Next Article in Journal
Schur Complement-Based Infinity Norm Bound for the Inverse of Dashnic-Zusmanovich Type Matrices
Next Article in Special Issue
Application of Multivariate Statistical Techniques as an Indicator of Variability of the Effects of COVID-19 on the Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control
Previous Article in Journal
An Optimal Inequality for the Normal Scalar Curvature in Metallic Riemannian Space Forms
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Trends in Agroforestry Research from 1993 to 2022: A Topic Model Using Latent Dirichlet Allocation and HJ-Biplot

by
Karime Montes-Escobar
1,2,*,
Javier De la Hoz-M
2,3,
Mónica Daniela Barreiro-Linzán
1,
Carolina Fonseca-Restrepo
4,
Miguel Ángel Lapo-Palacios
1,
Douglas Andrés Verduga-Alcívar
1 and
Carlos Alfredo Salas-Macias
5
1
Departamento de Matemáticas y Estadística, Facultad de Ciencias Básicas, Universidad Técnica de Manabí, Portoviejo 130105, Ecuador
2
Department of Statistics, University of Salamanca, 37008 Salamanca, Spain
3
Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad del Magdalena, Santa Marta 470004, Colombia
4
Departamento de Veterinaria, Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Universidad Técnica de Manabí, Portoviejo 130105, Ecuador
5
Carrera de Agronomía, Facultad de Ingeniería Agronómica, Universidad Técnica de Manabí, Portoviejo 130105, Ecuador
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Mathematics 2023, 11(10), 2250; https://doi.org/10.3390/math11102250
Submission received: 7 April 2023 / Revised: 6 May 2023 / Accepted: 9 May 2023 / Published: 11 May 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Multivariate Statistical Analysis and Application)

Abstract

:
Background: There is an immense debate about the factors that could limit the adoption of agroforestry systems. However, one of the most important is the generation of scientific information that supports the viability and benefits of the proposed techniques. Statistical analysis: This work used the Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) modeling method to identify and interpret scientific information on topics in relation to existing categories in a set of documents. It also used the HJ-Biplot method to determine the relationship between the analyzed topics, taking into consideration the years under study. Results: A review of the literature was conducted in this study and a total of 9794 abstracts of scientific articles published between 1993 and 2022 were obtained. The United States, India, Brazil, the United Kingdom, and Germany were the five countries that published the largest number of studies about agroforestry, particularly soil organic carbon, which was the most studied case. The five more frequently studied topics were: soil organic carbon, adoption of agroforestry practices, biodiversity, climatic change global policies, and carbon and climatic change. Conclusion: the LDA and HJ-Biplot statistical methods are useful tools for determining topicality in text analysis in agroforestry and related topics.
MSC:
62-XX; 62-07; 62Pxx; 62P12

1. Introduction

At present, several investigations have shown that there is a high degree of pollution and environmental degradation [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11] in ecosystems, mainly generated by human activities that are focused on meeting the needs of a constantly growing population [12]. Within this conglomerate of activities, it is possible to identify the relentless use of pesticides and chemical synthesis inputs in the agricultural sector, the excessive use of land, the deforestation of forests, the constant change of land use for agricultural exploitation, and the constant emissions generated by the industry that considerably strengthen the greenhouse effect, among others.
Therefore, society has seen the need to generate mechanisms that help mitigate these undesirable effects, leading the world to hold events such as the Rio de Janeiro summit (or the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development) (1992), the Program or Agenda 21, the agreement on climate change and the agreement on biological diversity, the declaration on relative principles of the forest, the World Conference on Social Development (1995), the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (1997), the Millennium Summit in Geneva (2000), the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, Rio +10 (2002), and the annual United Nations Conference on Climate Change (1995), among others, whose objectives are to try, through holistic approaches, to evaluate possible mitigation actions.
As a result of these events, based on scientific research, it has been established that the greatest threat in the medium term is the accumulation of greenhouse gases generated during human activities. In this aspect, the gas that causes the greatest concern, due to its abundance, is CO2 [13,14], which can be stored by forests [15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22] or in the structure of trees in production systems [23,24,25,26,27].
In relation to this concept, and in order to mitigate unwanted effects, the inclusion of trees in productive systems or agroforestry techniques is proposed as an environmentally friendly alternative. While agroforestry research has provided the necessary scientific foundations for it to be considered a sustainable practice, there is still much to be done to efficiently adopt it by producers through extension and decision makers.
Within this order of ideas, there is an immense debate about the factors that could limit the adoption of agroforestry systems; many authors attribute this fact to the uniqueness and complexity of the technology [28]. On this subject, Ref. [29], after reviewing various studies regarding the adoption of agroforestry technology in 21 countries, found that preferences and resource endowments are the most frequent factors. However, it is undeniable that one of the elements that influences the adoption of production systems is the prior generation of scientific information [28,30,31] that supports the feasibility and benefits of the proposed techniques.
In any case, it is important to highlight that the development of research on agroforestry is being highly promoted by governmental and nongovernmental extension agencies that work together with farmers, which is an encouraging forecast for the future. However, the research agenda, until now, has given high priority to some issues and neglected others, which together could generate technologies for the benefit of the earth and its users [32].
In this work, we present a Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) topic modeling method to identify and interpret scientific topics relating to existing topics or categories in a set of documents [33]. Thus, from a collection of documents called the corpus, LDA, based on Bayesian models, generates a probabilistic extension of the latent semantic analysis [33,34]. In addition, the LDA assumes an a priori sparse Dirichlet distribution on the topics in the document using Gibbs sampling [35]. Gibbs is able to determine the topic probabilities of the documents that mix various topics in different proportions. On the other hand, the HJ-Biplot method [36] is proposed in this work to obtain a more precise data evaluation, revealing the existing relationships between the analyzed data.

2. Materials and Methods

The procedure for the topic modeling analysis through Latent Dirichlet Allocation [37] was divided into four stages: (1) search and collection of articles; (2) preprocessing; (3) construction of the LDA model; (4) labeling of topics (Figure 1).

2.1. Data Collection

The search for articles was carried out through Scopus, utilizing the following query: “TITLE-ABS-KEY (agroforestry) AND (EXCLUDE (PUBYEAR, 2024) OR EXCLUDE (PUBYEAR, 2023)) AND (LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, “ar”)) AND (LIMIT-TO (LANGUAGE, “English”))”. We decided to select this database since it is one of the most used by researchers [39]. The inclusion criteria focused on selecting research articles and reviews published in the English language between 1993 and December 2022. The search was conducted on 10 March 2023.
The preliminary database with the documents obtained after executing the search query contained 9966 documents; this initial sample was subjected to a filtering process, where documents that were repeated or misclassified or that contained no abstract were eliminated. The final sample obtained consisted of 9794 documents.
The procedure for the identification of topics through LDA was divided into three stages: (i) preprocessing, (ii) creation of the LDA model, and (iii) labeling topics.

2.2. Preprocessing Texts

Data processing in this part of the study was carried out using LDAShiny [40], an open-source package of the R programming language [41], which contains the development of a tool that provides a web-based graphical user interface to perform a review of the scientific literature under the Bayesian approach of Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) and machine learning algorithms.
To increase the coherence of the topics, each abstract was tokenized using bigrams, which are the combination of consecutive unigrams. Although this process seems trivial, since the text is downloaded to the computer in readable format, it must be converted to lowercase and all punctuation marks, dashes, brackets, numbers, space blanks, and other characters removed. In addition, a standard list of words called “stopwords” was identified and eliminated, since their main function is to make a sentence grammatically correct (i.e., articles and prepositions).

2.3. Creation Model Latent Dirichlet Allocation

Topic models are latent variable models of documents that use correlations between words and latent semantic themes in a collection of documents [42]. This definition assumes that the expected number of topics, k, (i.e., latent variables) must be established a priori. Thus, selecting the right number of topics for a given collection of articles is not trivial. This challenge has been approached in a variety of ways, with the goal of striking a balance between the requirement for a large number of topics to cover all of the documents in the collection and the need for a small number of topics to ensure that the findings are intelligible. Simulations were run with k ranging from 5 to 50 and an inference process, Gibbs sampling [35], with 500 iterations was used. A topic coherence measure [43] was used to determine the quality of the LDA model, which is a measure of a topic model from the standpoint of human interpretability and is considered a more suitable measure than computational metrics such as perplexity [44].

2.4. Labeling Topics

First, a naive labeling algorithm provided by the package textmineR [45] based on bigrams was employed (these naive labels are based on P(bi-gram|topic) − P(bi-gram)). However, because these algorithms have a very limited capacity for understanding the latent meanings of human language, we decided to use manual labeling, which is considered a standard in topic modeling [46]. Two agroforestry professionals, with more than ten years of experience, manually identified the topics using two sources of information: the most common word lists (most likely) and a sample of the titles. Then, they summarized the 10 most-loaded articles.

2.5. Quantitative Indices Used to Analyze the Trend of Topics

We used some quantitative indices proposed by Xiong et al. [38], which were obtained by adding document–topic and topic–word distributions, in order to make the results and findings clear. The description of the indexes is as follows: the distribution of topics over time is obtained by:
θ k y = Σ m y θ m k n y
where m ϵ y represents articles published in a given year, θ m k represents the proportion of the k-th topic in each item, and n y represents the total number of articles published in the year [38].
We used simple regression slopes for each topic, with the year as a dependent variable and the fraction of topics in the corresponding year as the response variable, to make it easier to characterize the topics in terms of their tendency. [33]. The slopes obtained for each topic were classified as positive or negative at a level of statistical significance of 0.01 and were classified as positive or negative trends, respectively.
Additionally, the VOSviewer software [47] was used to generate the co-authorship network, using countries as the unit of analysis, and employing the full counting method. Only countries with at least 20 documents were considered.

2.6. HJ-Biplot

Finally, the HJ-Biplot [36] was used. It is a multivariate statistical technique that allows a graphic representation of the information contained in the rows (individuals) and columns (variables) of a matrix of data [36]. This technique was chosen since it offers a more precise data evaluation, highlighting the relationships between the parts, years, and topics. For this analysis, the Multbiplot software [48] was used, which allowed us to have a fast and easy way to incorporate our tables from a *.xls format.

3. Results

The summary generated included basic statistics about the analyzed dataset; it is presented in Table 1. Documents stemmed from 1564 different journals and were published over the course of three decades. A total of 25,174 authors were involved in the scientific production on agroforestry. Among the papers, 771 were single-authored papers, whereas the overall collaboration index of the sample was 2.61.
Table 2 shows the most influential journals in terms of article count. These journals were distributed in different subject areas, such as environmental science, environmental stewardship, ecosystem services, economic investment for research, policies on sustainable land use, and the participation of entities, specialized policy, etc. The journal with the most published articles was Agroforestry Systems, which contributed about 16% of the documents analyzed.
In terms of the annual number of publications in the evaluated period, we observed an annual growth rate of 7.63%. A low oscillation in the number of publications could be observed in the first decade, while in the last year the number of publications diverged from an exponential trend (Figure 2).
Figure 3 represents the countries that have published the most research on agroforestry in the world. The United States (1817), India (1114), Brazil (947), the United Kingdom (809), Germany (807), and France (638) were the five countries that appeared as the main sources of high-impact research available in the world scientific literature. They were followed by China (629), Indonesia (591), Kenya (587), Australia (464), Canada (456), and finally Spain (451), with a lower percentage of publications. Other countries did not show the same frequency of publications or the same impact.
Figure 4 shows the network of international coauthor relationships among 71 countries, the largest set connected. There are seven colors in Figure 4, indicating that these 71 countries are grouped into five clusters. There is a stronger cooperative relationship between countries in the same cluster than between countries in different clusters. Of course, this does not mean that there is no cooperation between countries in different clusters, but that there may be some common research topics among the countries of the same cluster, which makes their cooperation closer. More frequent connections (represented by the thickness of the line) could be observed between the United States and Brazil.

Topic Modeling Analysis

Figure 5 shows the coherence score for all LDA models that were examined. According to the findings, the LDA model with the best coherence score had 30 themes (k = 30).
The topic distribution from the document θ m was added to calculate the average probability θ k y of all the articles published in a given year and to identify the trends (Figure 6). We found that the probabilities of some topics increased gradually over time (color red); these topics were t_3 (raw materials production), t_11 (shade tree), t_12 (land cover), t_16 (adoption of agroforestry practices), t_17 (remote sensors), t_19 (fungal communities), t_21 (carbon and climatic change), t_22 (ecosystem services), t_24 (secondary forests), t_27 (biodiversity), t_28 (soil organic carbon), and t_29 (cork oak). Topics that had a decreasing behavior were (color blue): t_1 (tree species), t_2 (leaf litter), t_10 (alley cropping), t_14 (silvopastoral systems), t_15 (fine root), t_20 (soil water), t_23 (soil fertility), t_26 (production systems), and t_30 (aboveground biomass). The topics where there was no observed trend (color black) were: t_4 (intercrop systems), t_5 (rubber plantations), t_6 (food security), t_7 (fruit tree), t_8 (local knowledge), t_9 (agroforestry systems), t_13 (climatic change global policies), and t_25 (plant species).
Our study found six groups through cluster analysis (Figure 7). The topics: t_16 (adoption of agroforestry practices), t_6 (food security), t_13 (climatic change global policies), t_28 (soil organic carbon), and t_27 (biodiversity) of group six obtained higher probability proportions for the years 1993 and 2022; the topics t_10 (alley cropping), t_23 (soil fertility), t_15 (fine root), t_1 (tree species), and t_30 (aboveground biomass) of group five obtained higher probability proportions for the years 1993 and 2008. The remaining topics had low probability statistics during the years of study.
In Table 3, it is possible to observe the topic names that were generated from the words with the highest number of repetitions. Words were ranked for relevance. After the searches within the articles according to each topic, the 20 words with the highest number of repetitions generated the prevalence rankings. The five main ones were: t_28 (soil organic carbon), t_16 (adoption of agroforestry practices), t_27 (biodiversity), t_13 (climatic change global policies), and t_4 (carbon and climatic change).
Our study also carried out the analysis with the LDA method, where the relationships between topics were observed. The existence of a possible relationship was obtained by statistical analysis of PC according to the matrix generated in the LDA model (Figure 8).
The grouping of topics and years was analyzed using the multivariate analysis method HJ-Biplot, using the theta matrix from the results, which was composed of probability values. First and foremost, a high quality of representation can be observed in the initial factorial plane, with 71.39% of the inertia being effectively absorbed and explained (Figure 9).
The topics t_14 (silvopastoral systems) and t_18 (genetic diversity) had greater relevance in the years 1993, 1994, and 1995. The topics: t_10 (alley cropping), t_23 (soil fertility), t_30 (aboveground biomass), t_20 (soil water), t_26 (production systems), t_15 (fine root), t_1 (tree species), t_7 (fruit tree), t_4 (intercrop systems), t_2 (leaf litter), t_29 (cork oak), and t_25 (plant species) had greater relevance in the years 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2010.
The topics: t_28 (soil organic carbon), t_27 (biodiversity), t_11 (shade tree), t_19 (fungal communities), t_17 (remote sensors), and t_12 (land cover) had greater relevance in the years 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015. Finally, in the years 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022, the investigation of the topics t_22 (ecosystem services), t_21 (carbon and climatic change), t_3 (raw materials production), t_24 (secondary forests), t_9 (agroforestry systems), t_16 (adoption of agroforestry practices), t_8 (local knowledge), t_6 (food security), and t_13 (climatic change global policies) was the most relevant in the last seven years.

4. Discussion

The results of this study were consistent with those established by [49], who mentioned the United States, India, Germany, Brazil, Kenya, France, Australia, and the United Kingdom as countries with the highest interest in agroforestry research. Furthermore, some of the most common topics in this study were consistent with this 2023 analysis.
It was possible to notice a gradual increase in interest in research on agroforestry issues; proof of this was the increase over time in the number of publications made, which went from 120 in 1993 to 1011 in 2022, with a total of 145 countries involved in the 9794 articles that made up the study sample. However, there could be other factors with significant impact, such as economic investment for research, policies on sustainable land use, and the participation of entities specialized in agroforestry. In this regard, the United States, for example, has key policies to promote agroforestry; this is the case of the USDA’s National Agroforestry Center, which seeks to promote agroforestry science and its adoption. Similarly, Europe has included policies aimed at agroforestry issues in the common agricultural policy (CAP).
In this same sense, multistakeholder partnerships and agroforestry working groups and associations play extremely important roles in the generation and promotion of agroforestry science at different scales [50]. Considering the results of this study, countries such as India (which for the last 25 years has had a solid track record in agricultural and forestry research [51]), which has the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, the Indian Society of Agroforestry, and currently has the landmark national agroforestry policy that provides a framework designed to improve agricultural livelihoods; Germany that has the German Association for Agroforestry (DEFAF); France that has the French Agroforestry Association; Kenya that has the headquarters of World Agroforestry (ICRAF) are making efforts to develop agroforestry practices and economic growth, alleviate poverty, and make significant contributions in terms of environmental quality.
In this way, agroforestry is defined as a form of land use where it is possible to increase productivity, diversify production, and improve sustainability [52]. It is widely known as an agricultural production system where trees are grown together with annual crops and/or with animals, resulting in better complementary relationships between the components and an increase in multiple uses [53]. Additionally, it can provide high quality habitats, which is of great importance for the conservation of biodiversity. It can provide multiple alternatives for the commercialization of products, cushioning, in some cases, market fluctuations. The high levels of biodiversity also provide better ecological services, increasing local functions such as pest control [54] and pollination [55,56] and can improve soil fertility and reduce erosion [57,58].
Therefore, the relationship that existed between the results of the relevance analysis of the words used in the articles that made up the corpus under study was remarkable; the ten words that were the most relevant were: tree, system, soil, agroforestry, species, forest, crop, production, and land. In addition, it was possible to determine that there were topics that were gaining importance during the analysis period in the investigations; these being: soil organic carbon, adoption of agroforestry practices, biodiversity, climatic change global policies, carbon and climatic change, and food security.

5. Conclusions

This study provides relevant information about the evolution of science around the agroforestry topic over time and by country, providing a theoretical basis for the development of the discipline and could significantly contribute to decision making by researchers and research centers linked to the sector.
We found that the countries with the highest number of publications in agroforestry are the United States, India, Brazil, the United Kingdom, and Germany. Although there is generally a broad network of international cooperation, the United States and Brazil have more frequent connections in terms of international co-authorship relationships in the field of agroforestry.
Based on the results, we can conclude that there are certain topics related to raw material production, soil cover, adoption of agroforestry practices, biodiversity, and climate change that have gained importance over time, while other topics related to soil fertility, aerial biomass, and tree species have decreased in relevance. Bootstrap analysis also identified groups of topics that had higher probabilities in certain years, suggesting that certain topics may have been more relevant at certain times. Adoption of agroforestry practices, food security, global climate change policies, organic soil carbon, and biodiversity appear to be important topics both in 1993 and 2022, while topics such as alley cropping, soil fertility, fine roots, tree species, and aerial biomass appear to have been more relevant in 1993 and 2008. Overall, these results may be useful in identifying trends and areas of interest in agroforestry research, as well as guiding future research and policies related to agroforestry and sustainable land management.
Finally, the LDA method employed in this review categorized each subject based on subjective observations of high probability words and therefore showed effectiveness in generating responses about the most common topics studied in agroforestry. In contrast, the HJ-Biplot method was able to group topics by year, identifying which agroforestry topics were most relevant and for which years.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, K.M.-E. and C.A.S.-M.; methodology, K.M.-E. and J.D.l.H.-M.; software, K.M.-E. and J.D.l.H.-M.; validation, K.M.-E. and M.D.B.-L.; formal analysis, K.M.-E., J.D.l.H.-M. and C.A.S.-M.; investigation, K.M.-E.; resources, C.F.-R. and M.Á.L.-P.; data curation, K.M.-E. and J.D.l.H.-M.; writing—original draft preparation, C.F.-R.; writing—review and editing, M.Á.L.-P.; visualization, K.M.-E. and D.A.V.-A.; supervision, C.A.S.-M.; project administration, K.M.-E. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the Departamento de matemáticas y Estadística. Facultad de Ciencias Básicas, Facultad de Ingeniería Agronómica, Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Departamento de Veterinaria, Portoviejo, Manabí, Ecuador and Universidad del Magdalena, Santa Marta, Colombia.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Ayub, M.A.; Usman, M.; Faiz, T.; Umair, M.; Haq, M.A.U.; Rizwan, M.; Ali, S.; Rehman, M.Z.U. Restoration of Degraded Soil for Sustainable Agriculture. In Soil Health Restoration and Management; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 31–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Carson, R. Silent Spring 1962; Mariner Books Classics: New York, NY, USA, 2009; Available online: https://www.amazon.com/Silent-Spring-Rachel-Carson/dp/0618249060 (accessed on 22 February 2023).
  3. Das, S.; Aria, A.; Cheng, J.-O.; Souissi, S.; Hwang, J.-S.; Ko, F.-C. Occurrence and distribution of anthropogenic persistent organic pollutants in coastal sediments and mud shrimps from the wetland of central Taiwan. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0227367. [Google Scholar]
  4. Dou, R.; Sun, J.; Deng, F.; Wang, P.; Zhou, H.; Wei, Z.; Chen, M.; He, Z.; Lai, M.; Ye, T.; et al. Contamination of pyrethroids and atrazine in greenhouse and open-field agricultural soils in China. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 701, 134916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Litalien, A.; Zeeb, B. Curing the earth: A review of anthropogenic soil salinization and plant-based strategies for sustainable mitigation. Sci. Total. Environ. 2020, 698, 134235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Panwar, S. Vulnerability of Himalayan springs to climate change and anthropogenic impact: A review. J. Mt. Sci. 2020, 17, 117–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Sanaullah, M.; Usman, M.; Wakeel, A.; Alam Cheema, S.; Ashraf, I.; Farooq, M. Terrestrial ecosystem functioning affected by agricultural management systems: A review. Soil Tillage Res. 2020, 196, 104464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ramirez-Llodra, E. Deep-Sea Ecosystems: Biodiversity and Anthropogenic Impacts. In The Law of the Seabed; Brill Nijhoff: Leiden, Belgium, 2020; pp. 36–60. [Google Scholar]
  9. Rivera-Rivera, D.M.; Escobedo-Urías, D.C.; Jonathan, M.P.; Sujitha, S.B.; Chidambaram, S. Evidence of natural and anthropogenic impacts on rainwater trace metal geochemistry in central Mexico: A statistical approach. Water 2020, 12, 192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Yang, L.; Zhou, Y.; Shi, B.; Meng, J.; He, B.; Yang, H.; Yoon, S.J.; Kim, T.; Kwon, B.-O.; Khim, J.S.; et al. Anthropogenic impacts on the contamination of pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) in the coastal environments of the Yellow and Bohai seas. Environ. Int. 2020, 135, 105306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Wu, J.; Kurosaki, Y.; Du, C. Evaluation of climatic and anthropogenic impacts on dust erodibility: A case study in Xilingol Grassland, China. Sustainability 2020, 12, 629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Winch, D.; James, P. An Essay on the Principle of Population: Or, a View of Its Past and Present Effects on Human Happiness: With an Inquiry into Our Prospects Respecting the Future Removal or Mitigation of the Evils Which It Occasions; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1992. [Google Scholar]
  13. Peters, G.P.; Andrew, R.M.; Canadell, J.G.; Friedlingstein, P.; Jackson, R.B.; Korsbakken, J.I.; Le Quéré, C.; Peregon, A. Carbon dioxide emissions continue to grow amidst slowly emerging climate policies. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2020, 10, 3–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Sadatshojaie, A.; Rahimpour, M.R. CO2 emission and air pollution (volatile organic compounds, etc.)-related problems causing climate change. Curr. Trends Future Dev. (Bio-) Membr. Membr. Environ. Appl. 2020, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Canadell, J.G.; Jackson, R.B.; Ciais, P.; Besnard, S.; Yao, Y.; Yue, C.; Carvalhais, N.; Poulter, B.; Pugh, T.; Chave, J.; et al. The global carbon balance of forests based on flux towers and forest age data. In AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts; American Geophysical Union: Washington, DC, USA, 2019; p. B34D-01. Available online: https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019AGUFM.B34D..01C/abstract (accessed on 22 February 2023).
  16. Chambers, J.Q.; Higuchi, N.; Tribuzy, E.S.; Trumbore, S.E. ‘Carbon sink for a century. Nature 2001, 410, 429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Erb, K.-H.; Kastner, T.; Luyssaert, S.; Houghton, R.A.; Kuemmerle, T.; Olofsson, P.; Haberl, H. Bias in the attribution of forest carbon sinks. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2013, 3, 854–856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Huang, L.; Zhou, M.; Lv, J.; Chen, K. Trends in global research in forest carbon sequestration: A bibliometric analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 252, 119908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Pan, Y.; Birdsey, R.A.; Fang, J.; Houghton, R.; Kauppi, P.E.; Kurz, W.A.; Phillips, O.L.; Shvidenko, A.; Lewis, S.L.; Canadell, J.G.; et al. A Large and Persistent Carbon Sink in the World’s Forests. Science 2011, 333, 988–993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Pugh, T.A.M.; Lindeskog, M.; Smith, B.; Poulter, B.; Arneth, A.; Haverd, V.; Calle, L. Role of forest regrowth in global carbon sink dynamics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2019, 116, 4382–4387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Sedjo, R.A. Temperate forest ecosystems in the global carbon cycle. Ambio 1992, 21, 274–277. [Google Scholar]
  22. Zhu, K.; Song, Y.; Qin, C. Forest age improves understanding of the global carbon sink. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2019, 116, 3962–3964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Birhane, E.; Ahmed, S.; Hailemariam, M.; Negash, M.; Rannestad, M.M.; Norgrove, L. Carbon stock and woody species diversity in homegarden agroforestry along an elevation gradient in southern Ethiopia. Agrofor. Syst. 2020, 94, 1099–1110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Dhyani, S.K.; Ram, A.; Newaj, R.; Handa, A.K.; Dev, I. Agroforestry for carbon sequestration in tropical India. In Carbon Management in Tropical and Sub-Tropical Terrestrial Systems; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Horrillo, A.; Gaspar, P.; Escribano, M. Organic Farming as a Strategy to Reduce Carbon Footprint in Dehesa Agroecosystems: A Case Study Comparing Different Livestock Products. Animals 2020, 10, 162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Ortiz-Ceballos, G.C.; Vargas-Mendoza, M.; Ortiz-Ceballos, A.I.; Briseño, M.M.; Ortiz-Hernández, G. Aboveground Carbon Storage in Coffee Agroecosystems: The Case of the Central Region of the State of Veracruz in Mexico. Agronomy 2020, 10, 382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Sari, R.R.; Saputra, D.D.; Hairiah, K.; Rozendaal, D.M.A.; Roshetko, J.M.; van Noordwijk, M. Gendered Species Preferences Link Tree Diversity and Carbon Stocks in Cacao Agroforest in Southeast Sulawesi, Indonesia. Land 2020, 9, 108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. PSanchez, P.A. Science in agroforestry. Agrofor. Syst. 1995, 30, 5–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Pattanayak, S.K.; Mercer, D.E.; Sills, E.; Yang, J.-C. Taking stock of agroforestry adoption studies. Agrofor. Syst. 2003, 57, 173–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Coe, R.; Sinclair, F.; Barrios, E. Scaling up agroforestry requires research ‘in’ rather than ‘for’ development. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2014, 6, 73–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kwesiga, F.; Akinnifesi, F.K.; Mafongoya, P.L.; McDermott, M.H.; Agumya, A. Agroforestry research and development in southern Africa during the 1990s: Review and challenges ahead. Agrofor. Syst. 2003, 59, 173–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Nair, P.K.R. Directions in tropical agroforestry research: Past, present, and future. In Agroforestry Systems; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1998; pp. 223–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Griffiths, T.L.; Steyvers, M. Finding scientific topics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2004, 101 (Suppl. 1), 5228–5235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Hornik, K.; Grün, B. Topicmodels: An R package for fitting topic models. J. Stat. Softw. 2011, 40, 1–30. [Google Scholar]
  35. Geman, S.; Geman, D. Stochastic Relaxation, Gibbs Distributions, and the Bayesian Restoration of Images. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 1984, PAMI-6, 721–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Villardon, M.P.G. Una Alternativa de Representación Simultánea: HJ-Biplot. QüEstiió: Quaderns d’estadística i Investigació Operativa. 1986, pp. 13–23. Available online: https://www.raco.cat/index.php/Questiio/article/download/26468/26302 (accessed on 22 February 2023).
  37. Blei, D.M.; Ng, A.Y.; Jordan, M.I. Latent Dirichlet allocation. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2003, 3, 993–1022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Xiong, H.; Cheng, Y.; Zhao, W.; Liu, J. Analyzing scientific research topics in manufacturing field using a topic model. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2019, 135, 333–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Harzing, A.-W.; Alakangas, S. Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: A longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics 2016, 106, 787–804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. De la Hoz-M, J.; Fernández-Gómez, M.J.; Mendes, S. LDAShiny: An R Package for Exploratory Review of Scientific Literature Based on a Bayesian Probabilistic Model and Machine Learning Tools. Mathematics 2021, 9, 1671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Team, R. R Studio—Google Académico; RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio Inc.: Boston, MA, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  42. Blei, D.M.; Lafferty, J.D. A correlated topic model of Science. Ann. Appl. Stat. 2007, 1, 17–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Röder, M.; Both, A.; Hinneburg, A. Exploring the space of topic coherence measures. In Proceedings of the Eighth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, Shanghai, China, 2–6 February 2015; pp. 399–408. [Google Scholar]
  44. Chang, J.; Boyd-Graber, J.; Gerrish, S.; Wang, C.; Blei, D.M.; Chang, J.; Boyd-Graber, J.; Gerrish, S.; Wang, C.; Blei, D.M. Reading tea leaves: How humans interpret topic models. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 22—Proceedings of the 2009 Conference, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 7–10 December 2009; Neural Information Processing Systems Foundation: San Diego, CA, USA, 2009; Available online: https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2009/hash/f92586a25bb3145facd64ab20fd554ff-Abstract.html (accessed on 22 February 2023).
  45. Jones, T.; Doane, W. TextmineR: Functions for Text Mining and Topic Modeling, R package version 3.0.4; 2019. Available online: https://rdrr.io/cran/textmineR/ (accessed on 22 February 2023).
  46. Lau, J.H.; Grieser, K.; Newman, D.; Baldwin, T. Automatic labelling of topic models. In Proceedings of the ACL-HLT 2011—Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Portland, OR, USA, 19–24 June 2011. [Google Scholar]
  47. Van Eck, N.; Waltman, L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 2010, 84, 523–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Vicente-Villardón. MULTBIPLOT: A Package for Multivariate Analysis Using Biplots; Departamento de Estadística, Universidad de Salmanca: Salamanca, Spain, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  49. Liu, W.; Yao, S.; Wang, J.; Liu, M. Trends and Features of Agroforestry Research Based on Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. EURAF. Agroforestry as Sustainable Land Use. In Proceedings of the 4th European Agroforestry Conference, Nijmegen, The Netherlands, 28–30 May 2018. [Google Scholar]
  51. Puri, S.; Nair, P. Agroforestry research for development in India: 25 years of experiences of a national program. Agrofor. Syst. 2004, 61–62, 437–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Somarriba, E. Diagnóstico y diseño agroforestal. Agrofor. Am. 1998, 5, 68–72. [Google Scholar]
  53. Cannell, M.G.R. Soil Productivity Aspects of Agroforestry. By P. K. R. Nair. Nairobi: International Council for Research in Agroforestry (1984), pp. 83, price unstated. Exp. Agric. 1985, 21, 299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Perfecto, I.; Vandermeer, J.H.; Bautista, G.L.; Nunñez, G.I.; Greenberg, R.; Bichier, P.; Langridge, S. Greater predation in shaded coffee farms: The role of resident neotropical birds. Ecology 2004, 85, 2677–2681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Klein, A.-M.; Steffan-Dewenter, I.; Tscharntke, T. Bee pollination and fruit set of Coffea arabica and C. canephora (Rubiaceae). Am. J. Bot. 2003, 90, 153–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Ricketts, T.H.; Daily, G.C.; Ehrlich, P.R.; Michener, C.D. Economic value of tropical forest to coffee production. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2004, 101, 12579–12582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Buresh, R.J.; Tian, G. Soil improvement by trees in sub-Saharan Africa. Agrofor. Syst. 1997, 38, 51–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Young, A. Soil productivity, soil conservation and land evaluation. Agrofor. Syst. 1987, 5, 277–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Scheme of the methodological process used in the identification of research topics in agroforestry through Latent Dirichlet Allocation [38].
Figure 1. Scheme of the methodological process used in the identification of research topics in agroforestry through Latent Dirichlet Allocation [38].
Mathematics 11 02250 g001
Figure 2. Annual trend of document about agroforestry. The red line is the exponential trend.
Figure 2. Annual trend of document about agroforestry. The red line is the exponential trend.
Mathematics 11 02250 g002
Figure 3. Worldwide distribution of 9794 articles on agroforestry research published for the years 1993–2022.
Figure 3. Worldwide distribution of 9794 articles on agroforestry research published for the years 1993–2022.
Mathematics 11 02250 g003
Figure 4. Network of international coauthor relationships.
Figure 4. Network of international coauthor relationships.
Mathematics 11 02250 g004
Figure 5. Coherence. The red line indicates the number of topics.
Figure 5. Coherence. The red line indicates the number of topics.
Mathematics 11 02250 g005
Figure 6. Trend of topics: topics that increased gradually over time (color red), topics that had a decreasing behavior (color blue), and topics where there was no observed trend (color black).
Figure 6. Trend of topics: topics that increased gradually over time (color red), topics that had a decreasing behavior (color blue), and topics where there was no observed trend (color black).
Mathematics 11 02250 g006
Figure 7. Representing the distribution of topics by year through the heat map.
Figure 7. Representing the distribution of topics by year through the heat map.
Mathematics 11 02250 g007
Figure 8. Topic similarity map that shows a two-dimensional representation (via multi-dimensional scaling).
Figure 8. Topic similarity map that shows a two-dimensional representation (via multi-dimensional scaling).
Mathematics 11 02250 g008
Figure 9. Association between topics by year using HJ-Biplot method.
Figure 9. Association between topics by year using HJ-Biplot method.
Mathematics 11 02250 g009
Table 1. Statistics about the analyzed dataset.
Table 1. Statistics about the analyzed dataset.
DescriptionResults
Main information about data
Timespan1993:2022
Sources (journals, books, etc.)1564
Documents9794
Annual growth rate %7.63
Document average age9.8
Average citations per doc22.48
References1
Document contents
Keywords plus (ID)19,986
Author’s keywords (DE)20,415
Authors
Authors25,174
Authors of single-authored docs654
Authors collaboration
Single-authored docs771
Co-authors per doc4.41
International co-authorships %37.99
Document types
Article9173
Review621
Table 2. Most influential sources of the documents analyzed.
Table 2. Most influential sources of the documents analyzed.
SourcesArticles
Agroforestry Systems1549
Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment307
Sustainability (Switzerland)197
Forest Ecology and Management188
Forests149
Plant and Soil118
Forests Trees and Livelihoods112
Science of the Total Environment82
Agricultural Systems81
Land Use Policy76
Biodiversitas75
Small-Scale Forestry75
Journal of Sustainable Forestry74
Land72
Biodiversity and Conservation68
Land Degradation and Development64
Journal of Environmental Management62
Plos One60
Journal of Forestry Research56
Range Management and Agroforestry53
Agricultural and Forest Meteorology52
Agronomy50
Current Science50
Environmental Management50
Agronomy for Sustainable Development49
Table 3. Frequent topics.
Table 3. Frequent topics.
TOPICLAB. ALGORITLABEL ASIGNEDPRART.TOPICS TERMS
t_28soil_organsoil organic carbon4.7991825soilorgandepthsocproperti
t_16agroforestri_practicadoption of agroforestry practices4.9312785farmerfarmagroforestripracticadopt
t_27speci_richbiodiversity4.5273694diverslandscapspecihabitatconserv
t_13climat_changclimatic change global policies4.6564511projectdeveloppoliciapproachbase
t_21climat_changcarbon and climatic change3.365487carbonclimatchangstockclimat_chang
t_6food_securfood security4.5946485developfoodresearchsustainresourc
t_15fine_rootfine root3.2657483rootplantgrowthseedltreatment
t_12land_coverland cover3.8668392landareacoveragriculturdegrad
t_10allei_cropalley cropping3.6269389cropyieldmaizfieldallei
t_17remot_sensremote sensors4.14710384modeldatamethodestimvariabl
t_20soil_watersoil water3.50811382waterseasontemperaturrainfaldry
t_11shade_treeshade tree2.69112315coffeshadecacaopestshade_tree
t_3raw_materiraw materials production2.59713303woodenergipotentiproductpine
t_26product_systemproduction systems3.40814298producteconomcostbenefitmarket
t_23soil_fertilsoil fertility3.08115298fertilnutrientfallowincreassoil_fertil
t_4intercrop_systemintercrop systems3.01716282intercropplantspacewheatpoplar
t_25plant_speciplant species3.34317268speciplantnativdiverswoodi
t_22ecosystem_servicecosystem services3.5118265managagriculturecosystemservicpractic
t_30aboveground_biomassaboveground biomass3.19119260biomassyeargrowthheightstand
t_18genet_diversgenetic diversity2.56820227populgenetselectvariattrait
t_2leaf_litterleaf litter2.58821221litterleafratecontentconcentr
t_8local_peopllocal knowledge3.32622216localtraditknowledgregionimport
t_14silvopastor_systemsilvopastoral systems2.2223201pasturgrasslivestockproductforag
t_24secondari_forestsecondary forests3.04824177forestafnaturtropicrestor
t_9agroforestri_systemagroforestry systems3.54825159systemagroforestriagroforestri_systembasemonocultur
t_7fruit_treefruit tree2.12726155fruitcocoaafricapollinwest
t_1tree_specitree species3.35827148treetree_specidensiticanopibusi_media
t_29cork_oakcork oak2.1242878termforestrilongagrolong_term
t_5rubber_plantatrubber plantations1.7822958plantatrubbermonoculturpalmoil
t_19fungal_communfungal communities3.1923048effectpositfactoraffectinfluenc
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

Montes-Escobar, K.; De la Hoz-M, J.; Barreiro-Linzán, M.D.; Fonseca-Restrepo, C.; Lapo-Palacios, M.Á.; Verduga-Alcívar, D.A.; Salas-Macias, C.A. Trends in Agroforestry Research from 1993 to 2022: A Topic Model Using Latent Dirichlet Allocation and HJ-Biplot. Mathematics 2023, 11, 2250. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11102250

AMA Style

Montes-Escobar K, De la Hoz-M J, Barreiro-Linzán MD, Fonseca-Restrepo C, Lapo-Palacios MÁ, Verduga-Alcívar DA, Salas-Macias CA. Trends in Agroforestry Research from 1993 to 2022: A Topic Model Using Latent Dirichlet Allocation and HJ-Biplot. Mathematics. 2023; 11(10):2250. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11102250

Chicago/Turabian Style

Montes-Escobar, Karime, Javier De la Hoz-M, Mónica Daniela Barreiro-Linzán, Carolina Fonseca-Restrepo, Miguel Ángel Lapo-Palacios, Douglas Andrés Verduga-Alcívar, and Carlos Alfredo Salas-Macias. 2023. "Trends in Agroforestry Research from 1993 to 2022: A Topic Model Using Latent Dirichlet Allocation and HJ-Biplot" Mathematics 11, no. 10: 2250. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11102250

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