Next Article in Journal
Free-Base Porphyrin Aggregates Combined with Nickel Phosphite for Enhanced Alkaline Hydrogen Evolution
Next Article in Special Issue
An Evaluation on Sectoral Competitiveness of Guangdong in China: The Role of Carbon Taxation Policy
Previous Article in Journal
Analysis of Temperature Control Strategy on Energy Consumption in Buildings with Intermittent Occupancy
Previous Article in Special Issue
Towards GreenPLM—Key Sustainable Indicators Selection and Assessment Method Development
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Energies
Volume 16
Issue 3
10.3390/en16031211
energies-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Renewable Energies and Sustainable Development: A Bibliometric Overview

by
Francisco García-Lillo
*,
Eduardo Sánchez-García
,
Bartolomé Marco-Lajara
and
Pedro Seva-Larrosa
Department of Management, Faculty of Economic and Business Sciences, University of Alicante, 03690 San Vicente del Raspeig, Alicante, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Energies 2023, 16(3), 1211; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/en16031211
Submission received: 23 December 2022 / Revised: 10 January 2023 / Accepted: 17 January 2023 / Published: 22 January 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Development: Policies, Challenges, and Further)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Sustainable development has positioned itself as a fundamental element of a transversal nature, being linked to the energy transition. In this sense, it must be included as a mainstream objective of all actions and strategies developed at the social, academic, business, and political levels. However, to the best of our knowledge, no bibliometric work has been carried out to date to analyze the main contributions to the literature focused on the concepts of renewable energy and sustainable development. The main aim of this paper is to establish the key trends and academic contributions made in the field of renewable energies and sustainable development. For this purpose, a bibliometric and co-citation analysis has been carried out using the Bibliometrix® tool, an open-source R package. The results show that this is a field of study that has significantly increased its importance in recent years, which is illustrated using different indicators. We conclude that research trends seem to be directed towards managing the transition to a new, more sustainable energy model composed of renewable energy production systems, in addition to the adoption of new technologies to increase the efficiency of products and power transmission systems. In this respect, the transition towards a new, more sustainable energy model seems to be a fundamental step to guarantee the sustainability of human action.

1. Introduction

In recent years, research in renewable energies and their impact on social and economic development and the quality of the environment has significantly increased its relevance [1,2,3,4,5]. Then, among energy, environmental, and scientific experts, a growing conversation has evolved on the effects of the global climate variations on the standard of living of the population and environmental sustainability [6]. On numerous occasions, decision makers and scientists have underlined the need for lowering the emissions of harmful gases, especially those related with the greenhouse effect, which are recognized as the principal driver of unusual climate variations, to prevent the disaster of global warming [7,8].
Since the severe effects of environmental degradation, such as climate change and global warming, have started to be felt on a worldwide scale, governments have been pushed to seek a collective solution. Different climate meetings, such as those held in Kyoto or Paris, have failed to appropriately address climate change concerns [9]. Consequently, several researchers and scholars have concluded that environmental efficiency must be supported through the introduction of new laws, legislation, and economic policies [10,11,12,13]. Therefore, the major challenge for policymakers is to increase economic development without diminishing environmental quality [14,15,16,17].
Renewable energy is a key factor to enhance the sustainability of the environment from the perspective of climate change [18,19,20]. Furthermore, investments in renewable energies generally result in lower carbon emissions than conventional energies [21,22,23]. Therefore, countries may enhance the sustainability of the environment and build a sustainable and secure global context by promoting the use of renewable energies. In addition, from an economic standpoint, the development of green sources of energy provides considerable benefits [24,25,26,27,28]. There are previous research studies that analyze the literature focused on various renewable energy sources, as well as other ones on sustainable development and the impact of human activity on the environment. However, to the best of our knowledge, there are no previous studies that analyze, using bibliometric methods, the literature on both renewable energy and sustainable development, trying to unveil the main contributions (authors, journals, countries, collaborations, etc.) to these fields of study.
In this vein, this study provides a bibliometric analysis on renewable energy and sustainable development issues, considering all articles published up to 23 November 2022, the date on which the data were obtained. Applying advanced bibliometric techniques and R-based software, it is intended that this analysis goes deeper than the intellectual structure towards the conceptual and thematic underlying framework, uncovering topic rankings, gaps in current research, and opportunities for future research.
The main objective of this paper is to identify the seminal papers and the most important authors, institutions, countries, and collaborations among researchers that have laid the groundwork and paved the way for renewable energy and sustainable development research.
We opted for bibliometric analysis over conventional review approaches in this research because bibliometric techniques are unbiased, objective, analytical, robust, transparent, and valuable in revealing unique but related networks within a field and provide overviews of the domain [29]. Properly performed bibliometric reviews can greatly enhance the domain by enabling and empowering researchers in obtaining a comprehensive overview, finding the gaps in research, and making critical evaluations of relevant contemporary research questions. Our review is based on 8349 articles from 135 countries published before 23 November 2022 and co-authored by 23,493 authors. Single-authored documents amount to 1040 articles from 906 authors, while the remaining 7309 articles present an average of 3.84 authors per document. These 8349 documents received 181,006 citations and contained 328,799 references. This work is structured as follows. After this introduction, the methodology used is explained. Then, in the third section, the main results are shown. Finally, the conclusions developed are presented, in addition to the main limitations and possible future lines of research.

2. Materials and Methods

Web of Science database and, particularly, the following indexes were used to collect and compile trustworthy documents: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-E), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S). Then, a search engine formula of “TS = sustainable development” AND “renew* energy*” was introduced in the search box of the advanced window for a time period from 1900 to 2022 (extracted on 23 November 2022). As a result, 12,860 documents were retrieved, with the outstanding information of this documents being extracted from WoS using comma-separated value file formats.
Once the previous search was carried out and despite having been formerly developed to be used in carrying out systematic literature reviews, the “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis” (PRISMA statement) was adopted to refine the search results [30,31]. The whole process is shown in Figure 1.
The adoption of the PRISMA statement was motivated by the fact that this statement provides the potential to increase reliability across reviews, recognition is based on its comprehensiveness, and that it has recently started to be used in a great number of bibliometric studies [32,33,34,35,36]. After applying the “articles only” filter and checking the absence of duplicate papers, the number of documents was reduced to 8349 articles. Peer reviewed articles are documents in which knowledge is certified [37]. The process of the revision can be interpreted as a mechanism of control that enables validation of the knowledge such peer-reviewed scholarly journal articles provide [38,39].
Then, the primary objective of this research being to evaluate the present state of knowledge on sustainable development and renewable energy, a bibliometric approach was selected [40]. This research methodology is appropriate for analyzing the state of a field based on several indicators, such as the most prominent and referenced articles, journals, authors, institutions, and nations [41]. In addition, it permits the evaluation of the collaborative network between authors, institutions, and nations. In a broader sense, this research methodology permits the examination of voluminous publishing data at both the macroscopic and microscopic levels [42]. Consequently, bibliometric analysis may be utilized to undertake knowledge analysis on any study subject to identify objective and unobservable trends [43,44,45,46,47].
In this research, the powerful bibliometric analysis tool Bibliometrix® was used. Bibliometric analysis should include, among others, descriptive and collaborative network analysis, such as co-citation, bibliographic coupling, and co-occurrence testing. Bibliometrix® provides a thorough analysis of scientific mapping, using the biblioshiny interface [48]. In addition, VOSviewer is capable of handling huge datasets, has greater mapping features, and presents greater display options [48,49,50]. Both tools support the entire range of functions explored.
Furthermore, scholars have found that major breakthroughs within a given domain of science were interconnected chronologically, newer findings generally being dependent on older ones [51]. Based on the compiled papers, the features of the sustainable development and renewable energy fields were examined. In this vein, basic statistical features were addressed. Diverse indicators are used to assess the importance and fruitfulness of published articles [52], among which we can highlight the number of citations, documents, and the H-index. In addition, using Bibliometrix®, a visual analysis can be performed regarding the results.

3. Results

After being extracted from WoS, the dataset consisting of papers on sustainable development and renewable energy is shown in Table 1, which provides interesting information on the research analysis.

3.1. Production and Most Important Journals in Sustainable Development and Renewable Energy

Research on renewable energy and its effect on sustainable development remains remarkably insufficient in the literature and, for the most part, the growing ratio and related scales were utilized as sustainable development indicators when investigating the link between these two variables [53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61]. Nevertheless, although research on these topics is still insufficient, in recent years, research focused on the study of sustainability and renewable energy has increased exponentially.
Thus, as can be seen in Figure 2, although there is an increase in interest on the subject, it is in 2015 where this growth occurs with greater intensity, with 2017 being the year that generates a turning point in the number of publications. In this regard, the most recent data to be considered as definitive would be those for the year 2021.
Regarding the most active journals in these fields of study, Figure 3 shows the top 10 journals from the list of 1665 journals in sustainable development and renewable energy fields.
As can be seen, the main journals of this list are Energies (425 articles), Sustainability (422 articles), and Journal of Cleaner Production (384 articles). These are currently high-impact journals that focus on energy and environmental, social, and economic sustainability.
Previous paragraphs have shown the main journals on sustainable development and renewable energy fields, the top three journals being Energies, Sustainability, and Journal of Cleaner Production. As the most important journals on these issues, their number of publications have been analyzed over time, which are shown in Table 2. From 2015 onwards, the journal Energies has experienced an exponential growth in its number of publications in these fields, reaching the top position in 2020 and maintaining it in 2021, with a total of 131 articles published. The journal Sustainability ranks second, with 94 articles in 2021, while Journal of Cleaner Production is in third place with 67 articles published. Therefore, these three journals published 14.74% of the total of articles published by the 1665 journals identified in sustainable development and renewable energy. To facilitate the visualization of the data incorporated in Table 2, the information corresponding to the papers published by the three journals is shown in Figure 4.

3.2. Most Relevant Authors, Affiliations, and Countries in Sustainable Development and Renewable Energy

In connection with the ranking of the most prolific authors, Table 3 shows the top-10 list of the main authors on sustainable development and renewable energy published in the mentioned database, considering the output of articles, their number of local citations, and their h-index. It is worth mentioning that these ten authors managed to publish over 25 articles, whereas the rest of the authors published 24 papers or less. In addition, the positions of the most local cited and higher h-index authors classification are shown in the ranking of the most productive authors list. For example, Ahmad, M. is the most productive author in the field of analysis, in addition to having the highest h-index, while Bekun, F.V. is the second author in scientific production and local citations and the third one in h-index rank. Furthermore, there are several authors that are included in more than one classification, demonstrating its relevance in this field of study by means of different indicators.
In this regard, the publications of the top 10 authors in scientific production, considering in this case the number of articles fractioned by the authors involved in their development, are showed in Table 4.
In addition, Figure 5 shows the production over time of some of the most important authors, considering all these indicators. In the same way as observed in Figure 3, most of the scientific productivity in this field from the top 10 authors is concentrated from 2015 onwards.
The most global and local cited papers are detailed in Table 5 and Table 6, respectively. The term “global citations” refers to the total number of citations that each paper has received, considering all papers published in any field and region. In turn, the concept of local citations means the number of citations received by each document from the rest of the documents that make up the analyzed set.
Regarding the ranking of the most relevant affiliations in sustainable development and renewable energy published in the WoS database, the top 10 are shown in Table 7. The North China Electric Power University is positioned in first place with a wide margin, reaching a total of 157 documents, being followed by Tsinghua University with 85 documents and Istanbul Gelisim University with 82 documents. Then, the fourth and fifth places are held by Jiangsu University and the Chinese Academy of Sciences with 78 and 68 documents, respectively. Finally, there are three universities which have published 64 articles (Beijing Normal University, Cyprus International University, and Islamic Azad University) and two that have published 61 (King AbdulAziz University and King Saud University).
After analyzing the list, it is noteworthy that five of the ten entities on the list are located in China, one of the most polluting countries in the world (European Parliament News webpage: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/society/20180301STO98928/greenhouse-gas-emissions-by-country-and-sector-infographic, accessed on 25 November 2022). It seems that China is investing a great deal of effort and resources to try to improve the sustainability of the country’s energy production and socioeconomic development. In addition, Saudi Arabia appears to be investing similarly in academic research in this area.
Nevertheless, to verify the above data, Table 8 exposes the countries that have higher levels of scientific production, and those ones are the most cited on sustainable development and renewable energy.
As can be seen, China is both the most productive and cited country in sustainable development and renewable energy research (with 4223 articles and 36,917 citations), followed by the United States of America and the United Kingdom (with 1416 citations and 21,066 references and 1007 citations and 12,532 references, respectively). Furthermore, the country that presents a higher rate of multi-country collaboration is Australia (46.51%), followed by China (40.04%), the United Kingdom (35.48%), Spain (28.35%), the United States of America (27.69%), Italy (27.14%), Germany (26.92%), India (21.87%), Poland (18.89%), and Turkey (18.58%).
Table 9 shows the most frequent words linked to sustainable development and renewable energy, according to the WoS database. Then, the keywords most employed by the authors are highlighted. The greatest number of occurrences, as could be expected, is for renewable energy with a frequency of 1646, followed by sustainable development with 1187.
This illustrates the importance of these key concepts as fields of study. Then, from the third to the tenth word in the ranking, sustainability (549), renewable energy sources (253), economic growth (252), energy (250), climate change (242), energy efficiency (225), biomass (209), and CO2 emissions (192) are found.
These words might clarify the existing challenges to maximize the use of renewable energies, with the aim of achieving economic growth, increased energy efficiency, sustainability of energy production and supply, and business activity in general.
In fact, it is not only a simple evolution towards the generation of energy from renewable sources but a new socioeconomic system that allows for increased efficiency in energy consumption and the effective application of new methods, production models, and strategies to optimize operations and resources and achieve the fundamental objective of sustainable development. In this regard, it can be seen how the word optimization is part of the top 20 most frequent keywords.
In this regard, Figure 6 and Table 10 present the co-occurrence network of keywords. As showed, the 50 items considered can be classified into three clusters: the first cluster, which has 8 items that treat aspects related to the measurement of the impact of sustainable development and renewable energy; the second cluster, with 36 items, in which different issues linked to the improvement of the sustainability of the development strategies and energy production are included; and the third cluster, with 6 items, that presents keywords related to energy sources created from organic substances.
In addition, when we observe the betweenness centrality, cluster one is dominated by keywords such as economic growth, CO2 emissions, or energy consumption. Regarding the second cluster, keywords with the higher values of betweenness centrality are, by far, renewable energy and sustainable development. The third cluster is mastered by the keyword biomass.
In Table 11, the co-citation network is depicted. Two papers are co-cited when they are both cited in a third paper. Considered a valuable indicator, co-citation is a useful measure to gauge intellectual output in a particular domain and to reflect how schools of thought are evolving [48].
Through the co-citation analysis, four groups were identified that are clearly distinguishable in Figure 7. Thus, it is worth mentioning the contributions of Kuznets and Noris (1955) and Dogan (2016) in the first cluster, Engle (1987) and Bekun (2019) in the second, Im (2003) and Pedroni (2004) in the third, and Pesaran (2007) and Dumitrescu (2012) in the fourth cluster.
Figure 8 presents some key collaboration between countries, establishing a minimum edges threshold of eight. As can be clearly seen, the main cooperation agreements are managed by universities located in China, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America, which build ties to their peers throughout different countries in the world. In addition, Latin American and African countries seem to share a limited number of international cooperation agreements. Table 12 shows in detail the 40 country pairs with the highest frequency of collaboration, China being one of the most collaborative countries in the fields under study that actively cooperates with universities located in countries all around the world, such as Pakistan, the United States of America, the United Kingdom, Turkey, Canada, and Australia, among others.
Finally, a thematic map has been developed, which is shown in Figure 9. On a two-dimensional thematic map, the most relevant issues in the field, as determined by the authors’ keywords, were mapped. The map depicts the strength of their internal (density) and external (connectivity) relationships (centrality).
The density dimension reflects intra-cluster growth, while the centrality dimension represents the relevance or significance of a subject inside a particular area and the intensity of between-cluster links [120]. It consists of four quadrants, each of which represents a distinct characteristic of the themes [121,122,123,124].
  • Low density and centrality (emerging themes): The study subjects in the bottom left quadrant are underdeveloped or emerging themes that need more investigation. They often lack significance across networks and develop slowly inside a network. These topics are currently immature and peripheral to the field; they lack significance across networks and grow slowly inside a network. However, these topics are attractive and provide opportunity for further investigation.
  • Low density and high centrality (basic themes): the study subjects in the bottom right quadrant are significant but underdeveloped, fundamental, and transversal and have great relevance across networks but minimal development inside networks.
  • High density and low centrality (niche themes): the study subjects in the upper left quadrant have well-developed internal connections but minimal exterior connections; they are, therefore, barely important to the field at the present time.
  • High density and centrality (motor themes): The study subjects in the upper right quadrant are regarded as major themes in the literature that significantly contribute to the development of a discipline. They are very relevant across networks and highly developed inside networks.
Knowledge about developing and specialized themes is one of the most significant contributions of bibliometric analysis, since these topics provide opportunities for future study.

4. Discussion

The topics analyzed in this paper represent relevant factors that affect every nation on Earth, although the number of resources invested in research differs substantially from country to country. In this section, the main results showed through tables and figures are discussed. In Table 1, we can see that there is a wide range of journals and articles that have developed their research on the fields under study, but the most important is that the average annual growth rate of papers published is almost 7%, so the interest of academicians in these topics has significantly increased over time. These are broad topics, which can explain the fact that the 8349 papers analyzed used a total of 18,101 different keywords. The importance and cross-cutting nature of the topics could have had an impact on the degree of international cooperation among authors, as we can see that the international co-authorships reach a figure of over 34%, 12.46% being the percentage of single-authored papers. The transition to a new energy model based on renewable energy sources and actions aimed at the sustainable development of all the nations of the world are global challenges that must be addressed in a coordinated manner, and the level of cooperation in research and development is a key factor in achieving this goal.
In Figure 2 we can see that, although the average annual growth rate of papers published over time is 7%, this rate has soared in recent years and especially since 2017, which shows that the level of awareness on this issue is considerably higher in the last four years than in previous periods. Although the number of journals that have contributed to the increase in the number of publications in recent years is high, the contributions made by the journals Energies, Sustainability, and Journal of Cleaner Production are noteworthy. Figure 3 shows the top 10 journals with the highest number of publications, while Table 2 and Figure 4 show in detail the annual number of publications made by the mentioned journals, which present the higher number of publications of this ranking. These three are journals focused on energy and economic, social, and environmental sustainability, which are favoring scientific production and the dissemination of results at all levels, as they are open-access journals. Furthermore, Energy Policy is ranked fourth in this classification as an active journal in these fields, which could mean that attention is also being drawn to these issues from a political and legislative perspective, so that the sustainable development of nations can be driven via legislating regulations that enforce further use of renewable energies.
Then, Table 3 shows the most prolific authors based on their number of publications, local citations, and h-index. Four of them appear within the top ten in all three rankings, while eight are in two classifications. It is worth noting that there are three authors who appear in the first four positions in the three rankings, which also belong to the top ten authors when we analyze the ranking of the most prolific authors considering the number of articles fractioned by the authors involved (Table 4), so we can determine that they are some of the most important authors in these fields of study. As it is showed in Figure 5, the production of the most prolific authors is concentrated in the last four years, in line with the information obtained from Figure 2 regarding the whole number of papers published. Regarding the most global and local cited documents, the first ones may show those papers developed from a more transversal perspective, applicable to different fields and subfields of study (Table 5), while the second ones may be highly specialized works in the fields under study, so that they are more widely cited among the specific literature.
In Table 7 and Table 8 the main affiliations and countries by scientific production are displayed. As can be seen, China is positioned as a leading country in scientific production in the fields under study. Five universities from this country are ranked in the first six positions of the classification, with the sole exception of the third place, which belongs to Istanbul Gelisim University. In addition, China has published more than three times as many articles as the second-ranked country, the United States of America. In this vein, Chinese papers have also received over 75% more citations than the second country ranked and almost three times more than the third one, the United Kingdom. In this sense, despite being one of the most polluting and contaminated countries in the world, it seems to be making important efforts in research to try to promote the transition towards new energy models based on renewable energies and more sustainable development. It is worth noting that two Saudi Arabian universities belong to the ranking of the most prolific affiliations. In line with the news coming from this country in recent years, it seems to be promoting research in renewable energies and sustainable development as a way of improving its prestige at the international level, as well as diversifying its areas of investment.
When analyzing the most frequent keywords (Table 9), we see that among the most related keywords, such as renewable energy and sustainability, there are other revealing ones, such as economic growth, energy efficiency, optimization, or climate change, that allow us to visualize the main objectives of this energy transition to renewable sources and the efforts made in favor of sustainable development. Furthermore, energy policy is among the most frequent keywords, which reveals the importance of governments as institutions managing this transition through the implementation of specific regulations that guide the actions of public and private agents in terms of energy and environmental sustainability. Regarding the co-occurrence network of keywords, we can classify them in three clusters (Figure 6 and Table 10). The first one groups keywords related to the measurement of the impact of the transition to energy and development models that are sustainable. This reflects the need to establish indicators of the impact derived from the implementation of strategies in the established areas on key factors of the economy, energy efficiency, and sustainability. The second cluster corresponds to keywords related to the management of the transition and the strategies to implement to improve the sustainability of development and energy sources.
In this respect, energy policy, strategic planning at the government level, and the implementation of actions focused on the improvement of the sustainability of human activity, energy efficiency and storage, renewable energy sources, security, and innovations may play a key role to enhance the likelihood of success of this transition. Finally, the third one contains words relating to organic substances that could be used as alternative primary energy sources to current hydrocarbons. Some of these primary sources of energy from organic sources could facilitate the energy transition and sustainable development by reducing the environmental impact of fuel use for power generation. In some cases, the use of biofuels can favor the elimination of some harmful human-generated waste, promoting the regeneration of the natural environment.
The co-citation network of papers allows us to establish the intellectual output of these fields of study (Figure 7 and Table 11). This analysis may be used for further research to uncover the knowledge base of these fields of study through the in-depth analysis of the papers involved. Regarding collaboration between countries, it is worth mentioning that China is positioned as the country that has established the most international collaborations in renewable energy and sustainable development research (Figure 8 and Table 12).
Based on these data, it could be interpreted that China has the claim to lead scientific research in the fields of energy transition and sustainable development. In this sense, it would be interesting to extend the research to determine whether the strategies, regulations, and actions of this country are linked in the same terms to the achievement of these objectives. As was observed in the ranking of the most important countries, the United States of America and the United Kingdom are positioned as the second and third most important countries, although far behind the figures achieved by China. Finally, in Figure 9 the thematic map is shown, in which four themes are distinguished that reflect the most relevant issues in the field through the analysis of their internal and external relationships. Based on this, we established that renewable energy sources, solar energy, and energy transition are motor themes, which means they significantly contribute to the development of the discipline. Furthermore, economic growth, CO2 emissions, and energy consumption are identified as emerging fields in this area which need to be developed.

5. Conclusions

The possibility and reality of environmental deterioration have been increasingly obvious during the last decades. Growing evidence of environmental concerns is attributable to a mix of reasons, especially to the environmental effect of human activities. In this vein, a significant amount of a society’s environmental effect is attributable to its energy use. Ideally, a society pursuing sustainable growth would solely consume energy sources that have no environmental effect. For this reason, energy production is a key element which currently is in the spotlight of actions in favor of environmental, social, and economic sustainability. Global research efforts in the field of renewable energies increased significantly following the global oil shocks of the beginning of the 1970s. Since then, energy systems based on renewable energy technologies seemed to be the preferred choice due to factors such as the expected high fuel cost, the ease of installation of renewable energy systems, and their projected profitability estimates. In addition, it has been apparent in recent years that renewable energy sources and systems may have a positive influence on significant environmental issues, environmental deterioration, depletion of the world’s nonrenewable energy supplies, and rising energy consumption in emerging nations. This is a relatively new topic, which has received a great deal of attention in the last decades and especially in recent years, as can be seen in the graphs showing the evolution in the number of publications.
The aim of this research is to present, in a holistic way, the main features of the research in renewable energy and sustainable development fields. To conduct this study, bibliometric analysis was carried out, which allowed us to provide information about the most relevant authors, journals, affiliations, and countries, in addition to the main areas of research within the field of study. Regarding the journals, it is worth noting that nowadays, Energies and Sustainability are both among the most relevant journals to publish research in renewable energy and sustainable development. They have significantly increased the number of papers published in these fields in the last years. Furthermore, Journal of Cleaner Production ranks third in this classification.
This paper brings essential knowledge to academic, industrial, and political stakeholders, as all of them are, in some way, involved in issues related to sustainable development and renewable energy. A thorough review of the literature revealed the dynamics of the field under study over time. Regarding the practical contributions, some of the top ten countries that have conducted the most research in sustainable development and renewable energy are China and India, which rank 22nd and 5th in the classification of the world’s most polluted countries but have significantly improved their levels of pollution from 2018 to 2021 (according to IQAir https://www.iqair.com/world-most-polluted-countries, accessed on 5 December 2022). This may serve as evidence of the importance of research in improving the sustainability of socioeconomic development. Then, those countries with higher levels of pollution should invest in research to improve their environmental situation and the sustainability of their development strategies.
In this sense, it is necessary to emphasize the need for coordination and implementation of projects at the global level to homogenize, to some extent, the standard of practices in renewable energy to increase the probability of success of the efforts made in improving the sustainability of the development of today’s society and economic activity and therefore the quality of life of the whole society. While some of the most developed and less polluted countries are well represented in the rankings and are therefore making great efforts in researching in this area, it is worth highlighting the case of China. This country is the first in the rankings on renewable energy and sustainable development, regarding the number of publications, citations, and collaborations, while also being among the most polluting countries in the world (Information extracted on 25 November 2022 from European Parliament News webpage: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/society/20180301STO98928/greenhouse-gas-emissions-by-country-and-sector-infographic). An explanation for this could be that there is a temporal gap between scientific production and the effective transition to a more sustainable development model. In fact, there is evidence of progress made by China in this area (information extracted from the World Bank webpage: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/36668, accessed on 19 December 2022). Nevertheless, countries located in Africa, South America, or Southeast Asia seem to be lagging behind in terms of research in relation to this development process towards the implementation of renewable energy production models to boost the sustainability of socioeconomic development. It has been observed that the most relevant countries in terms of scientific production in the field of renewable energy and sustainable development are countries with a high degree of development, such as China, the United States of America, or various European countries, although among the main affiliations are also Iranian or Saudi Arabian universities.
In comparison with other areas, this is a relatively recent field of study, since the first publication of the database was 1991. Nevertheless, this field of study has experienced an astonishing increase in the number of publications since then. The number of articles published that year was 2, while 1399 articles were published in 2021 (an average annual growth of 34.08% in the number of publications, which has remained relatively stable over time). This is an impressive growth, especially in recent years, when the absolute value of publications is high, which shows the growing attention received from researchers. Moreover, this trend seems to have been maintained, since the number of papers published up to 23 November 2022 is 1568 (a growth of 12.08% in comparison to 2021 and with five weeks left in the year). This may be related to the increased concern on the part of all social, politic, and economic agents regarding the environmental sustainability of human action.
We are currently experiencing a crisis caused, to a large extent, by the control of traditional energy sources such as oil, gas, or coal. Therefore, the transition to renewable energy production systems could favor, in addition to a reduction in the environmental impact of the process, an increase in the degree of energy autonomy of countries. Considering the above, research trends seem to be directed towards managing the transition to a new, more sustainable energy model composed of renewable energy production systems, in addition to the adoption of new technologies to increase the efficiency of products and power transmission systems. To do so, knowledge sharing and interfirm cooperation with innovative purposes may be some of the most fruitful ways of accelerating the development and implementation of new technologies that favor the transition to new, more sustainable energy models [125,126,127,128,129]. Future research may enlarge the scope of this study and enhance its conclusions by gathering more data from other relevant sources.
Since we utilized specific words to search for the publications in renewable energy and sustainable development, and we used the Web of Science database, a large part of the most relevant works in this field has been included in this study, although it has not been possible to cover all the publications, for obvious reasons. In this vein, future research could use, in addition to bibliometric tools, other techniques, such as factor and social network analysis, to reveal the current trends of research by analyzing the more recent publications, in addition to considering other relevant databases.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, E.S.-G. and F.G.-L.; methodology, F.G.-L. and B.M.-L.; software, E.S.-G. and P.S.-L.; formal analysis, E.S.-G.; investigation, F.G.-L. and B.M.-L.; writing—original draft preparation, F.G.-L. and E.S.-G.; writing—review and editing, B.M.-L.; visualization, B.M.-L. and P.S.-L.; supervision, F.G.-L.; project administration, E.S.-G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

Data available upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Al-Mulali, U.; Tang, C.F.; Ozturk, I. Estimating the environment Kuznets curve hypothesis: Evidence from Latin America and the Caribbean countries. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 50, 918–924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Doğan, B.; Driha, O.M.; Balsalobre Lorente, D.; Shahzad, U. The mitigating effects of economic complexity and renewable energy on carbon emissions in developed countries. Sustain. Dev. 2021, 29, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Fotis, P.; Polemis, M. Sustainable development, environmental policy and renewable energy use: A dynamic panel data approach. Sustain. Dev. 2018, 26, 726–740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Kahia, M.; Aïssa, M.S.B.; Lanouar, C. Renewable and non-renewable energy use-economic growth nexus: The case of MENA Net Oil Importing Countries. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 71, 127–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Brent, A.C. Renewable Energy for Sustainable Development. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Lanouar, C.; Al-Malk, A.Y.; Al Karbi, K. Air pollution in Qatar: Causes and challenges. White Pap. 2016, 1, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  7. Amran, A.; Periasamy, V.; Zulkafli, A.H. Determinants of climate change disclosure by developed and emerging countries in Asia Pacific. Sustain. Dev. 2014, 22, 188–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Jaforullah, M.; King, A. Does the use of renewable energy sources mitigate CO2 emissions? A reassessment of the US evidence. Energy Econ. 2015, 49, 711–717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Sathaye, J.; Shukla, P.R.; Ravindranath, N.H. Climate change, sustainable development and India: Global and national concerns. Curr. Sci. 2006, 90, 314–325. [Google Scholar]
  10. Cardenas, L.M.; Franco, C.J.; Dyner, I. Assessing emissions–mitigation energy policy under integrated supply and demand analysis: The Colombian case. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 3759–3773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Lu, Y.; Khan, Z.A.; Alvarez-Alvarado, M.S.; Zhang, Y.; Huang, Z.; Imran, M. A Critical Review of Sustainable Energy Policies for the Promotion of Renewable Energy Sources. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Razmjoo, A.; Rezaei, M.; Mirjalili, S.; Majidi Nezhad, M.; Piras, G. Development of Sustainable Energy Use with Attention to Fruitful Policy. Sustainability 2021, 13, 13840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Musiał, W.; Zioło, M.; Luty, L.; Musiał, K. Energy Policy of European Union Member States in the Context of Renewable Energy Sources Development. Energies 2021, 14, 2864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Adebayo, T.S.; Awosusi, A.A.; Adeshola, I. Determinants of CO2 emissions in emerging markets: An empirical evidence from MINT economies. Int. J. Renew. Energy Dev. 2020, 9, 411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Shahbaz, M.; Haouas, I.; Sohag, K.; Ozturk, I. The financial development-environmental degradation nexus in the United Arab Emirates: The importance of growth, globalization and structural breaks. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 10685–10699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Shahzad, U.; Radulescu, M.; Rahim, S.; Isik, C.; Yousaf, Z.; Ionescu, S.A. Do Environment-Related Policy Instruments and Technologies Facilitate Renewable Energy Generation? Exploring the Contextual Evidence from Developed Economies. Energies 2021, 14, 690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Bhattacharya, M.; Churchill, S.A.; Paramati, S.R. The dynamic impact of renewable energy and institutions on economic output and CO2 emissions across regions. Renew. Energy 2017, 111, 157–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Brazovskaia, V.; Gutman, S.; Zaytsev, A. Potential Impact of Renewable Energy on the Sustainable Development of Russian Arctic Territories. Energies 2021, 14, 3691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Žičkienė, A.; Morkunas, M.; Volkov, A.; Balezentis, T.; Streimikiene, D.; Siksnelyte-Butkiene, I. Sustainable Energy Development and Climate Change Mitigation at the Local Level through the Lens of Renewable Energy: Evidence from Lithuanian Case Study. Energies 2022, 15, 980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Kung, C.C.; McCarl, B.A. Sustainable Energy Development under Climate Change. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. OECD Economic Outlook No. 91. 2013, pp. 499–533. Available online: https://www.oecd.org/ (accessed on 22 November 2022). [CrossRef]
  22. Androniceanu, A.; Sabie, O.M. Overview of Green Energy as a Real Strategic Option for Sustainable Development. Energies 2022, 15, 8573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ponkratov, V.V.; Kuznetsov, A.S.; Muda, I.; Nasution, M.J.; Al-Bahrani, M.; Aybar, H.Ş. Investigating the Index of Sustainable Development and Reduction in Greenhouse Gases of Renewable Energies. Sustainability 2022, 14, 14829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Blazejczak, J.; Braun, F.G.; Edler, D.; Schill, W.P. Economic effects of renewable energy expansion: A model-based analysis for Germany. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014, 40, 1070–1080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Dai, H.; Xie, X.; Xie, Y.; Liu, J.; Masui, T. Green growth: The economic impacts of large-scale renewable energy development in China. Appl. Energy 2016, 162, 435–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Spiegel-Feld, D.; Rudyk, B.; Philippidis, G. Allocating the economic benefits of renewable energy between stakeholders on Small Island Developing States (SIDS): Arguments for a balanced approach. Energy Policy 2016, 98, 744–748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Tomala, J.; Mierzejewski, M.; Urbaniec, M.; Martinez, S. Towards Sustainable Energy Development in Sub-Saharan Africa: Challenges and Opportunities. Energies 2021, 14, 6037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Marco-Lajara, B.; Sánchez-García, E.; Martínez-Falcó, J.; Poveda-Pareja, E. Regional Specialization, Competitive Pressure, and Cooperation: The Cocktail for Innovation. Energies 2022, 15, 5346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Arora, S.D.; Chakraborty, A. Intellectual structure of consumer complaining behavior (CCB) research: A bibliometric analysis. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 122, 60–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G.; Altman, D.; Antes, G.; Tugwell, P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. J. Chin. Integr. Med. 2009, 7, 889–896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Syst. Rev. 2021, 10, 89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Grosseck, G.; Țîru, L.G.; Bran, R.A. Education for sustainable development: Evolution and perspectives: A bibliometric review of research, 1992–2018. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Pham, H.H.; Dong, T.K.T.; Vuong, Q.H.; Luong, D.H.; Nguyen, T.T.; Dinh, V.H.; Ho, M.T. A bibliometric review of research on international student mobilities in Asia with Scopus dataset between 1984 and 2019. Scientometrics 2021, 126, 5201–5224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Thukral, S.; Jain, A. Unveiling contemporary dimensions in the internationalisation of family firms through bibliometric analysis and thematic analysis. Rev. Int. Bus. Strategy 2021, 31, 507–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Fauzi, M.A. Knowledge hiding behavior in higher education institutions: A scientometric analysis and systematic literature review approach. J. Knowl. Manag. 2022; Ahead of print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Kim, H.; So, K.K.F. Two decades of customer experience research in hospitality and tourism: A bibliometric analysis and thematic content analysis. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2022, 100, 103082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Merton, R.K. The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 1973. [Google Scholar]
  38. Richard, J.; Pillemer, D.B.; Light, R.J. Summing Up: The Science of Reviewing Research; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Ordanini, A.; Rubera, G.; DeFillippi, R. The many moods of inter-organizational imitation: A critical review. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2008, 10, 375–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Rousseau, R. Forgotten founder of bibliometrics. Nature 2014, 510, 218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Schaer, P. Applied informetrics for digital libraries: An overview of foundations, problems and current approaches. Hist. Soc. Res. 2013, 38, 267–281. [Google Scholar]
  42. Kokol, P.; Vošner, H.B. Historical, descriptive and exploratory analysis of application of bibliometrics in nursing research. Nurs. Outlook 2019, 67, 680–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Li, C.; Wu, K.; Wu, J. A bibliometric analysis of research on haze during 2000–2016. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2017, 24, 24733–24742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Li, X.; Ma, E.; Qu, H. Knowledge mapping of hospitality research − A visual analysis using CiteSpace. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2017, 60, 77–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Paul, J.; Benito, G.R. A review of research on outward foreign direct investment from emerging countries, including China: What do we know, how do we know and where should we be heading? Asia Pac. Bus. Rev. 2018, 24, 90–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Hao, A.W.; Paul, J.; Trott, S.; Guo, C.; Wu, H.H. Two decades of research on nation branding: A review and future research agenda. Int. Mark. Rev. 2019, 38, 46–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Pattnaik, D.; Hassan, M.K.; Kumar, S.; Paul, J. Trade credit research before and after the global financial crisis of 2008—A bibliometric overview. Res. Int. Bus. Financ. 2020, 54, 101287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Aria, M.; Cuccurullo, C. Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J. Informetr. 2017, 11, 959–975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Martínez-López, F.J.; Merigó, J.M.; Valenzuela-Fernández, L.; Nicolás, C. Fifty years of the European Journal of Marketing: A bibliometric analysis. Eur. J. Mark. 2018, 52, 439–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Donthu, N.; Kumar, S.; Pattnaik, D. Forty-five years of Journal of Business Research: A bibliometric analysis. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 109, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Goyal, K.; Kumar, S. Financial literacy: A systematic review and bibliometric analysis. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2021, 45, 80–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Hsieh, P.N.; Chang, P.L. An assessment of world-wide research productivity in production and operations management. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2009, 120, 540–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Ozturk, I.; Acaravci, A. Electricity consumption and real GDP causality nexus: Evidence from ARDL bounds testing approach for 11 MENA countries. Appl. Energy 2011, 88, 2885–2892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Tugcu, C.T.; Ozturk, I.; Aslan, A. Renewable and non-renewable energy consumption and economic growth relationship revisited: Evidence from G7 countries. Energy Econ. 2012, 34, 1942–1950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Soytas, U.; Sari, R. Energy consumption and GDP: Causality relationship in G-7 countries and emerging markets. Energy Econ. 2003, 25, 33–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Oguz, O.C.A.L.; Ozturk, I.; Aslan, A. Coal consumption and economic growth in Turkey. Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 2013, 3, 193–198. [Google Scholar]
  57. Sinha, A. Modeling energy efficiency and economic growth: Evidences from India. Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 2015, 5, 96–104. [Google Scholar]
  58. Apergis, N.; Danuletiu, D.C. Renewable energy and economic growth: Evidence from the sign of panel long-run causality. Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 2014, 4, 578–587. [Google Scholar]
  59. Apergis, N.; Payne, J.E. Renewable energy consumption and growth in Eurasia. Energy Econ. 2010, 32, 1392–1397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Bozkurt, C.; Destek, M.A. Renewable energy and sustainable development nexus in selected OECD countries. Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 2015, 5, 507–514. [Google Scholar]
  61. Bilgili, F.; Koçak, E.; Bulut, Ü.; Kuşkaya, S. Can biomass energy be an efficient policy tool for sustainable development? Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 71, 830–845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Song, C. Global challenges and strategies for control, conversion and utilization of CO2 for sustainable development involving energy, catalysis, adsorption and chemical processing. Catal. Today 2006, 115, 2–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Gielen, D.; Boshell, F.; Saygin, D.; Bazilian, M.D.; Wagner, N.; Gorini, R. The role of renewable energy in the global energy transformation. Energy Strategy Rev. 2019, 24, 38–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Wang, W.; Luo, Q.; Li, B.; Wei, X.; Li, L.; Yang, Z. Recent progress in redox flow battery research and development. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2013, 23, 970–986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Dunn, S. Hydrogen futures: Toward a sustainable energy system. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2002, 27, 235–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Kuhl, K.P.; Hatsukade, T.; Cave, E.R.; Abram, D.N.; Kibsgaard, J.; Jaramillo, T.F. Electrocatalytic conversion of carbon dioxide to methane and methanol on transition metal surfaces. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2014, 136, 14107–14113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Olah, G.A.; Prakash, G.S.; Goeppert, A. Anthropogenic chemical carbon cycle for a sustainable future. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2011, 133, 12881–12898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Lund, H. Renewable energy strategies for sustainable development. Energy 2007, 32, 912–919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Devine-Wright, P. Rethinking NIMBYism: The role of place attachment and place identity in explaining place-protective action. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2009, 19, 426–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. McLaughlin, S.B.; Kszos, L.A. Development of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) as a bioenergy feedstock in the United States. Biomass Bioenergy 2005, 28, 515–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Ursua, A.; Gandia, L.M.; Sanchis, P. Hydrogen production from water electrolysis: Current status and future trends. Proc. IEEE 2011, 100, 410–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Bekun, F.V.; Alola, A.A.; Sarkodie, S.A. Toward a sustainable environment: Nexus between CO2 emissions, resource rent, renewable and nonrenewable energy in 16-EU countries. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 657, 1023–1029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Alola, A.A.; Bekun, F.V.; Sarkodie, S.A. Dynamic impact of trade policy, economic growth, fertility rate, renewable and non-renewable energy consumption on ecological footprint in Europe. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 685, 702–709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Sarkodie, S.A.; Strezov, V. Effect of foreign direct investments, economic development and energy consumption on greenhouse gas emissions in developing countries. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 646, 862–871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Zafar, M.W.; Shahbaz, M.; Hou, F.; Sinha, A. From nonrenewable to renewable energy and its impact on economic growth: The role of research & development expenditures in Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation countries. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 212, 1166–1178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Danish, K.; Ulucak, R.; Khan, S.U.D. Determinants of the ecological footprint: Role of renewable energy, natural resources, and urbanization. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020, 54, 101996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Khan, Z.; Ali, S.; Umar, M.; Kirikkaleli, D.; Jiao, Z. Consumption-based carbon emissions and international trade in G7 countries: The role of environmental innovation and renewable energy. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 730, 138945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Inglesi-Lotz, R. The impact of renewable energy consumption to economic growth: A panel data application. Energy Econ. 2016, 53, 58–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Kuznets, S.; Noris, P. What was true about monarchy more than government [because] the mass of mankind understand it and they hardly anywhere in the world understand any other. Am. Econ. Rev. 1955, 45, 1–28. [Google Scholar]
  80. Dogan, E.; Turkekul, B. CO2 emissions, real output, energy consumption, trade, urbanization and financial development: Testing the EKC hypothesis for the USA. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2016, 23, 1203–1213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Pao, H.T.; Tsai, C.M. Multivariate Granger causality between CO2 emissions, energy consumption, FDI (foreign direct investment) and GDP (gross domestic product): Evidence from a panel of BRIC (Brazil, Russian Federation, India, and China) countries. Energy 2011, 36, 685–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Dincer, I. Renewable energy and sustainable development: A crucial review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2000, 4, 157–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Wüstenhagen, R.; Wolsink, M.; Bürer, M.J. Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept. Energy Policy 2007, 35, 2683–2691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  84. Walker, G.; Devine-Wright, P. Community renewable energy: What should it mean? Energy Policy 2008, 36, 497–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Engle, R.F.; Granger, C.W. Co-integration and error correction: Representation, estimation, and testing. Econom. J. Econom. Soc. 1987, 55, 251–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Grossman, G.M.; Krueger, A.B. Economic growth and the environment. Q. J. Econ. 1995, 110, 353–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  87. Balsalobre-Lorente, D.; Shahbaz, M.; Roubaud, D.; Farhani, S. How economic growth, renewable electricity and natural resources contribute to CO2 emissions? Energy Policy 2018, 113, 356–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  88. Bilgili, F.; Koçak, E.; Bulut, Ü. The dynamic impact of renewable energy consumption on CO2 emissions: A revisited Environmental Kuznets Curve approach. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 54, 838–845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Grossman, G.M.; Helpman, E. Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  90. Destek, M.A.; Sinha, A. Renewable, non-renewable energy consumption, economic growth, trade openness and ecological footprint: Evidence from organisation for economic co-operation and development countries. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 242, 118537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Pesaran, M.H.; Shin, Y.; Smith, R.J. Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. J. Appl. Econom. 2001, 16, 289–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Danish, K.; Baloch, M.A.; Mahmood, N.; Zhang, J.W. Effect of natural resources, renewable energy and economic development on CO2 emissions in BRICS countries. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 678, 632–638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Shahbaz, M.; Nasir, M.A.; Roubaud, D. Environmental degradation in France: The effects of FDI, financial development, and energy innovations. Energy Econ. 2018, 74, 843–857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  94. Shahbaz, M.; Hye, Q.M.A.; Tiwari, A.K.; Leitão, N.C. Economic growth, energy consumption, financial development, international trade and CO2 emissions in Indonesia. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013, 25, 109–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  95. Chen, Y.; Wang, Z.; Zhong, Z. CO2 emissions, economic growth, renewable and non-renewable energy production and foreign trade in China. Renew. Energy 2019, 131, 208–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Destek, M.A.; Sarkodie, S.A. Investigation of environmental Kuznets curve for ecological footprint: The role of energy and financial development. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 650, 2483–2489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Shahbaz, M.; Van Hoang, T.H.; Mahalik, M.K.; Roubaud, D. Energy consumption, financial development and economic growth in India: New evidence from a nonlinear and asymmetric analysis. Energy Econ. 2017, 63, 199–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  98. Dogan, E.; Seker, F. Determinants of CO2 emissions in the European Union: The role of renewable and non-renewable energy. Renew. Energy 2016, 94, 429–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Charfeddine, L.; Kahia, M. Impact of renewable energy consumption and financial development on CO2 emissions and economic growth in the MENA region: A panel vector autoregressive (PVAR) analysis. Renew. Energy 2019, 139, 198–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Pata, U.K. Renewable energy consumption, urbanization, financial development, income and CO2 emissions in Turkey: Testing EKC hypothesis with structural breaks. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 187, 770–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Phillips, P.C.; Perron, P. Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika 1988, 75, 335–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Adedoyin, F.F.; Gumede, M.I.; Bekun, F.V.; Etokakpan, M.U.; Balsalobre-Lorente, D. Modelling coal rent, economic growth and CO2 emissions: Does regulatory quality matter in BRICS economies? Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 710, 136284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Dickey, D.A.; Fuller, W.A. Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1979, 74, 427–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Adebayo, T.S.; Kirikkaleli, D. Impact of renewable energy consumption, globalization, and technological innovation on environmental degradation in Japan: Application of wavelet tools. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2021, 23, 16057–16082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Im, K.S.; Pesaran, M.H.; Shin, Y. Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. J. Econom. 2003, 115, 53–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Pedroni, P. Panel cointegration: Asymptotic and finite sample properties of pooled time series tests with an application to the PPP hypothesis. Econom. Theory 2004, 20, 597–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  107. Apergis, N.; Payne, J.E. Renewable energy consumption and economic growth: Evidence from a panel of OECD countries. Energy Policy 2010, 38, 656–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Pedroni, P. Critical values for cointegration tests in heterogeneous panels with multiple regressors. Oxf. Bull. Econ. Stat. 1999, 61, 653–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Levin, A.; Lin, C.F.; Chu, C.S.J. Unit root tests in panel data: Asymptotic and finite-sample properties. J. Econom. 2002, 108, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Pesaran, M.H.; Shin, Y.; Smith, R.P. Pooled mean group estimation of dynamic heterogeneous panels. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1999, 94, 621–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Kao, C. Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data. J. Econom. 1999, 90, 1–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Bhattacharya, M.; Paramati, S.R.; Ozturk, I.; Bhattacharya, S. The effect of renewable energy consumption on economic growth: Evidence from top 38 countries. Appl. Energy 2016, 162, 733–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Pesaran, M.H. A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J. Appl. Econom. 2007, 22, 265–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  114. Dumitrescu, E.I.; Hurlin, C. Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Econ. Model. 2012, 29, 1450–1460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  115. Pesaran, M.H. General diagnostic tests for cross-sectional dependence in panels. Empir. Econ. 2021, 60, 13–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Westerlund, J. Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxf. Bull. Econ. Stat. 2007, 69, 709–748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  117. Breusch, T.S.; Pagan, A.R. The Lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. Rev. Econ. Stud. 1980, 47, 239–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Alvarez-Herranz, A.; Balsalobre-Lorente, D.; Shahbaz, M.; Cantos, J.M. Energy innovation and renewable energy consumption in the correction of air pollution levels. Energy Policy 2017, 105, 386–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Pesaran, M.H.; Yamagata, T. Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. J. Econom. 2008, 142, 50–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  120. Callon, M.; Courtial, J.P.; Laville, F. Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemistry. Scientometrics 1991, 22, 155–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Cobo, M.J.; López-Herrera, A.G.; Herrera-Viedma, E.; Herrera, F. An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the Fuzzy Sets Theory field. J. Informetr. 2011, 5, 146–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Grivel, L.; Mutschke, P.; Polanco, X. Thematic mapping on bibliographic databases by cluster analysis: A description of the SDOC environment with SOLIS. J. Knowl. Organ. 1995, 22, 70–77. [Google Scholar]
  123. Nasir, A.; Shaukat, K.; Hameed, I.A.; Luo, S.; Alam, T.M.; Iqbal, F. A bibliometric analysis of corona pandemic in social sciences: A review of influential aspects and conceptual structure. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 133377–133402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Rejeb, A.; Rejeb, K.; Abdollahi, A.; Treiblmaier, H. The big picture on Instagram research: Insights from a bibliometric analysis. Telemat. Inform. 2022, 73, 101876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Claver-Cortés, E.; Marco-Lajara, B.; Sánchez-García, E.; Seva-Larrosa, P.; Manresa-Marhuenda, E.; Ruiz-Fernández, L.; Poveda-Pareja, E. A Literature Review on the Effect of Industrial Clusters and the Absorptive Capacity on Innovation. Int. J. Ind. Manuf. Eng. 2020, 14, 494–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Sánchez-García, E. Aglomeración Industrial, Capital Social y Capacidad de Absorción Como Impulsores del Desempeño Innovador y Empresarial: Una Aplicación al Sector de Suministro de Energía eléctrica, Gas, Vapor y Aire Acondicionado en España. Ph.D. Thesis, Universidad de Alicante, Alicente, Spain, 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Marco-Lajara, B.; Zaragoza-Sáez, P.; Martínez-Falcó, J.; Sánchez-García, E. Green Intellectual Capital in the Spanish Wine Industry. In Innovative Economic, Social, and Environmental Practices for Progressing Future Sustainability, 1st ed.; Marco-Lajara, B., Zaragoza-Sáez, P., Martínez-Falcó, J., Sánchez-García, E., Eds.; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2022; pp. 102–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Pizoń, J.; Cioch, M.; Kański, Ł.; Sánchez-García, E. Cobots implementation in the era of Industry 5.0 using modern business and management solutions. Adv. Sci. Technol. Res. J. 2022, 16, 166–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Marco-Lajara, B.; Zaragoza-Sáez, P.C.; Martínez-Falcó, J.; Sánchez-García, E. Does green intellectual capital affect green innovation performance? Evidence from the Spanish wine industry. Br. Food J. 2022; ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Energies 16 01211 g001 550
Figure 1. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA statement).
Figure 1. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA statement).
Energies 16 01211 g001
Energies 16 01211 g002 550
Figure 2. Evolution of production over time.
Figure 2. Evolution of production over time.
Energies 16 01211 g002
Energies 16 01211 g003 550
Figure 3. Top 10 most important journals in sustainable development and renewable energy.
Figure 3. Top 10 most important journals in sustainable development and renewable energy.
Energies 16 01211 g003
Energies 16 01211 g004 550
Figure 4. Evolution in the number of articles published by the top 3 journals in sustainable development and renewable energy over time.
Figure 4. Evolution in the number of articles published by the top 3 journals in sustainable development and renewable energy over time.
Energies 16 01211 g004
Energies 16 01211 g005 550
Figure 5. Top 10 authors’ production over time.
Figure 5. Top 10 authors’ production over time.
Energies 16 01211 g005
Energies 16 01211 g006 550
Figure 6. Co-occurrence network of keywords.
Figure 6. Co-occurrence network of keywords.
Energies 16 01211 g006
Energies 16 01211 g007 550
Figure 7. Co-citation network.
Figure 7. Co-citation network.
Energies 16 01211 g007
Energies 16 01211 g008 550
Figure 8. Collaboration world map.
Figure 8. Collaboration world map.
Energies 16 01211 g008
Energies 16 01211 g009 550
Figure 9. Thematic map.
Figure 9. Thematic map.
Energies 16 01211 g009
Table
Table 1. Main information about the dataset.
Table 1. Main information about the dataset.
Main Information Data
Sources (Journals, Books, etc.)1665
Documents8349
Annual Growth Rate %6.92%
Document Average Age4.4
Average citations per doc21.68
References328,799
Document contents
Keywords Plus (ID)9447
Author’s Keywords (DE)18,101
Authorship
Authors23,493
Authors of single-authored docs906
Authors collaboration
Single-authored docs1040
Co-Authors per doc3.84
International co-authorships %34.27%
Table
Table 2. Number of articles published by the top 3 journals in sustainable development and renewable energy.
Table 2. Number of articles published by the top 3 journals in sustainable development and renewable energy.
EnergiesSustainabilityJCPTotal
20030011
20040000
20050022
20060022
20070044
20080022
20092035
20100011
20111236
201236312
20130347
201417816
20152151027
20166143454
201711263673
2018274950126
2019424742131
2020797760216
20211319467292
23 November 20221208252254
Total4254223841231
%5.09%5.05%4.60%14.74%
Source: own elaboration. Note: JCP = Journal of Cleaner Production.
Table
Table 3. Ranking of the top 10 most relevant authors.
Table 3. Ranking of the top 10 most relevant authors.
RankAuthorsA.P.MLC AuthorsCitationsRank A.P.AuthorsH-Ind.Rank A.P.
1Ahmad, M.50Alola, A.A.5263Ahmad, M.241
2Bekun, F.V.43Bekun, F.V.5092Alola, A.A.213
3Alola, A.A.36Sarkodie, S.A.42336Bekun, F.V.202
4Streimikiene, D.35Ahmad, M.3131Kaygusuz, K.176
5Zhang, Y.32Sinha, A.30516Sinha, A.1616
6Kaygusuz, K.30Kaygusuz, K.2366Streimikiene, D.164
7Liu, Y.28Sharif, A.21326Adebayo, T.S.1511
8Li, Y.26Lund, H.20450Sharif, A.1526
9Huang, G.H.25Khan Sar19728Zhang, Y.155
10Murshed, M.25Kirikkaleli, D.19417Duic, N.1419
Source: own elaboration. Note: MLC = most local cited; A.P. = articles published; H-ind. = H-index.
Table
Table 4. Ranking of the top 10 most relevant authors based on the number of articles fractioned by the authors involved.
Table 4. Ranking of the top 10 most relevant authors based on the number of articles fractioned by the authors involved.
AuthorsArticlesArticles FractionalizedAuthorsArticlesArticles Fractionalized
Kaygusuz, K.3022.20Ahmad, M.5011.56
Alola, A.A.3613.93Yuksel, I.129.53
Dincer, I.2412.33Khan, I.157.52
Bekun, F.V.4312.29Demirbas, A.87.50
Streimikiene, D.3512.01Kilkis, S.137.13
Source: own elaboration.
Table
Table 5. Most global cited documents.
Table 5. Most global cited documents.
DocumentTCTC per YearNormalized TC
Song, C.S., 2006, Catal Today [62]133178.2917.91
Gielen, D., 2019, Energy Strateg Rev [63]1090272.5042.02
Wang, W., 2013, Adv Funct Mater [64]1035103.5028.28
Dunn, S., 2002, Int J Hydrogen Energ [65]99847.5214.83
Kuhl, K.P., 2014, J Am Chem Soc [66]955106.1127.26
Olah, G.A., 2011, J Am Chem Soc [67]85571.2518.71
Lund, H., 2007, Energy [68]84152.5617.85
Devine-Wright, P., 2009, J Community Appl Soc [69]77255.1416.61
MCLaughlin, S.B., 2005, Biomass Bioenerg [70]76042.2212.37
Ursua, A., 2012, P IEEE [71]71965.3623.20
Source: own elaboration. Note: TC = total citations.
Table
Table 6. Most local cited documents.
Table 6. Most local cited documents.
DocumentYearLCGCLC/GC RatioNLCNGC
Bekun, F.V., 2019, Sci Total Environ [72]201911755621.04%46.4021.43
Gielen, D., 2019, Energy Strateg Rev [63]20199310908.53%36.8842.02
Alola, A.A., 2019, Sci Total Environ [73]20198931827.99%35.2912.26
Lund, H., 2007, Energy [68]2007778419.16%23.1917.85
Sarkodie, S.A., 2019, Sci Total Environ [74]20197748415.91%30.5418.66
Bhattacharya, M., 2017, Renew Energ [17]20177031522.22%39.4611.08
Zafar, M.W., 2019, J Clean Prod [75]20196824327.98%26.979.37
Danis, K., 2020, Sustain Cities Soc [76]20206733520.00%30.7017.38
Khan, Z., 2020, Sci Total Environ [77]20206425025.60%29.3312.97
Inglesi-Lotz, R., 2016, Energ Econ [78]20165734216.67%37.0010.87
Source: own elaboration. Note: LC = local citations; GL = global citations; NLC = normalized local citations; NGC = normalized global citations.
Table
Table 7. Ranking of the top 10 most relevant affiliations.
Table 7. Ranking of the top 10 most relevant affiliations.
RankAffiliationsLocation (Country)Articles
1North China Electric Power UniversityChina157
2Tsinghua UniversityChina85
3Istanbul Gelisim UniversityTurkey82
4Jiangsu UniversityChina78
5Chinese Academy of SciencesChina68
6Beijing Normal UniversityChina64
7Cyprus International UniversityCyprus64
8Islamic Azad UniversityIran64
9King AbdulAziz UniversitySaudi Arabia61
10King Saud UniversitySaudi Arabia61
Source: own elaboration.
Table
Table 8. Top 10 countries by scientific production and by number of citations.
Table 8. Top 10 countries by scientific production and by number of citations.
RankCountryA.P.SCPMCPMCP RatioCountryCitationsA.A.C.Rank by A.P.
1China166199666540.04%China36,91722.231
2USA50236313927.69%USA21,06641.962
3UK40326014335.48%UK12,53231.103
4India3752938221.87%Turkey938327.686
5Italy3392479227.14%Germany770424.697
6Turkey3392766318.58%Australia705232.8010
7Germany3122288426.92%Italy687420.285
8Poland2702195118.89%Spain467018.399
9Spain2541827228.35%India464112.384
10Australia21511510046.51%Denmark462158.4927
Source: own elaboration. Notes: A.P. = articles published; SCP = intra-country collaboration; MCP = multi-country collaboration; AAC = average article citations.
Table
Table 9. Most frequent keywords.
Table 9. Most frequent keywords.
RankWordsOccur.RankWordsOccur.
1Renewable energy164611Energy policy180
2Sustainable development118712Solar energy173
3Sustainability54913China172
4Renewable energy sources25314Energy consumption163
5Economic growth25215Energy transition155
6Energy25016Sustainable development goals151
7Climate change24217Sustainable energy137
8Energy efficiency22518Wind energy130
9Biomass20919Environment114
10CO2 emissions19220Optimization113
Source: own elaboration. Note: Occur.: occurrences.
Table
Table 10. Co-occurrence network: betweenness centrality.
Table 10. Co-occurrence network: betweenness centrality.
NodeCtBtw. Centr.NodeCtBtw. Centr.
Economic growth112.80735033Hydrogen21.99254828
CO2 emissions13.636313664Renewable energies20.19710793
Energy consumption11.954041469Hydropower20.648958365
Carbon emissions10.322238652Turkey20.698360254
Renewable energy consumption10.292130003Life cycle assessment20.397351068
Financial development10.42558991Electricity21.035292634
Environmental sustainability10.414799319Circular economy20.282127878
Ecological footprint11.323089645Africa20.915252997
Renewable energy2340.6036557Innovation20.22587387
Sustainable development2216.4577325Energy security20.15221816
Sustainability247.64563016Rural electrification20.042105175
Renewable energy sources22.658386943Energy planning20.073572621
Energy213.66376645European union21.68437152
Climate change26.995001929Renewables20.939566896
Energy efficiency23.427861349Wind power20.196424031
Energy policy24.88015071Environmental impact20.244632844
Solar energy23.527386642Photovoltaic20.200939003
China22.475363939Development20.09408488
Energy transition22.612772585India20.234933131
Sustainable development goals22.595185353Biomass37.293564981
Sustainable energy21.799810863Bioenergy31.222581308
Wind energy20.956151449Biofuels31.053647224
Environment21.115476119Biogas30.931960257
Optimization21.122092716Biofuel30.105481429
Energy storage20.271778096Biodiesel30.153286807
Source: own elaboration. Note: Ct: cluster.
Table
Table 11. Co-citation network.
Table 11. Co-citation network.
NodeClusterBtw CentralityNodeClusterBtw Centrality
Kuznets, S., 1955 [79]114.21712026Dogan, E., 2016-1 [80]113.0139325
Pao, H.T., 2011 [81]19.160808946Dincer, I., 2000 [82]10.264321447
Wüstenhagen, R., 2007 [83]10Walker, G., 2008 [84]10
Engle, R.F., 1987 [85]29.971516542Bekun, F.V., 2019 [72]25.736036126
Grossman, G.M., 1995 [86]22.88732154Alola, A.A., 2019 [73]22.849657155
Balsalobre-Lorente, D., 2018 [87]22.52550982Bilgili, F., 2016 [88]22.215158742
Grossman, G.M., 1993 [89]22.020116395Destek, M.A., 2020 [90]21.800078263
Sarkodie, S.A., 2019 [74]21.763636178Pesaran, M.H., 2001 [91]21.502480292
Danish, K., 2019 [92]21.464169468Shahbaz, M., 2018 [93]21.311842541
Shahbaz, M., 2013 [94]21.28944021Chen, Y.L., 2019 [95]21.189045827
Destek, M.A., 2019 [96]21.187019505Shahbaz, M., 2017 [97]21.017568693
Dogan, E., 2016-2 [98]20.898444104Charfeddine, L., 2019 [99]20.783289169
Pata, U.K., 2018 [100]20.747061711Phillips, P.C.B., 1988 [101]20.470699809
Adedoyin, F.F., 2020 [102]20.4107689Dickey, D.A., 1979 [103]20.357834934
Adebayo, T.S., 2021 [104]20.273711091Im, K.S., 2003 [105]335.9971932
Pedroni, P., 2004 [106]328.6887552Apergis, N., 2010 [107]327.30118952
Pedroni, P., 1999 [108]317.84502662Levin, A., 2002 [109]317.62408762
Pesaran, M.H., 1999 [110]311.06348275Kao, C., 1999 [111]38.917242166
Bhattacharya, M., 2016 [112]38.071007742Gielen, D., 2019 [63]30.591680293
Pesaran, M.H., 2007 [113]468.2672215Dumitrescu, E.I., 2012 [114]454.91456586
Pesaran, M.H., 2021 [115]437.72237576Westerlund, J., 2007 [116]434.60157964
Breusch, T.S., 1980 [117]419.15446075Alvarez-Herranz, A., 2017 [118]413.46028189
Pesaran, M.H., 2008 [119]45.846887802
Source: own elaboration.
Table
Table 12. Frequency of the most collaborative entities in sustainable development and renewable energy.
Table 12. Frequency of the most collaborative entities in sustainable development and renewable energy.
FromToFrequencyFromToFrequency
ChinaPakistan241TurkeyNigeria34
ChinaUSA156USAGermany34
ChinaUK102UKNetherlands32
ChinaTurkey100UKPakistan32
ChinaCanada74ChinaBangladesh30
ChinaAustralia71ChinaKorea30
PakistanSaudi Arabia68ChinaSweden29
ChinaMalaysia66MalaysiaSaudi Arabia29
ChinaIndia64UKItaly29
ChinaSaudi Arabia58UKTurkey29
ChinaJapan51ChinaItaly28
TurkeyRussia51ChinaFrance27
PakistanMalaysia50USACanada27
TurkeyPakistan50USAIndia27
UKGermany47IndiaPakistan26
USAUK46ChinaIran25
ChinaVietnam45ChinaNetherlands25
IndiaSaudi Arabia39GermanyNetherlands25
UKSpain35USAItaly25
USAAustralia35ChinaGermany24
Source: own elaboration.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

García-Lillo, F.; Sánchez-García, E.; Marco-Lajara, B.; Seva-Larrosa, P. Renewable Energies and Sustainable Development: A Bibliometric Overview. Energies 2023, 16, 1211. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/en16031211

AMA Style

García-Lillo F, Sánchez-García E, Marco-Lajara B, Seva-Larrosa P. Renewable Energies and Sustainable Development: A Bibliometric Overview. Energies. 2023; 16(3):1211. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/en16031211

Chicago/Turabian Style

García-Lillo, Francisco, Eduardo Sánchez-García, Bartolomé Marco-Lajara, and Pedro Seva-Larrosa. 2023. "Renewable Energies and Sustainable Development: A Bibliometric Overview" Energies 16, no. 3: 1211. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/en16031211

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop