Journal Press India®

Global Agricultural Trade: A Bibliometric Analysis

Vol 10 , Issue 2 , July - December 2023 | Pages: 120-137 | Review paper  

 
Article has been added to the cart.View Cart (0)
https://doi.org/10.17492/jpi.focus.v10i2.1022306


Author Details ( * ) denotes Corresponding author

1. * Ankit Rathee, Research Scholar, Commerce, Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, Haryana, India (ankitrathee00001@gmail.com)
2. Kuldip Singh Chhikara, Professor, Commerce, Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, Haryana, India (kuldip.comm@mdurohtak.ac.in)

This study addresses the lack of a comprehensive overview of Global Agricultural Trade (GAT) literature that aligns with sustainable goals. Employing a bibliometric analysis of 39 articles from the Web of Science database, the research maps the intellectual landscape of GAT, examining publication trends, influential authors, institutions, countries, funding sources, and key articles. The study reveals a research gap from 1998-2007, impacting agricultural and related sectors. Notably, China leads with 17 articles, followed by the USA and Japan. The analysis identifies five thematic clusters within GAT. By shedding light on global scholarly output, the research emphasizes the need for further exploration and understanding of the diverse themes encompassed in international agricultural trade.

Keywords

International Trade; Exports; Imports; Agricultural Products; Bibliometric Analysis

  1. Barrett, C. B., Carter, M. R., & Little, P. D. (2006). Understanding and reducing persistent poverty in Africa: Introduction to a special issue. The Journal of Development Studies, 42(2), 167-177. Retrieved from doi:10.1080/00220380500404587.
  2. Callon, M., Courtial, J. P., Turner, W. A., & Bauin, S. (1983). From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis. Social Science Information, 22(2), 191-235. Retrieved from doi:10.1177/053901883022002003.
  3. Cobo, M. J., Martínez, M. A., Gutiérrez-Salcedo, M., Fujita, H., & Herrera-Viedma, E. (2015). 25 years at knowledge-based systems: A bibliometric analysis. Knowledge-Based Systems, 80, 3-13. Retrieved from doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2014.12.035.
  4. FAO. (2022). The state of agricultural commodity markets 2022. Retrieved from https://www.fao.org/3/cc0471en/cc0471en.pdf.
  5. Ferro, E., Otsuki, T., & Wilson, J. S. (2015). The effect of product standards on agricultural exports. Food Policy, 50, 68-79. Retrieved from doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2014.10.016.
  6. Gaesser, L. A., Kobayashi, N., & Wilson, N. L. (2020). The US—Japan trade agreement. Choices, 35(3), 1-7. Retrieved from jstor.org/stable/27098574.
  7. Godar, J., & Gardner, T. (2019). Trade and land-use telecouplings. In C. Friss (Ed.), Telecoupling: Exploring land-use change in a globalised world (pp. 149-175). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. Retrived from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11105-2_8.
  8. Hubert, J. J. (1977). Bibliometric models for journal productivity. Social Indicators Research, 4(4), 441-473.
  9. Jambor, A., & Babu, S. (2016). The Competitiveness of Global Agriculture. In Competitiveness of Global Agriculture (pp. 6-26). Cham: Springer. Retrieved from doi:10.1007/978-3-319-44876-3_6.
  10. Khan, Z. A., Koondhar, M. A., Aziz, N., Ali, U., & Tianjun, L. (2020). Revisiting the effects of relevant factors on Pakistan’s agricultural products export. Agricultural Economics, 66(12), 527-541. Retrieved from doi:10.17221/252/2020-AGRICECON.
  11. Khan, Z. A., Koondhar, M. A., Khan, I., Ali, U., & Tianjun, L. (2021). Dynamic linkage between industrialization, energy consumption, carbon emission, and agricultural products export of Pakistan: An ARDL approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 43698-43710. Retrieved from doi: 10.1007/s11356-021-13738-4.
  12. Levy, Y., & Ellis, T. J. (2006). A systems approach to conduct an effective literature review in support of information systems research. Informing Science, 9, 181-212. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.28945/479.
  13. Liapis, P. (2011). Changing patterns of trade in processed agricultural products. In OECD (Ed.), Globalisation, comparative advantage and the changing dynamics of trade (pp. 121-148). Paris: OECD. Retrieved from doi:10.1787/5kgc3mq19s6d-en.
  14. Nakano, Y., Tashiro, M., Urano, R., Kikuchi, M., Ito, N., Moriya, E., Shirahige, T., Mishima, M., Takazono, T., Miyazaki, T. & Izumikawa, K. (2020). Characteristics of azole-resistant Aspergillus fumigatus attached to agricultural products imported to Japan. Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy, 26(10), 1021-1025. Retrieved from doi:10.1016/j.jiac.2020.05.008.
  15. Poonam, & Anshita, Chhikara, K. S. (2022). Fintech and financial inclusion: A bibliometric analysis. MANTHAN: Journal of Commerce and Management, 9(2), 121-144. Retrieved from doi:10.17492/jpi.manthan.v9i2.922207.
  16. Reed, M. (2001). International trade in agricultural products. London: Pearson Education.
  17. Ridley, W., & Devadoss, S. (2023). Competition and trade policy in the world cotton market: Implications for US cotton exports. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. Advance Online Publication. Retrieved from doi:10.1111/ajae.12370.
  18. Searchinger, T., Waite, R., Hanson, C., Ranganathan, J., Dumas, P., & Matthews, E. (2018). Creating a sustainable food future: A menu of solutions to sustainably feed more than 9 billion people by 2050. World Resources Institute.
  19. Shepherd, B., & Wilson, N. L. (2013). Product standards and developing country agricultural exports: The case of the European Union. Food Policy, 42, 1-10. Retrieved from doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2013.06.003.
  20. Thorbecke, E., & Nissanke, M. (2006). Introduction: The impact of globalization on the world’s poor. World Development, 34(8), 1333-1337. Retrieved from doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2005.10.007.
  21. Torchia, M., Calabrò, A., & Morner, M. (2015). Public–private partnerships in the health care sector: A systematic review of the literature. Public Management Review, 17(2), 236-261. Retrieved from doi:10.1080/14719037.2013.792380.
  22. Udah, S. C., Nwachukwu, I. N., Nwosu, A. C., Mbanasor, J. A., & Akpan, S. B. (2015). Determinants of agricultural export growth in Nigeria. International Journal of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 3(3), 105-109.
  23. UNCTAD. (2019). Trade and Development Report 2019: Financing a Global Green New Deal. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Retrieved from unctad.org2019.pdf.
  24. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2014). CitNetExplorer: A new software tool for analyzing and visualizing citation networks. Journal of Informetrics, 8(4), 802-823. Retrieved from doi:10.1016/j.joi.2014.07.006.
  25. Van Leeuwen, T. (2006). The application of bibliometric analyses in the evaluation of social science research. Who benefits from it, and why it is still feasible. Scientometrics, 66(1), 133-154. Retrieved from doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0010-7.
  26. Van Oorschot, J. A., Hofman, E., & Halman, J. I. (2018). A bibliometric review of the innovation adoption literature. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 134, 1-21. Retrieved from doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2018.04.032.
  27. Vatananan-Thesenvitz, R., Schaller, A. A., & Shannon, R. (2019). A bibliometric review of the knowledge base for innovation in sustainable development. Sustainability, 11(20), 5783. Retrieved from doi:10.3390/su11205783.
  28. Whittaker, J. (1989). Creativity and conformity in science: Titles, keywords and Co-word analysis. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 473-496. Retrieved from doi:10.1177/030631289019003004.
  29. Zupic, I., & Cater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429-472. Retrieved from doi:10.1177/1094428114562629.
Abstract Views: 3
PDF Views: 3

By continuing to use this website, you consent to the use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.