Intérêt Public Ecosystèmes Forestiers, Paris, 149 p.Google Scholar
  3. Aussenac G., 2002. From the “Annales de l’École Nationale des Eaux et Forêts” to the “Annals of Forest Science”, eighty years of forestry science publications in France. Ann. For. Sci. 59: 789–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (COSEPUP), 2005. Facilitating interdisciplinary research. Nat. Acad. Press, Washington, D.C., 332 p.Google Scholar
  5. Glück P., 2004. Response to “The role of research in the MCPFE” — Research needs in the pan-European process: the role of EFI. In: Baines C. (Ed.), Forest Research Crossing Borders. EFI Proc. 50: 97–101.Google Scholar
  6. Helms J.A., 2002. Forest, forestry, forester. What do these terms mean? J. For. 100: 15–19.Google Scholar
  7. Hettelingh J.P., Posch M., and Slootweg J., 2005. Status of European critical loads and dynamic modelling. In: Hettelingh J.P., Posch M., and Slootweg J. (Eds.), CCE Status Report 2005, Coordination Centre for Effects, Bilthoven, Netherlands, pp. 9–26.Google Scholar
  8. Hickey G.M. and Nitschke C.R., 2005. Crossing disciplinary boundaries in forest research: an international challenge. For. Chron. 81: 321–323.Google Scholar
  9. Houllier F., 2004. How to respond to emerging research needs in Europe? In: Baines C. (Ed.), Forest research crossing borders. EFI Proc. 50: 137–142.Google Scholar
  10. Innes J.L., 2005. Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity and training in forestry and forest research. For. Chron. 81: 324–329.Google Scholar
  11. IPCC, 2007. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, In: Pachauri R.K. and Reisinger A. (Eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 104 p.Google Scholar
  12. Jansen G., 2008. Communication between forest scientists and forest policy-makers in Europe — a survey on both sides of the science/policy interface. For. Policy Econ. 10: 183–194.Google Scholar
  13. Kaennel M., 1998. Biodiversity: a diversity in definition. In: Bachmann P., Köhl M., Päivinen R. (Eds.), Assessment of biodiversity for improved forest planning, Kluwer, Dordrecht, 71–81.Google Scholar
  14. Konijnendijk C.C., 2004. Enhancing the forest science/policy interface in Europe: urban forestry showing the way. Scand. J. For. Res. 19(Suppl.): 123–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kuhn T.S., 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Univ. of Chicago Pr., Chicago, 173 p.Google Scholar
  16. Mendoza M.A., Fajardo J.J., and Zepeta J., 2005. Landscape based forest management, a real world case study from Mexico. For. Ecol. Manage. 209: 19–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mulloy F., 2004. Closing address. In: Baines C. (Ed.), Forest Research Crossing Borders. EFI Proc. 50: 149–150.Google Scholar
  18. Nobis M. and Wohlgemuth T., 2004. Trend words in ecological core journals over the last 25 years (1978–2002). Oikos 106: 411–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Schlaepfer R., 1997. Ecosystem-Based Management of Natural Resources: a Step Towards Sustainable Development. IUFRO Occasional Paper 6: 30.Google Scholar
  20. Seppälä R., 2004. How to respond to emerging research needs in Europe: trends affecting forest research and strategies to face them. In: Baines C. (Ed.), Forest Research Crossing Borders. EFI Proc. 50: 147–148.Google Scholar
  21. Soutrenon A. and Delatour C., 1998. Vingt ans de traitements de souches à l’urée contre Heterobasidion annosum en France (Base de données du Cemagref). Rev. For. Fr. 50: 217–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ter Braak, C.J. F. and Šmilauer P., 2002. CANOCO reference manual and CanoDraw for Windows user’s guide: software for canonical community ordination (version 4.5). Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, New York.Google Scholar
  23. White A. and Hernandez N.R., 1991. Increasing field complexity revealed through article title analyses. J. Am. Soc. Info. Sci. 42: 731–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer S+B Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michèle Kaennel Dobbertin
    • 1
  • Michael Peter Nobis
    • 1
  1. 1.Swiss Federal Research Institute WSLBirmensdorfSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations