63046 Contributing to the scientific literature Citation analysis of CIFOR publications IMPACT ASSESSMENT PAPERS Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal No. 6 Impact Assessment Papers Series 1. Bringing forests-and-people science to young researchers: An impact assessment study of capacity building Purabi Bose 2. Influencing the global forest policy agenda: An evaluation of CIFOR’s research Michael J. Spilsbury and Purabi Bose 3. An evaluation of POLEX (CIFOR’s Forest Policy Experts Listserv): Targeting key forest agenda-setters Michael J. Spilsbury and Nina Haase 4. The sustainability of forest management: Assessing the impact of CIFOR’s Criteria and Indicators research Michael J. Spilsbury 5. CIFOR’s role in research collaboration: Learning from partners’ perspectives Purabi Bose 6. Contributing to the scientific literature: Citation analysis of CIFOR publications Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal Contributing to the scientific literature Citation analysis of CIFOR publications Arild Angelsena,b and Baikuntha Aryala a Department of Economics and Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, Norway. E-mail: Arild.Angelsen@umb.no; Baikuntha.Aryal@umb.no b CIFOR Donors The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) receives its major funding from governments, international development organizations, private foundations and regional organizations. In 2004, CIFOR received financial support from Australia, African Wildlife Foundation (AWF), Asian Development Bank (ADB), Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Carrefour, China, CIRAD, Conservation International Foundation (CIF), European Commission, Finland, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Ford Foundation, France, German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ), German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ), Indonesia, International Development Research Centre (IDRC), International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), Innovative Resource Management (IRM), International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO), Italy, Japan, Korea, Netherlands, Norway, Organisation Africaine du Bois (OAB), Overseas Development Institute (ODI), Peruvian Institute for Natural Renewable Resources (INRENA), Philippines, Sweden, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Switzerland, The Overbrook Foundation, The Nature Conservancy (TNC), Tropical Forest Foundation, United States, United Kingdom, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Waseda University, World Bank, World Resources Institute (WRI) and World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). National Library of Indonesia Cataloging-in-Publication Data Angelsen, A. Contributing to the scientific literature: citation analysis of CIFOR publications/ by Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR). 37p. ISBN: 979-24-4602-8 (pbk.) 1. Forestry 2. Literature 3. Bibliometric I. Aryal, B. II. CIFOR © 2005 by CIFOR All rights reserved. Published in 2005 Printed by Harapan Prima, Indonesia Cover photos by Trilby MacDonald, Michael Hailu and Catur Wahyu Published by Center for International Forestry Research Jl. CIFOR, Situ Gede, Sindang Barang Bogor Barat 16680, Indonesia Tel.: +62 (251) 622622; Fax: +62 (251) 622100 E-mail: cifor@cgiar.org Web site: http://www.cifor.cgiar.org Contents Summary and recommendations 1 1. Introduction 3 1.1 Measuring impact 3 1.2 The study 4 2. Results and discussion 6 2.1 Total number of publications 6 2.2 Total citations 7 2.3 Publications and citation over time 7 2.4 Ten most-cited publications 9 2.5 Citation by type of publication 10 2.6 Citation by type of work 11 2.7 Affiliation of first author 11 2.8 Publications by CIFOR researcher 12 2.9 Journals publishing CIFOR work 13 2.10 Journals citing CIFOR publications 16 2.11 Lifespan of publications 18 3. Recommendations 19 3.1 Publication strategy 19 3.2 Selection of journals 20 3.3 Publication database 20 Appendix 1. Tables Table A1. CIFOR publications by year and record type (to May 2004) 21 Table A2. Breakdown of citations by year of publication and years cited 22 Table A3. Publications in terms of number of times cited 22 Table A4. CIFOR publications cited more than five times 23 Summary and recommendations 1 This study analysed journal citations of CIFOR publications, using the ISI Web of Science database. The main findings are: • The total number of publications on the CIFOR publication database is 1437 (to May 2004). A publication is classified as a CIFOR publication when at least one of the authors is affiliated with CIFOR, as a staff member, associate scientist or consultant. • Refereed articles make up 24% of all publications, and together with refereed books and book chapters the refereed publications constitute one-third of all publications. • Of the 1437 publications, 24% have been cited. In other words, three-quarters of CIFOR publications have never been cited in an academic journal. • Seventeen publications have been cited more than 20 times, and 5 more than 50 times. One article has been referred to 192 times. • Journal articles have a much higher chance than any other publication of being cited. Refereed books and book chapters have a surprisingly low citation frequency. • Two of the top four publications are not journal articles, indicating that quality, accessibility, topic, marketing and other factors are important, besides the medium of publication. • Empirical work and overviews/syntheses are the dominant categories among the top 43 publications (those with 10 or more citations). • Half of the top 43 publications have non-CIFOR first authors, indicating that CIFOR (scientists) benefit from partner collaboration; but using a more narrow definition of CIFOR publication would also significantly reduce the number of publications and citations. • Forestry journals dominate the list of journals where CIFOR work has been published, with Forest Ecology and Management at the top, with 33 publications. Half the journals on the ‘top 24’ list (five or more CIFOR publications) have an average of less than one citation per published article, 1 We acknowledge constructive and detailed comments from Oliver Coomes, Pete Frost, Ulrik Ilstedt, David Kaimowitz, Rosie Ounsted, Ravi Prabhu and Mike Spilsbury to a draft of this report, as well as valuable inputs and support from Michael Hailu, Yuni Soeripto, Mike Spilsbury and Luluk Suhada during the whole process. Naturally, the views expressed in this report are our own and cannot be attributed to any of the persons listed or to the institutions with which we are affiliated. 1 2• Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal CONTRIBUTING TO THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE while seven have more than five citations: three biological/conservation journals: Conservation Biology, Biotropica and Environmental Conservation; two economics/development journals: World Development and Ecological Economics; and two forestry journals: Forest Ecology and Management and Forest Science. • These seven journals also figure high on the list of journals citing CIFOR work, with Forest Ecology and Management again at the top, with 170 CIFOR citations. • CIFOR publications are long lived, and show no sign of falling citation rates even after 5–7 years. Fewer than 40% of the citations appear within the first four years of publication. • There are several encouraging trends: o A steady increase in the number of publications (about 200 per year for the last three years). o The proportion of refereed articles is higher than ever (27–28%). o Citations per cited article are higher for the latest crop of publications. While the TOR did not include making recommendations on the publication strategy, a few suggestions follow naturally from the above findings: • The usual recommendation of ‘publish more journal articles, and in better journals’ is also valid for CIFOR. In particular, many publications are appearing in low impact (and low citation probability) journals, primarily forestry journals. While this might, to some extent, reflect the quality of the papers, many of them could probably have been ‘upgraded’ and published in better-respected journals. In selecting the journal to which to submit a paper, more attention should be given to the merit of the journal, impact factor, past record of CIFOR publication and general academic reputation. • While it is natural for many CIFOR papers to appear in forestry journals, the findings also suggest that the impact can be increased by publishing more papers in general journals within the ecological/biological/conservation and economics/social science/development fields. • The CIFOR publication database, on which this report is based, can be improved to make it a better tool for analysing publication records and further developing the publication strategy. 1 Introduction 1.1 Measuring impact Do CIFOR research and publications have an impact on the scientific community? One way to answer this question is by counting citations of CIFOR publications in academic journals. Citation counting is commonly used “to assess the academic performance of individual researchers, departments and research institutions when making decisions about funding, hiring, promotion and tenure” (Leimu and Koricheva 2005: 28)2. Such assessments are based on the assumption that citing a publication is an acknowledgement by peers about the utility and quality of the work. Yet there are a number of other factors that influence the number of citations that a publication receives, and these should be kept in mind when interpreting the results presented in this report3. These factors include: • Reputation of journal: Papers published in well-respected journals generally receive more citations, although Leimu and Koricheva (2005) found this “journal effect” to be small for ecological papers. • Type of journal: Articles in general journals receive more citations than those in specialised ones, in the same way that theoretical journals score better than applied journals. • Type of article: Review articles (and journals) tend to be cited more often than other types of articles. • Subject area: Citations (and journal impact factors) vary considerably between subject areas. For example, publication speed is much higher in the natural than the social sciences, making it more likely that a good citation count and high impact factor for the article will be achieved quickly (the commonly used impact factors refer to citation within two years of publication)4. • Number of authors: The more the merrier. The reasons for this might be that the scientific network expands with multi-authored papers, self-citations increase, and – possibly– the quality of the paper improves by it having more authors. 2 Leimu, R. and Koricheva, J. 2005. “What determines the citation frequency of ecological papers?” Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20(1): 28-32. 3 The following list is based on Leimu and Koricheva (2005) and Amin, M. and Mabe, M. 2000. “Impact factors: Use and abuse.” Perspectives in Publishing 1: 1-6. 4 Amin and Mabe (2000) therefore recommend that journal impact factor comparisons should not be made across subject areas. 3 4• Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal CONTRIBUTING TO THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE • Reputation and institutional affiliation of cited authors: Citation can be used to demonstrate that one is familiar with the work of prominent researchers. Reputation is, of course, also built by producing good work. • Network of author and marketing of publications: Interpersonal connections play an important role (‘citing friends and colleagues’), as does the author’s marketing of the article (presenting at conferences, distributing the article, etc.). • Availability of journal (article): Publications available electronically on the Internet (either free or through subscription) have an advantage. Journals of professional associations, sent to all members, also have a tendency to be cited more frequently. One objection against citation counting is that ‘citing does not tell anything about impact’. One possible more refined (and ‘objective’) method is to weight citations based on the impact factor of the journal. However, this is more laborious and was not undertaken in this study (and would probably not have changed the overall picture). Furthermore, one would also have liked to discover the real impact of the publications on the academic community (e.g., in terms of changing the agenda, conceptual frameworks, theories and methods used). Is it, for example, just of the ‘name dropping’ type (‘deforestation is a serious problem, e.g., Smith 1996; Jones 1997; Hyde 1998; Hansen 1999; ….’)? Or has it led to a major change in conceptual frameworks, policy documents or the way in which empirical research is carried out? While citation counting does not reveal this, there are good reasons to believe that number of citations is an indicator of such real impacts. The advantage of citation counting lies in its simplicity and objectivity. More refined methods will often include subjective and controversial judgements. As with all indicators (e.g., GDP as indicator of wealth, or life expectancy as measure of health) one can argue that the reality is more complex, which is certainly true. But that does not imply that such indicators are useless, just that they have to be used with care. 1.2 The study In the present study we used the citation database of the ISI Web of Science. This includes all the major journals, and is the most complete database for this purpose. It includes citations of all types of publication, but only those appearing in journal articles. Thus, a journal article citing a CIFOR Occasional Paper (OP) is registered, while the citation of a journal article in a CIFOR OP is not. The CIFOR Library provided a list of all CIFOR publications from 1993 to mid- 2004, 1437 publications in total. A CIFOR publication is defined as a publication of which at least one of the authors is affiliated with CIFOR, as a staff member, IMPACT ASSESSMENT PAPERS No. 6 • 5 associate scientist or consultant. The list used is identical to those presented in the Annual Reports. We have not made any corrections to the publication list, although there appear to be some incorrect data (e.g., classifications). An important constraint on this exercise was the fact that accumulating citations takes time. Thus, 9 of the top 10 publications are from 1998 or earlier. In other words, it is too early to assess the scientific impact of publications from the last 4–5 years. This work was carried out according to the TOR given by CIFOR, with Baikuntha Aryal being responsible for preparing the statistical material while Arild Angelsen drafted the report. The statistical work was carried out in June–July 2004. The number of citations increases weekly, and this report shows the status as at mid- June 20045. In addition to the present report, an Excel sheet with the primary and processed data is available. 5 Two possible sources of inaccuracy in the database are misspellings of authors’ names and the fact that the same publication is cited differently by different authors. 2 Results and discussion 2.1 Total number of publications The total number of CIFOR publications from 1993 to May 2004 was 1437; a breakdown by year of publication and record type is given in Table A1 in the Appendix. The distribution by type of publication is shown in Figure 1. The refereed article, the most common and prestigious form of scientific communication, constituted 24% of the publications (344 in total). Other Articles publications (refereed) 11% 24% Books (refereed) Other book 3% chapters 27% Book chapter (refereed) Other books 5% 21% Other articles 9% Figure 1. CIFOR publications by category The most common publications were, however, non-refereed book chapters (27%), which, together with non-refereed books, constituted nearly half of all publications (48%). The term ‘book’ in the CIFOR publication database is used widely, and also covers reports, papers etc.6. Overall, CIFOR has produced about 450 refereed publications (close to one-third of the total), which is quite a high number for an institute as young as CIFOR. However, the figures also show that most papers, reports etc. never reach the stage of externally refereed publication7. 6 We suggest that the categories used and the categorisation of some publications are reconsidered in the publication database. In this report, the term Books (refereed) is included in what the database categorises as: Books refereed, Books Series Refereed and Books CD ROM refereed. 7 There may be some double counting, as some ‘grey’ papers are eventually published. 6 IMPACT ASSESSMENT PAPERS No. 6 • 7 2.2 Total citations Most CIFOR publications are never cited in journal articles. Of the 1437 publications on the database, 1090 (76%) have never been cited in the journals covered by the ISI Web of Science. The distribution of the 347 cited publications (24%) is shown in Figure 2, with the complete data provided in Table A3 in the Appendix. Note, however, that it takes time for a journal to be cited. Thus of publications from the period 1994–2000, 31% have been cited, and this gives a more accurate picture of the citation frequency of CIFOR publications. Moreover, as seen from Table 2 (section 2.5), the citation frequency varies considerably by type of publication (43.6 % of the refereed journal articles have been cited). 180 160 140 120 100 80 164 60 105 40 20 40 21 12 0 5 1 2-5 6-10 11-20 21-50 51- Number of citations Figure 2. Publications by frequency of citation Almost half of the cited articles have been cited only once, while 17 have been cited more than 20 times, which is considered a very good frequency of citation. These 17 articles account for about 44% of all citations (1902 in total). The 43 top articles (10 or more citations), which are considered in more detail later, represent 62% of all citations. 2.3 Publications and citation over time Table A1 (Appendix) shows a steady increase in CIFOR publications over time. To correct for annual fluctuations and show trends over time more clearly, Figure 3 is based on rolling 3-year averages (the average for the previous three years). In 2003 CIFOR produced 214 publications, 54 of which were refereed articles. 8• Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal CONTRIBUTING TO THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE A further positive development is that for the last five years the proportion of refereed articles has been higher than ever: 27–28%. The change in number of citations over time is shown in Figure 4. Not surprisingly, there is a sharp increase in the number of citations, reflecting two facts: first, the steady increase in the number of publications as shown in Figure 3, not least in the most-cited form of publication, namely the refereed journal article. Second, it takes time to build up citation numbers, and CIFOR publications are long lived (see section 2.11). There are also other possible explanations of the sharp increase that we cannot test for in the material: CIFOR (and CIFOR researchers) may, since the institute’s establishment in 1993, have built up a good scientific reputation that makes citation more likely (cf. discussion in section 1.1). The quality and usefulness of CIFOR publications may also have increased over time. 250 Total 200 Articles (refere ed) 150 100 50 - 199 5 199 6 199 7 199 8 199 9 200 0 200 1 200 2 200 3 Figure 3. Publications by year (rolling 3-year averages) 600 508 500 400 349 291 300 214 200 127 88 100 46 27 0 1 1 0 199 3 199 4 199 5 199 6 199 7 199 8 199 9 200 0 200 1 200 2 200 3 Figure 4. Citations by year IMPACT ASSESSMENT PAPERS No. 6 • 9 2.4 Ten most-cited publications A list of the ‘top 10’ publications is given in Table 1. The article by Young, Boyle and Brown (1996) “The population genetic consequences of habitat fragmentation for plants”, published in Trends in Ecology and Evolution, is by far the most-cited publication with 192 citations (10% of the total). A list of the publications with more than five citations is given in Table A4 (Appendix). Table 1. The ‘top 10’ list of cited publications Author(s) Title Year Where published Citat- ions Young, A.G.; Boyle, The population genetic 1996 Trends in Ecology and T.J.B.; Brown, A.H.D. consequences of habitat Evolution 11: 413-418. fragmentation for plants 192 Kaimowitz, D.; Economic models of 1998 Bogor, Indonesia, CIFOR. Angelsen, A. tropical deforestation: a review 81 Pinard, M.A.; Putz, Retaining forest biomass 1996 Biotropica 3(28): 78-295. F.E. by reducing logging damage 67 Chazdon, R.L.; Statistical methods 1998 In: Dallmeier, F. and Colwell, R.K.; for estimating species Comiskey, J.A. (eds.) Forest Denslow, J.S.; richness of woody biodiversity research, Guariguata, M.R. regeneration in primary monitoring and modeling: and secondary rain forests conceptual background and of Northeastern Costa Rica old world case studies. Man and the Biosphere Series, Vol. 20, 285-309. 65 Parrotta, J.A.; Catalyzing native forest 1997 Forest Ecology and Turnbull, J.W.; Jones, regeneration on degraded Management 1-2(99): 1-7. N. tropical lands 51 Guariguata, M.R.; Early woody invasion 1995 Restoration Ecology 4(3): Rheingans, R.; under the tree plantation 252-260. Montagini, F. in Costa Rica: implications for forest restoration 45 Vanclay, J.K. Growth models for tropical 1995 Forest Science 1(41): 7-42. forests: a synthesis of models and methods 39 Guariguata, M.R.; Structure and floristic of 1997 Plant Ecology 132: 107-120. Chazdon, R.L.; secondary and old growth Denslow J.S.; Dupuy, stands in lowland Costa J.M.; Anderson, L. Rica 35 Lambin, E.F.; The causes of land-use 2003 Global Environmental Turner, B.L.; Geist, and land-cover change: Change 4(11): 261-269. H.J.; Agbola, S.J.; moving beyond the myths Angelsen, A.; Bruce, J.W.; Coomes, O.T.; Dirzo, R.; Fischer, G.; Folke, C. 35 Vanclay, J.K.; Evaluating forest growth 1997 Ecological Modelling 98: Skovsgaard, J.P. models 1-12. 34 10 • Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal CONTRIBUTING TO THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE One should note that the ‘top 10’ publications, with one exception, are from 1998 or earlier. As demonstrated later, the life of a publication is surprisingly long, and it takes time to accumulate a high number of citations. Thus, some of the more recent publications are likely to enter the ‘top 10’ list eventually. 2.5 Citation by type of publication Which publication medium gives the highest probability of being cited? The answer is as one would expect: the refereed journal article (see Table 2). And the winning margin is overwhelming: close to 44% of the refereed articles have been cited, and these have been cited 8.5 times on average. Two-thirds of the citations of CIFOR work are of journal articles. Table 2. Citations by type of publication Type of Total Cited Total Percent- Citations Citations publication publi- publica- cita- age cited per cited per pub- cations tions tions publica- lication tion Article 344 150 1270 43.6% 8.5 3.7 (refereed) Book 37 3 3 8.1% 1.0 0.1 (refereed) Book chapter 70 8 9 11.4% 1.1 0.1 (refereed) Other articles 134 19 63 14.2% 3.3 0.5 Other books 307 64 254 20.8% 4.0 0.8 Other book 385 61 197 15.8% 3.2 0.5 chapters Other 160 42 106 26.3% 2.5 0.7 publications Total/average 1437 347 1902 24.1% 5.5 1.3 The figures for refereed books and books chapters were surprisingly low; in fact, they were outscored by non-refereed books and book chapters. We do not have any good explanation for this. One possible reason might be that refereed books are sold by commercial publishers, and their often high prices (compared to all other categories) put them beyond the reach of many potential readers (and authors of journal articles). The figures for other (non-refereed) books and other publications were reasonably high. In short: journal articles ‘sell’ more than anything else! Refereed books and book chapters do not ‘sell’ well. The chances of being cited are 30–40 times higher for a refereed article than for a refereed book (chapter). IMPACT ASSESSMENT PAPERS No. 6 • 11 One should note, however, that the top four publications included one book published by CIFOR and one book chapter. This indicates that factors such as quality, topic, marketing, accessibility and author reputation are also important factors in being cited. 2.6 Citation by type of work The top 43 publications were classified according to type of work, as indicated in Figure 5: overview/synthesis; theoretically oriented work; empirical, case studies; essays/comments. Obviously, such a classification is subjective and some publications could have been placed in several categories. The results are therefore indicative. Essays, comments 12% Overviews/ syntheses 37% Empirical, case studies 44% Theoretically oriented work 7% Figure 5. Distribution of top 43 citations by type of work Empirical studies and overviews/syntheses predominate, which is not surprising. As CIFOR is an applied research institute, one would expect empirical work to figure high among the publications. Also, as a global institute CIFOR is also in a good position to synthesise results and provide overviews of the fields. There are no large differences in the average number of citations between the different categories, except that essays/comments have a lower citation rate than the others. 2.7 Affiliation of first author CIFOR actively encourages partnership and joint projects with other institutions (‘centre without walls’). Many publications are the result of such collaboration, and half of the top 43 publications have non-CIFOR scientists as their first 12 • Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal CONTRIBUTING TO THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE author (see Table 3). By ‘first author CIFOR’ we mean CIFOR staff, CIFOR associate scientists (e.g., Putz), and CIFOR-commissioned work (e.g., Neumann and Hirsch). Table 3. Publications by affiliation of first author Publications Citations Citations per publication First author CIFOR 22 470 21.4 First author non-CIFOR 21 713 34.0 Total/Average 43 1183 27.5 The fact that half of the top 43 publications are by first authors not affiliated with CIFOR (but include CIFOR scientists as one of the authors) can be interpreted in different ways. It could be seen as an indication of the value and benefits of such collaboration. CIFOR scientists are able to establish partnerships with other scientists who publish and are cited. However, it could also be taken as an indication that CIFOR scientists are not able to produce top-quality academic publications on their own. And, obviously, the overall publication record would have been much poorer if publications with non-CIFOR first authors had been excluded. 2.8 Publications by CIFOR researcher Who are the authors on the ‘top 10’ list and on the more comprehensive list of publications with more than five citations (top 91)? The list of these 20 researchers with two or more publications on the latter list is presented in Table 4. A few aspects are worth highlighting: many (almost half ) of the individuals on the list are former scientists, which is not surprising given the time it takes to build up citation numbers. Associates (of whom some are former scientists) are also well represented. Further, there is a natural-science dominance, particularly at the top of the list (Putz, Guariguata, Sheil, Boyle). It is also clear that CIFOR lost some of its ability to produce well-cited publications drawing from biophysical research when Putz, Guariguata, Boyle, Vanclay, Gillison and others left. But again, one must take into account the length of time it takes to build up citation numbers, and should not conclude that ‘it was better in the old days’. There are several current scientists and associates who will climb further up the list as they accumulate publications and citations. IMPACT ASSESSMENT PAPERS No. 6 • 13 Table 4. Number of publications by CIFOR scientists and associates Name Publications Publications Position on ‘top 91’ list on ‘top 10’ list Jack Putz 9 1 Associate Manuel Guariguata 8 3 Associate Doug Sheil 8 Scientist Tim Boyle 6 1 Former scientist David Kaimowitz 6 1 Scientist, DG Arild Angelsen 5 2 Former scientist, now Associate Jeff Sayer 5 Former DG Jerry Vanclay 5 2 Former scientist Andy Gillison 4 Former scientist Ravi Prabhu 4 Scientist William Sunderlin 4 Scientist Lini Wollenberg 4 Scientist Bruce Campbell 3 Scientist Manuel Ruiz Perez 3 Former scientist, now Associate John Turnbull 3 1 Former scientist Sven Wunder 3 Scientist Carol Colfer 2 Scientist Dennis Dykstra 2 Former scientist David Edmunds 2 Former scientist Ousseynou Ndoye 2 Scientist Plinio Sist 2 Former scientist 2.9 Journals publishing CIFOR work CIFOR publications have appeared in 180 different journals. Of these, 115 have published only one CIFOR work, while 24 journals have published five or more. These are listed in Table 5. Perhaps not surprisingly, the top eight journals on the list – and 14 of the 24 - are forestry journals. The citation frequency of an article is determined by several factors, including the journal in which it is published. In Table 6 the journals are sorted by the number of citations per published article. Journals with fewer than five CIFOR publications are shown in italics, indicating that the statistical basis for firm conclusions is weak. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, which has published the most-cited articles, is top of the list, but has had only three CIFOR publications. Among those with five or more CIFOR publications, Biotropica scores highest. 14 • Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal CONTRIBUTING TO THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE Table 5. Journals with five or more CIFOR publications Journal Total Cited Number Percent- Citations Citations public- public- of times age cited per cited per ations ations cited article published (avg.) article (avg.) Forest Ecology and 33 16 182 48% 11.4 5.5 Management International Forestry 25 13 42 52% 1.7 3.2 Review (& under former title: Commonwealth Forestry Review) Journal of Tropical Forest 23 9 33 39% 3.7 1.4 Science Bois et Forêts des 21 4 6 19% 1.5 0.3 Tropiques ETFRN News 1) 16 0 0 0% Forests, Trees and 13 4 7 31% 1.8 0.5 Livelihoods (& under former title: International Tree Crops Journal) Unasylva 12 4 6 33% 1.5 0.5 ITTO Tropical Forest 12 4 7 33% 1.8 0.6 Update 1) Revista Forestal del Peru 11 0 0 0% World Development 11 8 57 73% 7.1 5.2 Small-scale Forest 9 0 0 0% Economics, Management and Policy International Journal of 9 1 2 11% 2.0 0.2 Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology Gender, Technology and 7 0 0 0% Development Agroforestry Systems 7 2 5 29% 2.5 0.7 Ecological Economics 7 6 49 86% 8.2 7.0 Zimbabwe Science News 6 0 0 0% Borneo Research Bulletin 6 2 2 33% 1.0 0.3 Society and Natural 6 3 16 50% 5.3 2.7 Resources Conservation Biology 6 4 44 67% 11.0 7.3 Biotropica 6 6 112 100% 18.7 18.7 Forest Science 5 2 47 40% 23.5 9.4 Environmental 5 4 37 80% 9.3 7.4 Conservation Total /Average 478 169 1333 35% 7.9 2.8 1) These are not refereed journals, although classified as such on the CIFOR database. IMPACT ASSESSMENT PAPERS No. 6 • 15 Table 6. Journals sorted according to citations per published CIFOR article Journal Total Cited Times Percentage Citation Citations per published published cited cited per cited published article article (avg.) (avg.) Trends in Ecology 3 3 201 100% 67.0 67.0 and Evolution Global 2 2 39 100% 19.5 19.5 Environmental Change Biotropica 6 6 112 100% 18.7 18.7 World Bank 2 1 28 50% 28.0 14.0 Research Observer Ecological 3 3 37 100% 12.3 12.3 Modelling Plant Ecology 4 4 48 100% 12.0 12.0 Forest Science 5 2 47 40% 23.5 9.4 Oecologia 2 2 17 100% 8.5 8.5 Forestry 2 1 16 50% 16.0 8.0 Environmental 5 4 37 80% 9.3 7.4 Conservation Conservation 6 4 44 67% 11.0 7.3 Biology Ecological 7 6 49 86% 8.2 7.0 Economics Journal of 4 3 24 75% 8.0 6.0 Forestry Mitigation and 2 2 12 100% 6.0 6.0 Adaptation Strategies for Global Change Forest 33 16 182 48% 11.4 5.5 Ecology and Management World 11 8 57 73% 7.1 5.2 Development Human Ecology 4 2 18 50% 9.0 4.5 Development 3 3 13 100% 4.3 4.3 and Change Agriculture, 3 2 11 67% 5.5 3.7 Ecosystems and Environment Ecological 2 1 7 50% 7.0 3.5 Applications Science 2 2 7 100% 3.5 3.5 Total /Average 478 169 1333 35% 7.9 2.8 16 • Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal CONTRIBUTING TO THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE Forest Ecology and Management, the most popular target journal for CIFOR work, has a respectable citation frequency. The same is not true for the other forestry journals on the ‘top 22’ list, with the notable exception of Forest Science and to some extent also International Forestry Review (formerly: Commonwealth Forestry Review). Among the top 22 journals listed in Table 5, only seven have a reasonably high citation frequency (more than five citations per published CIFOR article): three biological/conservation journals: Conservation Biology, Biotropica and Environmental Conservation; two economics/development journals: World Development and Ecological Economics; and two forestry journals: Forest Ecology and Management and Forest Science. A clear conclusion is that a high proportion of the CIFOR research that is published in journals appears in journals that have a low probability of being cited. This probably reflects, to some extent, the simple fact that it is more difficult to have papers accepted in the more respected journals (with high citation frequency). And while there might be other reasons for publishing in some of these minor journals, it might also reflect the fact that CIFOR (scientists) do not have a clear strategy for getting their papers published in the well-respected journals. Simple measures such as counting journal publications hide the enormous variation in status, citation-probability and impact of the various journals. Furthermore, it seems that the probability of being cited is relatively lower in forestry journals than in general development/economics/social science and biology/ecology/conservation journals. This corresponds with a general finding in the citation literature (cf. section 1.1). 2.10 Journals citing CIFOR publications Where is CIFOR work cited? Table 7 shows the journals with the most frequent CIFOR citations, while Table 8 shows the citations by disciplinary category of journal. Not surprisingly, forestry-related journals again top the list, with Forest Ecology and Management being by far the journal most frequently citing CIFOR publications. This is also the journal with the highest number of CIFOR publications, indicating some ‘intra-journal-citation’. There is, nevertheless, a high uptake in both ecological and biological journals, with Conservation Biology taking a good second place; furthermore, ecological and biological journals combined outscore forestry journals. Development/economics journals, the third group, cite CIFOR publications relatively less frequently, although the citation in respected journals such as World Development and Land Economics is reasonably high. IMPACT ASSESSMENT PAPERS No. 6 • 17 Table 7. Journals citing CIFOR publications8 Journal Number of citations of CIFOR publications Forest Ecology and Management 170 Conservation Biology 60 Biological Conservation 34 Molecular Ecology 32 Biotropica 31 Biodiversity and Conservation 25 World Development 23 Land Economics 22 Ecological Modelling 22 Ecological Economics 20 Restoration Ecology 19 Journal of Tropical Ecology 19 Environmental Conservation 18 Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 18 Journal of Applied Ecology 16 American Journal of Botany 16 Environment and Development Economics 15 Ecological Applications 15 Oecologia 14 Forest Science 13 Canadian Journal of Forest Research – Revue 13 Canadienne De Recherche Forestière Table 8. Types of journals citing CIFOR publications Journal discipline Number of citations Forestry and Vegetation 271 Ecology, Ecography, Ecosystems and Evolution 226 Biology, Microbiology 167 Economics and Development, Marketing 118 Botany, Plant and Trees 65 Environment 65 Agriculture and Land 43 Nature, Climate and Biodiversity 34 Science 34 Geography 23 Human Science 20 Entomology 17 Social, Sociology and Anthropology 14 Genetics 12 Hydrology and Remote Sensing 9 Physics 6 Aquatic 5 Zoology 4 Soil 4 8 This table refers to the top 43 publications (10 or more citations). 18 • Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal CONTRIBUTING TO THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE 2.11 Lifespan of publications What is the lifespan of a publication? We checked this for all cited publications by breaking down the citations by year. The results are presented in Figure 6, where publications have been classified by year of publication. Naturally, there is a build-up in citations, with a steep increase in the first couple of years. The surprise, however, is that the number of citations levels off quite slowly. Except for the 1994 crop (only eight articles cited), there is no sign of a drop in citation frequency, even after 5–7 years (see also Table A2). In other words, CIFOR publications are long-lived. Another encouraging finding is the increase in citation frequency for the more recent publications (remembering that 1996 was the year of the most-cited publication). The last column of Table A4 in the Appendix gives the percentage of citations from the first four years after publication. Naturally, there is a huge variation. Eight of the 43 publications were not cited during the first four years, but then appear to have been ‘discovered’ by fellow researchers. On average (weighted), only 39% of the citations appear during the first four years. Thus, it may be expected that many of the publications from the early 2000s will eventually climb high on the list of most-cited publications; for example, the three World Development articles by Mertens et al. (2000), Campbell et al. (2001) and Wunder (2001). 2.5 2 1994 1995 1996 1.5 1997 1998 1 1999 2000 2001 0.5 2002 0 t t+1 t+2 t+3 t+4 t+5 t+6 t+7 t+8 t+9 t+10 Figure 6. Citations by year after publication (citations per year for articles that have been cited) 3 Recommendations The TOR did not include making recommendations on the publication strategy. We have, however, taken the liberty of making a few suggestions and present some thoughts based on our findings. 3.1 Publication strategy CIFOR is aiming for impacts on several audiences, which might be grouped as follows9: 1. The global forest policy world (international organisations and processes and donors). 2. National research partners in developing countries. 3. The academic community, mostly in developed countries. This report clearly deals with the third group. The first two groups read very few academic journals, and publish in even fewer. To reach these audiences it may be more important to publish in fora such as Unasylva, ITTO Tropical Forest Update, Zimbabwe Science News, Revista Forestal de Peru and CIFOR publications rather than in academic journals. There is rather limited overlap between the publications figuring high in this report (academic impact) and those found to have an impact on policy makers, as described in the CIFOR report by Spilsbury and Bose (2004)10. Over time, however, there are probably some trickle-down effects: in international organisations such as FAO and the World Bank, in particular, a shorter route might be expected from academic research to policy formulation than in national (and local) governments. CIFOR should think in terms of addressing the different audiences separately, and research projects should have strategies to reach all audiences through different forms of publications. 9 We acknowledge the inputs from David Kaimowitz to this sub-section. 10 Spilsbury, M.J. and Bose, P. 2005. “Influencing the Global Forest Policy Agenda - An Evaluation of CIFOR Research”. Impact Assessment Papers Series No. 2. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia. 19 20 • Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal CONTRIBUTING TO THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE 3.2 Selection of journals The usual recommendation to any research institution is to ‘publish more journal articles, and in better journals’. This is also valid for CIFOR. In particular, many publications are appearing in low impact (and low citation probability) journals, primarily forestry journals. While this might, to some extent, reflect the quality of the papers, many of them could probably have been ‘upgraded’ and published in better-respected journals. In selecting the journal to which to submit a paper, more attention should be given to the journal, impact factor and past record of CIFOR publication. The reputation of a journal is also important, although there is a close correlation: one study found that 60% of the variations in journal-quality perceptions formed by economists are explained by the SSCI impact factor11. While it is natural for many CIFOR papers to appear in forestry journals, the findings also suggest that the impact can be increased by publishing more papers in general journals within the ecological/biological/conservation and economics/ social science/development fields. It is also becoming increasingly important that the journal is included in a publisher/consortia bundle, and that electronic downloads are possible (preferably free, although this is not common). One possibility is for CIFOR to make a ‘list of recommended journals’ to aid researchers in the publishing process. The results of this report would serve as an important input into making such a list. 3.3 Publication database The CIFOR publication database, on which this report is based, can be improved to make it a better tool for analysing publication records and further developing the publication strategy. Our recommendations include: 1. The ‘record type’ field (type of publication) contains too many categories, and the publications do not always seem to be classified correctly. 2. A classification of journals based on merit and impact would also be useful; this could also guide authors in selecting journals to which to submit a paper. 3. Another useful variable would be the type of research leading up to the publication: field projects, syntheses, commissioned work by consultancies, partnerships (where CIFOR is not in the driving seat), etc. 11 Ellis, L.V. and Durden, G.C. 1991. “Why economists rank their journals the way they do.” Journal of Economics and Business 43: 157-170. Appendix 1. Tables Table A1. CIFOR publications by year and record type (to May 2004) 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total Articles 6 6 9 11 23 6 17 26 3 23 4 134 Articles refereed 6 24 18 30 14 32 44 70 40 54 12 344 Book 2 7 14 31 39 42 21 51 46 29 16 8 306 Book refereed 1 1 1 2 24 6 35 Book, Thesis 1 1 Book, CD ROM 1 1 refereed Book, Series refereed 1 1 CD ROM 2 1 1 1 3 4 12 Chapter 7 22 41 38 58 32 18 85 54 20 10 385 Chapter refereed 10 55 5 70 CIFOR publications 6 3 6 8 23 Papers 2 1 4 1 4 2 3 1 18 PhD dissertation 1 1 Report 1 1 3 5 Series 2 6 4 4 7 7 18 10 6 4 1 69 Series refereed 1 1 8 10 Software CD ROM 1 1 refereed Other 2 4 8 2 3 1 1 21 Total 2 29 80 111 135 153 115 154 246 150 214 48 1437 21 22 • Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal CONTRIBUTING TO THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE Table A2. Breakdown of citations by year of publication and years cited (to mid-June 2004) (Rows show the publication year and columns the years in which the publication was cited.)12 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total 1993 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 0 1 1 1 2 3 4 4 9 4 1 4 34 1995 0 0 0 20 27 20 26 34 35 29 35 16 242 1996 0 0 0 5 17 38 41 59 61 67 83 38 409 1997 0 0 0 1 0 23 30 56 47 59 75 21 312 1998 0 0 0 0 0 4 20 35 63 53 80 33 288 1999 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 15 45 44 56 20 186 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 30 50 54 23 168 2001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 35 65 45 146 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 25 16 44 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 34 34 73 2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 1 1 27 46 88 127 214 291 349 508 250 1902 Table A3. Publications in terms of number of times cited Times Number of Times Number of Times Number of Times Number of cited publications cited publications cited publications cited publications 0 1090 9 8 19 1 39 1 1 164 10 5 20 2 45 1 2 50 11 5 21 1 51 1 3 26 12 2 25 1 65 1 4 16 13 3 27 2 67 1 5 13 14 1 28 2 81 1 6 17 15 1 29 1 192 1 7 6 16 5 34 1 8 4 18 1 35 2 12 An attempt has been made to correct the few inaccuracies in the publication years in the list. In one case an article (published in 2003) was cited before it was published (2002). This might refer to citation of a draft version of the article. IMPACT ASSESSMENT PAPERS No. 6 • 23 Table A4. CIFOR publications cited more than five times Author Title Record Public- Source Times % cited type ation cited in first 4 date years Young, A.G.; The population Articles 1996 Trends in Boyle, T.J.B.; genetic (Refereed) Ecology and Brown, A.H.D. consequences Evolution (11): of habitat 413-418. fragmentation for plants 192 23.4 Kaimowitz, D.; Economic models Book 1998 Bogor, Angelsen, A. of tropical Indonesia, deforestation: a CIFOR. 139p. review 81 53.1 Pinard, M.A.; Retaining forest Articles 1996 Biotropica 3(28): Putz, F.E. biomass by (Refereed) 78-295. reducing logging damage 67 14.9 Chazdon, R.L.; Statistical Chapter 1998 In: Dallmeier, F. Colwell, R.K.; methods for and Comiskey, Denslow, J.S.; estimating species J.A. (eds.) Forest Guariguata, M.R. richness of woody biodiversity regeneration research, in primary and monitoring secondary and modeling: rain forests of conceptual Northeastern background Costa Rica and old world case studies. Man and the Biosphere Series, Vol. 20, 285-309. 65 40.0 Parrotta, J.A.; Catalyzing Articles 1997 Forest Turnbull, J.W.; native forest (Refereed) Ecology and Jones, N. regeneration on Management degraded tropical 1-2(99): 1-7. lands 51 37.3 Guariguata, M. Early woody Articles 1995 Restoration R.; Rheingans, R.; invasion under (Refereed) Ecology 4(3): Montagini, F. the tree plantation 252-260. in Costa Rica: implications for forest restoration 45 24.4 Vanclay, J.K. Growth models Articles 1995 Forest Science for tropical forests: (Refereed) 1(41): 7-42. a synthesis of models and methods 39 20.5 24 • Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal CONTRIBUTING TO THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE Author Title Record Public- Source Times % cited type ation cited in first 4 date years Lambin, E.F.; The causes of land- Articles 2003 Global Turner, B.L.; Geist, use and land-cover (Refereed) Environmental H.J.; Agbola, change: moving Change 4(11): S.J.; Angelsen, beyond the myths 261-269. A.; Bruce, J.W.; Coomes, O.T.; Dirzo, R.; Fischer, G.; Folke, C. 35 100.0 Guariguata, Structure and Articles 1997 Plant Ecology M.R.; Chazdon, floristic of (Refereed) 132: 107-120. R.L.; Denslow, secondary and old J.S.; Dupuy, J.M.; growth stands in Anderson, L. lowland Costa Rica 35 48.6 Vanclay, J.K.; Evaluating forest Articles 1997 Ecological Skovsgaard., J.P. growth models Modelling 98: 1-12. 34 23.5 Zuidema, P.A.; Forest Articles 1996 Environmental Sayer, J.A.; fragmentation (Refereed) Conservation Dijkman, W. and biodiversity: 4(23): 290 -297. the case for intermediate-sized conservation areas 29 20.7 Angelsen, A. Agricultural Articles 1999 Journal of expansion and (Refereed) Development deforestation: Economics 58: modelling 185-218. the impact of population, market forces and property rights 28 71.4 Angelsen, A.; Rethinking Articles 1999 World Bank Kaimowitz, D. the causes of (Refereed) Research deforestation: Observer 1(14): lessons from 73-98. economic models 28 53.6 Guariguata, Forest Articles 1997 Biotropica 1(29): M.R.; Manuel, R.; regeneration (Refereed) 15-28. Dupuy, J.M. in abandoned logging roads in lowland Costa Rica 27 51.9 Soares, P.; Torne, Evaluating a Articles 1995 Forest M.; Skovsgaard, growth model (Refereed) Ecology and J.P.; Vanclay, J.K. for forest Management management 3(71): 251-265. using continuous forest inventory data 27 0.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT PAPERS No. 6 • 25 Author Title Record Public- Source Times % cited type ation cited in first 4 date years Ghazoul, J.; Disturbance- Articles 1998 Journal of Liston, K.A.; induced density- (Refereed) Ecology 3(86): Boyle, T.J.B. dependent 462-473. reproductive success in a tropical forest tree 25 48.0 Pinard, M. A.; Creating timber Articles 1995 Journal of Putz, F.E.; Tay, J.; harvest guidelines (Refereed) Forestry 10(93): Sullivan, T.E. for a reduced- 41-45. impact logging project in Malaysia 21 28.6 Mertens, B.; Impact of Articles 2000 World Sunderlin, macroeconomics (Refereed) Development W.D.; Ndoye, O.; change on 6(28): 983-999. Lambin, E.F. deforestation in South Cameroon: integration of household survey and remotely- sensed data 20 85.0 Pinard, M.A.; Vine infestation Articles 1994 Journal of Putz, F.E. of large remnant (Refereed) Tropical Forest trees in logged Science 3(6): forest in Sabah, 302-309. Malaysia: biomechanical facilitation in vine succession 20 0.0 Iremonger, S.; A global CD ROM 1997 WCMC, Ravilious, C.; overview of forest Cambridge UK Quinton, T. conservation: and CIFOR Including GIS digital files of forest and protected areas 19 36.8 Bertault, J.G.; An experimental Articles 1997 Forest Sist, P. comparison (Refereed) Ecology and of different Management 1- harvesting 3(94): 209-218. intensities with reduced-impact and conventional logging in East Kalimantan 18 16.7 Putz, F.E.; Blate, Tropical forest Articles 2001 Conservation G.M.; Redford, management and (Refereed) Biology 1(15): K.H.; Fimbel, R.; conservation of 7-20. Robinson, J. biodiversity: an overview 16 106.3* 26 • Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal CONTRIBUTING TO THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE Author Title Record Public- Source Times % cited type ation cited in first 4 date years Putz, F.E.; Dykstra, Why poor logging Articles 2000 Conservation D.P.; Heinrich, R. practices persist in (Refereed) Biology 4(14): the tropics 951-956. 16 75.0 Jennings, S.B.; Assessing forest Articles 1999 Forestry 1(72): Brown, N.D.; canopies and (Refereed) 59-73. Sheil, D. understorey illumination: canopy closure, canopy cover and other measures 16 62.5 Sist, P.; Nolan, Harvesting Articles 1998 Forest T.; Bertault, J-G.; intensity versus (Refereed) Ecology and Dykstra, D. P. sustainability in Management Indonesia 108: 251-260. 16 31.3 Gillison, A.N.; The nitrogen Articles 1997 Oecologia 112: Schulze, W.; supply from (Refereed) 464-471. Schulze, E.D.; soils and insects Pate, J.S. during growth of the pitcher plants Nepenthes mirabilis, Cephalotus follicularis and Darlingtonia californica 16 0.0 Kiker, C.F.; Putz, Ecological Articles 1997 Ecological F.E. certification of (Refereed) Economics 20: forest products: 37-51. economic challenges 15 33.3 Guariguata, M.R.; Ecological Articles 1998 Forest Pinard, M.A. knowledge of (Refereed) Ecology and regeneration Management from seed in 1/2(112): 87 - 89. neotropical forest trees: implications for natural forest management 14 28.6 Angelsen, A.; Agricultural Book 2001 Wallingford, Kaimowitz, D.; technologies Oxon, UK, CABI (eds.) and tropical Publishing in deforestation association with Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR). xiv, 422p. 13 92.3 IMPACT ASSESSMENT PAPERS No. 6 • 27 Author Title Record Public- Source Times % cited type ation cited in first 4 date years Pinard, M.A.; Ecological Articles 1999 Forest Putz, F.E.; Rumíz, characterization (Refereed) Ecology and D.; Guzman, R.; of tree species Management Jardim, A. for guiding forest 113: 201-213. management decision in seasonally dry forests in Lomerío, Bolivia 13 84.6 Sheil, D. Tropical forest Articles 1999 Journal of diversity, (Refereed) Vegetation environmental Science 10: 851- change 860. and species augmentation: after the intermediate disturbance hypothesis 13 66.7 Wickramasinghe, Non-timber Articles 1996 Human Ecology A.; Ruiz Perez, M.; forest product (Refereed) 4(24): 493-519. Blockhus, J.M. gathering in Ritigala forest (Sri Lanka): household strategies and community differentiation 12 0.0 Dykstra, D.P.; FAO model code of Book 1996 Rome, Food Heinrich, R. forest harvesting and Agriculture practice Organisation. 85p. 12 0.0 Campbell, B.M.; Challenges to Articles 2001 World Mandondo, A.; proponents of (Refereed) Development Nemarundwe, common property 4(29): 589-600. N.; Sithole, B.; de resource system: Jong, W.; Luckert, despairing M.; Matose, F. voices from the social forests of Zimbabwe 11 100.0* Ostrom, E. Self-governance Series 1999 Bogor, and forest Indonesia. resources CIFOR Occasional Paper, No. 20. 15p. 11 54.5 28 • Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal CONTRIBUTING TO THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE Author Title Record Public- Source Times % cited type ation cited in first 4 date years Doran, J.C.; Australian trees Book 1997 Canberra, Turnbull, J.W.; and shrubs: Australia. ACIAR (eds.) species for land Monograph, No. rehabilitation and 24. 384p. farm planting 11 0.0 Dickinson, M.B.; Natural forest Articles 1996 Commonwealth Dickinson, J.C.; management as a (Refereed) Forestry Review Putz, F.E. conservation tool: 4(75): 309-315. divergent opinions on constraints, possibilities, and alternatives 11 0.0 Sunderlin, W.D. Managerialism Articles 1995 Society and and the (Refereed) Natural conceptual limits Resources (8): of sustainable 481-492. development 11 0.0 Wunder, S. Poverty alleviation Articles 2001 World and tropical forests (Refereed) Development - what scope for 11(29): 1817-33. synergies? 10 100.0 Neumann, R.P.; Commercialisation Book 2000 Bogor, Hirsch, E. of non-timber Indonesia, forest products: CIFOR. 176p. review and analysis of research 10 80.0 Smith, J.; van de Dynamics of Articles 1999 Agriculture, Kop, P.; Reategui, secondary forests (Refereed) Ecosystems and K.; Lombardi, I.; in slash-and- Environment Sabogal, C.; Diaz, burn farming: 2/3(76): 85-98. A. interactions among land use types in the Peruvian Amazon 10 40.0 Ndoye, O.; Ruiz The markets for Chapter 1998 London, Perez, M.; Eyebe, non-timber forest Overseas A. products in the Development humid forest zone Institute (ODI). of Cameroon ODI RDFN Paper, No. 22c. 20p. 10 40.0 Pinard, M.A.; Monitoring carbon Articles 1997 Mitigation and Putz, F.E. sequestration (Refereed) Adaptation benefits Strategies for associated with a Global Change reduced-impact 2: 203-215. logging project in Malaysia 10 60.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT PAPERS No. 6 • 29 Author Title Record Public- Source Times % cited type ation cited in first 4 date years Arnold, J.E.M.; Can non- Articles 2001 Ecological Ruiz Perez, M. timber forest (Refereed) Economics 39: products match 437-47. tropical forest conservation and development objectives? 9 van Nieuwstadt, The ecological Articles 2001 Conservation M.G.L.; Sheil, D.; consequences (Refereed) Biology 4(15): Kartawinata, K. of logging in the 1183-1186. burned forests of East Kalimantan, Indonesia 9 Wunder, S. Ecotourism Articles 2000 Ecological and economic (Refereed) Economics incentives: 3(32): 465-480. an empirical approach 9 Campbell, B.M.; Economic Articles 2000 Ecological Dore, D.; Luckert, comparisons (Refereed) Economics M.; Mukamuri, B.; of livestock 3(33): 413-438. Gambiza, J. production in communal grazing lands in Zimbabwe 9 CIFOR C&I Team The CIFOR criteria Book 1999 Bogor, and indicators Indonesia, generic template CIFOR. Criteria and Indicators Toolbox Series, No. 2. 9 Guariguata, M.R. Response of forest Articles 1998 Forest tree samplings (Refereed) Ecology and to experimental Management mechanical 2/3(102): 103- damage in 111. lowland Panama 9 Campbell, B.M. The Miombo Book 1996 Bogor, in transition: Indonesia, woodlands and CIFOR. welfare in Africa 9 Kvist, L.P.; Estimating use- Articles 1995 Commonwealth Andersen, M.; values and relative (Refereed) Forestry Review Hesselsoe, M.; importance of 4(74): 293-300. Vanclay, J.K. Amazonian flood plain trees and forests to local inhabitants 9 30 • Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal CONTRIBUTING TO THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE Author Title Record Public- Source Times % cited type ation cited in first 4 date years Tan, W.X.; Blake, Early selection for Articles 1995 Forest Science T.J.; Boyle, T.J.B. drought tolerance (Refereed) 41: 168-180. and relationship to dry weight partitioning in black spruce families 8 Boyle, T.J.B.; Measuring, Articles 1995 Commonwealth Sayer, J.A. monitoring (Refereed) Forestry Review and conserving 1(74): 20-25. biodiversity in managed tropical forests 8 Putz, F.E.; Phenology of Articles 1995 Biotropica (27): Romano, G.B.; epiphytic and (Refereed) 183-189. Holbrook, N.M. tree-phase strangler figs in a Venezuelan palm savanna 8 Putz, F.E. Vines in treetops: Chapter 1995 In: Lowman, MD. consequences and Nadkarni, of mechanical N. (eds.) Forest dependence Canopies. 311- 323. 8 Sheil, D.; Burslem, Disturbing Articles 2003 Trends in D.F.R.P. hypotheses in (Refereed) Ecology and tropical forests Evolution 1(18): 18-26. 7 Guariguata, M.R. Seed and Articles 2000 Ecological seedling ecology (Refereed) Applications of tree species 1(10): 145-154. in neotropical secondary forests: management implications 7 IMPACT ASSESSMENT PAPERS No. 6 • 31 Author Title Record Public- Source Times % cited type ation cited in first 4 date years Turnbull, J.W.; Tropical acacias Chapter 1998 In: Turnbull, Midgley, S. J.; planted in Asia: an J.W., Crompton, Cossalter, C. overview H.R. and Pinyopusarerk, K. (eds.) Recent developments in acacia planting: proceedings of an international workshop held in Hanoi, Vietnam, 27–30 October 1997. ACIAR Proceedings, No. 82. 14-28. 7 Prabhu, R.; Colfer, Testing criteria Book 1996 GTZ Wald-Info. C.J.P. and indicators for the sustainable management of forests: a report on phase I of the CIFOR research project 7 Putz, F.E.; Viana, V. Biological Articles 1996 Biotropica 3(28): challenges for (Refereed) 323-330. certification of tropical timber 7 Sayer, J. A. Science and Series 1995 Bogor, international Indonesia. nature CIFOR conservation Occasional Paper, No. 4. 14p. 7 Edmunds, D.; A strategic Articles 2001 Development Wollenberg, E. approach to (Refereed) and Change multistakeholder 2(32): 231-253. negotiations 6 Wunder, S. The economics Book 2000 London, UK, of deforestation: Macmillan the example of and St. Martin Ecuador Press in association with St. Anthony’s College. 262p. 6 32 • Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal CONTRIBUTING TO THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE Author Title Record Public- Source Times % cited type ation cited in first 4 date years Mendoza, G.A.; Development of a Articles 2000 Environmental Prabhu, R. methodology for (Refereed) Management selecting criteria 26: 659-673. and indicators of sustainable forest management: a case study on participatory assessment 6 Campbell, B.M.; Special section: Articles 2000 Ecological Costanza, R.; van land use options (Refereed) Economics den Belt, M. in dry tropical 3(33): 341-351. woodland ecosystems in Zimbabwe: introduction, overview and synthesis 6 Prabhu, R. Criteria and Chapter 1999 In: Prasad, R., indicators for Raghavan, S., sustainable forest Phukan, B.R. and management: a Joshi, B. (eds.) global overview Proceedings of The National Technical Workshop (under Bhopal- India Process of SFM) on Evolving Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management in Bhopal, India, 21-23 January, 1999. 6 Sheil, D; Sayer, Tree diversity and Articles 1999 Science 284: J.A.; O’Brien, T. conservation in (Refereed) 1587. logged rainforest 6 IMPACT ASSESSMENT PAPERS No. 6 • 33 Author Title Record Public- Source Times % cited type ation cited in first 4 date years Sheil, D. Developing tests Articles 1999 Plant Ecology of successional (Refereed) 1(140): 117-127. hypotheses with size-structured populations, and an assessment using long-term data from a Ugandan rain forest 6 Sheil, D. A half century of Chapter 1998 In: Dallmeier, F. permanent plot and Comiskey, observation in J.A. Forest Budongo Forest, biodiversity Uganda: histories, research, highlights and monitoring hypotheses and modeling: conceptual background and old world case studies. Proceedings of the 1995 Smithsonian MAB Washington Symposium. Man and the Biosphere Series, Vol. 20. 399-428. 6 Liengsiri, C.; Mating system Articles 1998 Journal of Boyle, T.J.B.; Yeh, in Pterocarpus (Refereed) Heredity 89: F.C. macrocarpus Kurz 216-221. in Thailand 6 Bertault, J.G.; Sist, STREK project Chapter 1998 In: Bertault, P.; Nguyen-The, objectives and J.G. and Kadir, N. methodology K., (eds.) Silvicultural research in a lowland mixed dipterocarp forest of East Kalimantan, the contribution of the STREK project. 29-49. 6 34 • Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal CONTRIBUTING TO THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE Author Title Record Public- Source Times % cited type ation cited in first 4 date years Wadley, R.L.; Hunting primates Articles 1997 Human Ecology Colfer, C.J.P.; and managing (Refereed) 2(25): 243-271. Hood, I.G. forests: the case of Iban forest farmers in Indonesian Borneo 6 Vanclay, J.K.; Using plant Articles 1997 Forest Gillison, A.N.; functional (Refereed) Ecology and Keenan, R.N. attributes to Management quantify site 1/3(94): 149- productivity and 163. growth patterns in mixed forests 6 Segura, O.; Politicas forestales Book 1997 San Salvador, Kaimowitz, D.; en Centroamerica: El Salvador, Rodriguez, J.; analisis de las IICA-Holanda/ (eds.) resticciones para Laderas. 335p. el desarrollo del sector forestal 6 Harcourt, C.; Conservation atlas Book 1996 New York, Sayer, J.A. of tropical forests: Simon & the Americas Schuster. 355p. 6 Sunderlin, W.D.; Rates and causes Series 1996 Bogor, Resosudarmo, of deforestation in Indonesia. I.A.P. Indonesia: Towards CIFOR a resolution of the Occasional ambiguities Paper, No. 9 (Eng.). 6 Kaimowitz, D. Livestock and Book 1995 Washington deforestation in D.C., IFPRI. EPDT Central America Discussion in the 1980s and Paper, No. 9. the 1990s: a policy perspective 6 Magnussen, S.; Estimating sample Articles 1995 Forest Boyle, T.J.B. size for inference (Refereed) Ecology and about the Management Shannon-Weaver 1/3(78): 71-84. and the Simpson Indices of species diversity 6 Sheil, D. Long-term Articles 2001 Plant Ecology observations (Refereed) 155: 183-199. of rain forest succession, tree diversity and responses to disturbance 5 IMPACT ASSESSMENT PAPERS No. 6 • 35 Author Title Record Public- Source Times % cited type ation cited in first 4 date years Tomich, T.P.; van Agricultural Chapter 2001 In: Lee, D.R. and Noordwjik, M.; intensification, Barrett, C.B. Budidarsono, deforestation, and (eds.) Tradeoffs S.; Gillison, A.N.; the environment: or synergies? Kusumanto, T.; assessing tradeoffs Agricultural Murdiyarso, D.; in Sumatra, intensification, Stolle, F.; Fagi, Indonesia economic A.M. development, and the environment. Wallingford, Oxon, UK, CAB International. 5 Ekoko, F. Balancing politics, Articles 2000 Development economics and (Refereed) and Change conservation: 1(31): 131-154. the case of the Cameroon forestry law reform 5 Sheil, D.; Long-term Articles 2000 Journal of Jennings, S.; permanent plot (Refereed) Tropical Ecology Savill, P. observations 6(16): 765-800. of vegetation dynamics in Budongo, a Ugandan rain forest 5 Mendoza, G.A.; Multiple criteria Articles 2000 Forest Prabhu, R. decision making (Refereed) Ecology and approaches to Management assessing forest 131: 107-126. sustainability using criteria and indicators: a case study 5 Salafsky, N.; Linking livelihoods Articles 2000 World Wollenberg, E. and conservation: (Refereed) Development a conceptual 8(28): 1421- framework and 1438. scale for assessing the integration of human needs and biodiversity 5 36 • Arild Angelsen and Baikuntha Aryal CONTRIBUTING TO THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE Author Title Record Public- Source Times % cited type ation cited in first 4 date years Wollenberg, E.; Using scenarios Articles 2000 Landscape and Edmunds, D.; to make decisions (Refereed) Urban Planning Buck, L. about the future: 1/2(47): 65-77. anticipatory learning for the adaptive co- management of community forests 5 Guariguata, M.R. Early response Articles 1999 Forest of selected Ecology and tree species to Management 2- liberation thinning 3(124): 255-261. in a young secondary forest in Northeastern Costa Rica 5 Wollenberg, E. Methods for Chapter 1998 In: Wollenberg, assessing the E. and Ingles, A. conservation and (eds.) Incomes development of from the forest: forest products: methods for the what we know and development what we have yet and to learn conservation of forest products for local communities. 1-16. Bogor, Indonesia, CIFOR & IUCN. 5 Gillison, A.N.; A generic plant Articles 1997 Functional Carpenter, G. functional (Refereed) Ecology 6(11): attribute set 775 - 783. and grammar for dynamic vegetation description and analysis. 5 Kaimowitz, D. Factors Articles 1997 Ambio 8(28): determining low (Refereed) 537-540. deforestation: the Bolivian Amazon 5 Sunderlin, W.D.; Cattle, broadleaf Series 1996 Bogor, Rodriguez, J.A. forests and the Indonesia. agricultural CIFOR modernization law Occasional of Honduras: the Paper, No. 7 case of Olancho (Eng.). 5 IMPACT ASSESSMENT PAPERS No. 6 • 37 Author Title Record Public- Source Times % cited type ation cited in first 4 date years Liengsiri, C.; Yeh, Isozyme analysis Articles 1995 Forest F.C.H.; Boyle, T.J.B. of a tropical forest (Refereed) Ecology and tree, Pterocarpus Management macrocarpus Kurz 74: 13-22. 5 IMPACT ASSESSMENT PAPERS The Impact Assessment Contributing to the scientific literature Papers series publishes studies undertaken by This study examines the frequency of citations of CIFOR publications CIFOR to assess the in order to provide a useful indicator of CIFOR’s research impact. Out impact and influence of the 1437 publications registered in CIFOR’s publication database of its research and up until May 2004, 24 % have been cited in scientific journals. related collaborative Seventeen publications have been cited more than 20 times, and five undertakings. The more than 50 times, with one article being cited 192 times. papers are also available on CIFOR’s website in Refereed articles make up 24% of CIFOR’s publications and have a downloadable format 30-40 times greater likelihood of being cited than a refereed book or (www.cifor.cgiar.org/ chapter. Forest Ecology and Management tops the list of most articles publications/papers). by CIFOR researchers (33) and citations of CIFOR work (170). The Contact Publications first author of about half of the most cited CIFOR publications are non- at cifor@cgiar.org to CIFOR researchers in joint authorship with CIFOR staff, indicating request a printed copy. CIFOR and its scientists benefit from partner collaboration. The study shows that CIFOR publications remain a useful reference and source of information for long periods, with no sign of falling citation rates even after 5-7 years. Less than 40 % of the citations appear within the first four years of publication. Many papers appear in low impact journals, but with a bit more ‘upgrading’ many could have appeared in higher quality journals. While it is natural for many CIFOR papers to appear in forestry journals, the study also suggests CIFOR’s impact can be increased by publishing more papers in broader journals related to biology, ecology, conservation, social sciences, economics and development. The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) is a leading international forestry research organization established in 1993 in response to global concerns about the social, environmental, and economic consequences of forest loss and degradation. CIFOR is dedicated to developing policies and technologies for sustainable use and management of forests, and for enhancing the well-being of people in developing countries who rely on tropical forests for their livelihoods. CIFOR is one of the 15 Future Harvest centres of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). With its headquarters in Bogor, Indonesia, CIFOR also has regional offices in Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cameroon and Zimbabwe, and works in over 30 other countries around the world.