Catalysts for progress? Mapping policy insights from energy research

IF 6.9 2区 经济学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Energy Research & Social Science Pub Date : 2025-02-14 DOI:10.1016/j.erss.2025.103955
Brian Boyle , Yen-Chieh Liao , Sarah King , Robin Rauner , Stefan Müller
{"title":"Catalysts for progress? Mapping policy insights from energy research","authors":"Brian Boyle ,&nbsp;Yen-Chieh Liao ,&nbsp;Sarah King ,&nbsp;Robin Rauner ,&nbsp;Stefan Müller","doi":"10.1016/j.erss.2025.103955","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This article measures policy relevance in the abstracts of papers published between 2010 and 2023 in the top 100 journals covering energy research. Communicating the impact of research beyond academia is key to overcoming the evidence-policy divide. Yet, policy engagement is shaped by structural factors and poses unresolved dilemmas for researchers. Qualitative analyses of how research findings are presented in publications are inherently limited in scope, while simple search queries miss contributions that do not refer to ‘policy’ explicitly. Undertaking a large-scale bibliometric analysis, we use computational methods to evaluate over 270,000 abstracts by applying a carefully validated keyword-based dictionary approach. Overall, we find that 15 % of abstracts contain policy-relevant statements, with considerable differences among journals mentioning policy in their aims and scope. We also observe geographic variation by authorship and the funding agencies that sponsored research projects. Finally, we apply unsupervised topic models to identify distinct themes in policy-relevant abstracts. Our analysis reveals that the topics of renewable energy and implementation are most prevalent but have declined since 2010, while the focus on energy systems and emissions has gradually increased. These findings inform ongoing discussions about bridging the gap between research and policy impact in a field that will play a pivotal role in developing pathways to net zero.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48384,"journal":{"name":"Energy Research & Social Science","volume":"121 ","pages":"Article 103955"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Research & Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629625000362","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article measures policy relevance in the abstracts of papers published between 2010 and 2023 in the top 100 journals covering energy research. Communicating the impact of research beyond academia is key to overcoming the evidence-policy divide. Yet, policy engagement is shaped by structural factors and poses unresolved dilemmas for researchers. Qualitative analyses of how research findings are presented in publications are inherently limited in scope, while simple search queries miss contributions that do not refer to ‘policy’ explicitly. Undertaking a large-scale bibliometric analysis, we use computational methods to evaluate over 270,000 abstracts by applying a carefully validated keyword-based dictionary approach. Overall, we find that 15 % of abstracts contain policy-relevant statements, with considerable differences among journals mentioning policy in their aims and scope. We also observe geographic variation by authorship and the funding agencies that sponsored research projects. Finally, we apply unsupervised topic models to identify distinct themes in policy-relevant abstracts. Our analysis reveals that the topics of renewable energy and implementation are most prevalent but have declined since 2010, while the focus on energy systems and emissions has gradually increased. These findings inform ongoing discussions about bridging the gap between research and policy impact in a field that will play a pivotal role in developing pathways to net zero.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Energy Research & Social Science
Energy Research & Social Science ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
14.00
自引率
16.40%
发文量
441
审稿时长
55 days
期刊介绍: Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) is a peer-reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles examining the relationship between energy systems and society. ERSS covers a range of topics revolving around the intersection of energy technologies, fuels, and resources on one side and social processes and influences - including communities of energy users, people affected by energy production, social institutions, customs, traditions, behaviors, and policies - on the other. Put another way, ERSS investigates the social system surrounding energy technology and hardware. ERSS is relevant for energy practitioners, researchers interested in the social aspects of energy production or use, and policymakers. Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) provides an interdisciplinary forum to discuss how social and technical issues related to energy production and consumption interact. Energy production, distribution, and consumption all have both technical and human components, and the latter involves the human causes and consequences of energy-related activities and processes as well as social structures that shape how people interact with energy systems. Energy analysis, therefore, needs to look beyond the dimensions of technology and economics to include these social and human elements.
期刊最新文献
Men and the mask: Dramaturgical mask-wearing, masculinities and oilmen's ‘stoical’ emotional shielding practices in Scotland's offshore oilfields Challenging epistemic hierarchy: Reincorporating societal risks into nuclear safety goals Legitimacy transfer: A typology for multi-system interactions in sustainability transitions Precarious lives: Exploring the intersection of insecure housing and energy conditions in Ireland Which tariff to choose? How individual attitudes and preferences explain demand for flexible electricity tariffs in Germany
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1