Circular economy scientific knowledge in the European Union and China: A bibliometric, network and survey analysis (2006–2016)

Abstract In this article, we analyse the evolution of circular economy (CE) scientific knowledge in the most productive political geographies in the field, namely the European Union (EU) 28 and China by using bibliometric, network and survey analysis. Our objective is to provide a systemic, quantitative, visio-temporal review of the evolution of the CE scientific research field. Using Web of Science (WoS) database and Scopus, we trace the bibliometric characteristics of key research terms, their co-occurrences, publication (co)authorships at multi-level (author, institute, city, region, country), issue journals, literature citations and funding sources. Our findings from co-authorship, citation, co-citation, bibliometric coupling, co-occurrence and network analyses indicate that China and the EU have the highest amount of CE literature published and are each other's primary source of co-authorship. Emerging or reiterated main themes in the joint CE literature between EU and China are emergy analysis, indicators; resource efficiency, food waste, zero waste; eco-cities, lifestyle and governance. There appears a good potential for international cooperation in the sectoral fields of automotive, construction and demolition, critical raw materials; in business, (new) business models, product and services platforms, and from security perspective, resource security, security of supply, given the paucity of co-authorship between China and the EU under these themes. In China; Beijing, Shenyang, Dalian, Shanghai are the most active cities with a central role of Chinese Academy of Sciences at institution level of analysis. The most active EU institute is the Delft University of Technology in South Holland, the Netherlands. In Europe, we observe countries citing CE literature yet with no or few publications. Journal of Cleaner Production is the most important outlet for publications on CE and also for joint publications of CE researchers in both China and EU-28. We conclude our article with future research agendas, and a positive note on existing interests in international cooperation based on our survey participated by highly-cited CE authors.

[1]  M. Chertow,et al.  Scholarship and Practice in Industrial Symbiosis: 1989–2014 , 2016 .

[2]  Rong Hao,et al.  An Empirical Analysis of Production Efficiency of the Non-ferrous Metal Industry , 2014 .

[3]  X. Tong,et al.  The rise and fall of a “waste city” in the construction of an “urban circular economic system”: The changing landscape of waste in Beijing , 2016 .

[4]  Xin Man,et al.  State of the art on food waste research: a bibliometrics study from 1997 to 2014 , 2017 .

[5]  Haiyan Zhang,et al.  Comparative analysis of socio-economic and environmental performances for Chinese EIPs: case studies in Baotou, Suzhou, and Shanghai , 2009 .

[6]  Ludo Waltman,et al.  Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer , 2017, Scientometrics.

[7]  R. Merli,et al.  How do scholars approach the circular economy? A systematic literature review , 2017 .

[8]  Lin Zhao,et al.  Mapping the scientific research on life cycle assessment: a bibliometric analysis , 2015, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[9]  N. Jacobsen Industrial Symbiosis in Kalundborg, Denmark: A Quantitative Assessment of Economic and Environmental Aspects , 2006 .

[10]  Surekha K. Satpute,et al.  Biosurfactants’ Production from Renewable Natural Resources: Example of Innovativeand Smart Technology in Circular Bioeconomy , 2017 .

[11]  Gustavo Cattelan Nobre,et al.  Scientific literature analysis on big data and internet of things applications on circular economy: a bibliometric study , 2017, Scientometrics.

[12]  Yong Geng,et al.  Industrial park management in the Chinese environment , 2009 .

[13]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994 .

[14]  G. Dijkema,et al.  Understanding the Evolution of Industrial Symbiosis Research , 2014 .

[15]  Lei Shi,et al.  Achieving Dewaterization in Industrial Parks , 2011 .

[16]  J. Meredith,et al.  The evolution of the intellectual structure of operations management—1980–2006: A citation/co-citation analysis , 2009 .

[17]  N. Droste,et al.  Green, circular, bio economy: A comparative analysis of sustainability avenues , 2017 .

[18]  Thed van Leeuwen The application of bibliometric analyses in the evaluation of social science research. Who benefits from it, and why it is still feasible , 2006 .

[19]  Eugene Garfield,et al.  From the science of science to Scientometrics visualizing the history of science with HistCite software , 2009, J. Informetrics.

[20]  R. Kemp,et al.  Circular Economy Policies in China and Europe , 2017 .

[21]  J. Bi,et al.  The Circular Economy: A New Development Strategy in China , 2006 .

[22]  Qinghua Zhu,et al.  Industrial Symbiosis in China: A Case Study of the Guitang Group , 2007 .

[23]  L. Bettencourt,et al.  Evolution and structure of sustainability science , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  Eugene Garfield,et al.  Citation indexing - its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities , 1979 .

[25]  Yong Geng,et al.  Recent progress on emergy research: A bibliometric analysis , 2017 .

[26]  F. Blomsma,et al.  The Emergence of Circular Economy: A New Framing Around Prolonging Resource Productivity , 2017 .

[27]  Z. Tan,et al.  Issues and solutions of China’s generation resource utilization based on sustainable development , 2016 .

[28]  M. M. Kessler Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers , 1963 .

[29]  P. Planing Business Model Innovation in a Circular Economy Reasons for Non-Acceptance of Circular Business Models , 2015 .

[30]  Joseph Sarkis,et al.  Towards a national circular economy indicator system in China: an evaluation and critical analysis , 2012 .

[31]  Aldo Roberto Ometto,et al.  Theoretical contribution of industrial ecology to circular economy , 2018 .

[32]  E. Hultink,et al.  The Circular Economy - A New Sustainability Paradigm? , 2017 .

[33]  J. E. Hirsch,et al.  An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output , 2005, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.

[34]  Matthew E Falagas,et al.  Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses , 2007, FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.

[35]  Laura Johnson,et al.  How Many Interviews Are Enough? , 2006 .

[36]  D. Deselnicu,et al.  Towards a circular economy: A zero waste programme for Europe , 2014 .

[37]  Anne-Wil Harzing,et al.  Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison , 2015, Scientometrics.

[38]  Han Shi,et al.  Developing country experience with eco-industrial parks: a case study of the Tianjin Economic-Technological Development Area in China , 2010 .

[39]  T. V. Leeuwen Descriptive Versus Evaluative Bibliometrics , 2004 .

[40]  Vasileios Rizos,et al.  The Circular Economy: Barriers and Opportunities for SMEs , 2015 .

[41]  Arno Behrens,et al.  Understanding the Circular Economy in Europe, from Resource Efficiency to Sharing Platforms: The CEPS Framework , 2016 .

[42]  Jonathan M. Cullen,et al.  Taking the Circularity to the Next Level: A Special Issue on the Circular Economy , 2017 .

[43]  Marian Chertow,et al.  INDUSTRIAL SYMBIOSIS: Literature and Taxonomy , 2000 .