River research and applications across borders

Rivers flow across national borders, unfettered by political distinctions, and the ecological health of rivers is closely linked to their degree of connectivity. River research today is more global than it has ever been, but we show that river research, engineering, and management still operate within homegrown local paradigms. As a basis for this discussion, we studied the citation networks surrounding the most widely cited papers in our field, assessing the degree to which researchers have collaborated across geographical boundaries and fully drawn from the international literature. Despite gains over time, our field remains surprisingly and pervasively provincial. The likely explanation for provincial bias is that researchers are generally more familiar and comfortable with their own research methods, sites, and agendas. However, local focus has tangible consequences. For example, contrasting paradigms and differing approaches to river restoration and to flood-risk management show that opportunities are lost when we fail to learn from the successes and failures of other regions. As Sharp and Leshner (2014; p. 579) have argued, "the search for solutions needs to draw upon the talents and innovative ideas of scientists, engineers, and societal leaders worldwide to overcome traditional and nationalistic paradigms that have so far been inadequate to meeting these challenges.

Exploring the Adult Learning Research Field by Analysing Who Cites Whom

In this article we report on findings from a large-scale bibliographic study conducted based on the citation practices within the field of research on adult learning. Our data consist of 151,261 citation links between more than 33,000 different authors whose papers were published in five leading international journals in the field of adult learning during the time period 2006–2014. By analysing the composition of the dominating citation clusters we are able to construct a telescopic view of the research field based on an accumulation of bibliographic citations. The results consist of two parts. First we go through the dominating players active in the field, their position and mutual relationship. Secondly, we derive two main structural oppositions inherent in the citation networks, one connected to the research object (studying education or work) and the second to the level of analysis (cognition or policy). We find that the most dominating tradition within adult learning the last few decades – sociocultural perspectives on learning - occupies a very central position in the space of citations, balancing between these opposing poles. We hope that this analysis will help foster reflexivity concerning our own research practices, and will reveal the relations of dominance currently prevailing within the field of adult learning