Abstract
Modern land protection and biodiversity conservation depend greatly on the application of land trust. With the accelerated development of land trust organizations, the land trust has become the most effective land conservation method. To draw and analyze the current status of the research on the field of the land trust, we conduct the cluster analysis of co-citation and keywords co-occupation, and comb the evolution of international land trust research from 1990 to 2019. This article collected 1341 related documents included in the “Web of Science” database as the basic data for analysis, combined with bibliometrics method and visualization software to find out the landmark literature with high burst value, and study literature co-citation clusters in the network map. The results show that the main subject of collected literatures is related to ecology and environment. The hotspots of international land trust mainly cover four aspects: conserving private land by conservation easements, impact and response to climate change, collaborative governance, and community land trust (CLT). It is found that the land trust research has formed a clear co-citation cluster differentiation. By analyzing and sorting out the landmark literatures and hotspots in the field of the land trust, the purpose of this study is to provide researchers with more reference for research implementation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Brewer, R. (2013).Conservancy: The land trust movement in America. Dartmouth College Press.
Merenlender, A. M., Huntsinger, L., Guthey, G. T., & Fairfax, S. K. (2004). Land trusts and conservation easements: who is conserving what for whom? Conservation Biology, 18(1), 65–76.
Fairfax, S. K., Gwin, L., King, M. A., Raymond, L., & Watt, L. (2005). Buying nature: The limits of land acquisition as a conservation strategy, 1780–2003. The MIT Press.
Kabii, T., & Horwitz, P. (2006). A review of landholder motivations and determinants for participation in conservation covenanting programmes. Environmental Conservation, 33(1), 11–20.
Rissman, A. R., Lozier, L., Comendant, T., Kareiva, P., Kiesecker, J. M., Shaw, M. R., & Merenlender, A. M. (2007). Conservation easements: Biodiversity protection and private use. Conservation Biology, 21(3), 709–718.
Yuan-Farrell, C., Marvier, M., Press, D., & Kareiva, P. (2005). Conservation easements as a conservation strategy: Is there a sense to the spatial distribution of easements? Natural Areas Journal, 25(3), 282–289.
Milder, J. C., & Clark, S. (2011). Conservation development practices, extent, and land-use effects in the United States. Conservation Biology, 25(4), 697–707.
Knight, A. T., Cowling, R. M., Difford, M., & Campbell, B. M. (2010). Mapping human and social dimensions of conservation opportunity for the scheduling of conservation action on private land. Conservation Biology, 24(5), 1348–1358.
Hodge, I., & Adams, W. M. (2012). Neoliberalisation, rural land trusts and institutional blending. Geoforum, 43(3), 472–482.
Rissman, A. R., & Sayre, N. F. (2012). Conservation outcomes and social relations: A comparative study of private ranchland conservation easements. Society and Natural Resources, 25(6), 523–538.
Hotte, N., Kozak, R., & Wyatt, S. (2019). How institutions shape trust during collective action: A case study of forest governance on Haida Gwaii. Forest Policy and Economics, 107, 101921.
Stern, M. J., & Coleman, K. J. (2015). The multidimensionality of trust: Applications in collaborative natural resource management. Society and Natural Resources, 28(2), 117–132.
Mase, A. S., Babin, N. L., Prokopy, L. S., & Genskow, K. D. (2015). Trust in sources of soil and water quality information: Implications for environmental outreach and education. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 51(6), 1656–1666.
Lachapelle, P., & Mccool, S. F. (2012). The role of trust in community wildland fire protection planning. Society and Natural Resources, 25(4), 321–335.
Baumgartgetz, A., Prokopy, L. S., & Floress, K. (2012). Why farmers adopt best management practice in the United States: A meta-analysis of the adoption literature. Journal of Environmental Management, 96(1), 17–25.
Ranjan, P., Church, S. P., Floress, K., & Prokopy, L. S. (2019). Synthesizing conservation motivations and barriers: What have we learned from qualitative studies of farmers’ behaviors in the united states? Society & Natural Resources, 32(11), 1171–1199.
Alixgarcia, J., Sims, K. R., Orozcoolvera, V. H., Costica, L. E., Medina, J. D., & Monroy, S. R. (2018). Payments for environmental services supported social capital while increasing land management. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115(27), 7016–7021.
Muradian, R., Arsel, M., Pellegrini, L., et al. (2013). Payments for ecosystem services and the fatal attraction of win-win solutions. Conservation Letters, 6(4), 274–279.
Kamal, S., Grodzinskajurczak, M., & Brown, G. (2015). Conservation on private land: A review of global strategies with a proposed classification system. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 58(4), 576–597.
Bennett, D. E., Pejchar, L., Romero, B., Knight, R. L., & Berger, J. (2018). Using practitioner knowledge to expand the toolbox for private lands conservation. Biological Conservation, 152–159.
Gray, K. A., & Galande, M. (2011). Keeping “Community” in a Community Land Trust. Social Work Research, 35(4), 241–248.
Moore, T., & Mckee, K. (2012). Empowering local communities? An international review of community land trusts. Housing Studies, 27(2), 280–290.
Scott, J. M., Davis, F. W., McGhie, R. G., Wright, R. G., Groves, C., & Estes, J. (2001). Nature reserves: Do they capture the full range of America’s biological diversity? Ecological applications, 11(4), 999–1007.
Klenosky, D. B., Perryhill, R., Mullendore, N., & Prokopy, L. S. (2015). Distinguishing ambivalence from indifference: A study of attitudes toward land trusts among members and nonmembers. Land Use Policy, 48(48), 250–260.
Epanchin-Niell, R., Kousky, C., Thompson, A., & Walls, M. (2017). Threatened protection: Sea level rise and coastal protected lands of the eastern United States. Ocean and Coastal Management, 137, 118–130.
Torabi, N., Cooke, B., & Bekessy, S. A. (2016). The role of social networks and trusted peers in promoting biodiverse carbon plantings. Australian Geographer, 47(2), 139–156.
Acknowledgements
This research was funded by the National Social Science Foundation, grant number 17BJL090.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this paper
Cite this paper
Li, M., Yang, C., Zhang, L. (2021). Scientometric Analysis and Scientific Trends on Land Trust. In: Lu, X., Zhang, Z., Lu, W., Peng, Y. (eds) Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium on Advancement of Construction Management and Real Estate. CRIOCM 2020. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-3587-8_62
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-3587-8_62
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-16-3586-1
Online ISBN: 978-981-16-3587-8
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)