Next Article in Journal
An Experimental Approach to Investigating Quasi-Saturation Using Darcy’s Law
Previous Article in Journal
Prospects of Mortality Salience for Promoting Sustainable Public Sector Management: A Survey Experiment on Public Service Motivation
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 13
10.3390/su151310458
sustainability-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:
Review

Progress of Mine Land Reclamation and Ecological Restoration Research Based on Bibliometric Analysis

by
Ya Shao
1,
Qinxue Xu
2,* and
Xi Wei
1
1
College of Earth Sciences, Guilin University of Technology, Guilin 541004, China
2
College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Guilin University of Technology, Guilin 541004, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(13), 10458; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310458
Submission received: 15 May 2023 / Revised: 14 June 2023 / Accepted: 30 June 2023 / Published: 3 July 2023
(This article belongs to the Topic Green Mining)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The mining of mineral resources has caused serious damage to land and significant pressure on ecological environment. During the repairing of damaged land and degraded ecosystems, there have been many pieces of literature related to land reclamation and ecological restoration (LRER) that have emerged. To understand the progress and prospect of LRER research, it is necessary to sort out such pieces of literature, analyze the current research status, and forecast the future research directions. Here, Bibliometrix R-package was used to analyze 2357 articles, which were derived from the core database of Web of Science, to explore the development of LRER from 1990 to 2022. The results are as follows. (1) The annual scientific output results show that both the number of articles published on LRER and the number of articles annually citied were increasing gradually from 1990 to 2022. (2) High-frequency keyword analysis indicates that heavy metal (Cd, Pb) pollution remediation is a research hotspot. The cluster analysis (CA) and multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) show that there are two clusters in the current research of LRER, in which one surrounds heavy metal pollution and the other focuses on ecological restoration of mining areas. The two clusters correspond to the remediation and ecological restoration (rehabilitation) stages of stepwise ecological restoration, respectively. Thematic evolution analysis shows that, for more than 30 years, mine drainage and heavy metal pollution treatment, soil reconstruction (soil profile reconstruction, soil improvement), and vegetation restoration have been the focus of research. (3) Future research should focus on the relationship between mine ecological restoration and carbon sequestration and the relationship between ecological restoration and biodiversity in mine areas. In addition, LRER technology exchange, international cooperation, and industrialization are also main directions of development. Generally, in this study, metrology software (Bibliometrix R-package 3.1.4) from the literature was used to sort out the relevant literature on LRER over the past 30 years so as to provide reference for future research on LRER.

1. Introduction

The mining industry is a large contributor to the global economy and has been developing since the industrial revolution [1]. The mining of metal minerals, non-metallic minerals, and organic minerals leads to many ecological and environmental problems, for example, land excavation and occupation, surface subsidence, soil erosion, desertification, land pollution, and biodiversity loss [2,3]. Open-pit mining can cause drastic disturbances to regional ecosystem and soil properties [4], resulting in a significant loss of soil nutrients (soil organic carbon, total nitrogen) [5]. Compared with open-pit mining, underground mining inevitably causes a large amount of land subsidence [6]. For example, underground coal mining with high ground-water level can cause many environmental problems, of which the most serious are subsidence and waterlogging [7]. In addition, mining is a significant source of soil heavy metal pollution [8].
In recent years, the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for 2030 call for restoration of degraded terrestrial ecosystems (Goal 15) to “protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, … halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss” [9]. The Convention on Biological Diversity (2016) called for the “restoration of degraded natural and semi-natural ecosystems, … as a contribution to… adapting to the effects of climate change, combating desertification and land degradation” [10]. In addition, the United Nations General Assembly has declared 2021–2030 as the Decade of Ecosystem Restoration [11]. A series of development goals and initiatives of the United Nations have put forward that it is urgent to restore various ecosystems, including mine ecosystems, to protect biodiversity and improve ecosystem stability and sustainability.
During the repairing of damaged land and degraded ecosystems, there are many pieces of research literature that have emerged, involving a lot of relevant terms, for example, ecological restoration, ecosystem restoration, mitigation hierarchy, eco-compensation (biodiversity, ecosystems), reclamation, rehabilitation, remediation, repurposing, revegetation, etc. [12,13]. According to Mine closure and reclamation—Vocabulary (ISO 20305:2020(E)—2020), reclamation (rehabilitation) is defined as “reinstating of disturbed land, associated with a mine or a mine feature to be safe, stable, non-polluting and consistent with the agreed post mining land use” [14]. The Society for Ecological Restoration’s international standards (SER Standards), second edition, defines reclamation as “the process of making severely degraded land fit for cultivation or a state suitable for some human use” [13]. For ecological restoration, SER Standards have been proposed four times, and the latest one is that “ecological restoration is the process of assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged, or destroyed” [13,15]. Classic ecological terminology regards rehabilitation, reclamation, and restoration as terms with similar goals [15]. Usually, reclamation is often used in the USA and UK, restoration is used in the UK sometimes, and rehabilitation is often used in Australia and Canada [16]. Remediation aims to remove degradation to achieve safe, stable, and non-polluting landscapes, and it is a precondition for ecological restoration, reclamation, or rehabilitation after mining [12]. Some scholars also believe that, except for restoration, reclamation, and rehabilitation, it is necessary to add a term “ecological reclamation” and define it [17]. From the above literature, it can be seen that there are many terms related to mine restorative practices, and their use in the academic community is quite chaotic. Although the terminology is different, the work content is quite similar or the same. In recent years, land reclamation and ecological restoration are often used side by side in many international academic conferences, for example, the first international symposium on LRER was held in Beijing, China, 2014, the second international symposium on LRER was held in Xi’an, Shaanxi, 2017, and the third international symposium on LRER was held in Xuzhou, Jiangsu, 2021. The convening of three international conferences indicates a trend towards gradually unifying terminology in this field. LRER is so important that it has become one of the academic research focuses. However, due to the large amount of terms in this field, the literature on LRER lacks systematic induction and sorting. How have scholars progressed in research on LRER so far? There should be more information to be obtained. Hence, relevant methods, such as the bibliometric method, are needed for literature analysis. Using bibliometrics for science mapping, we can answer three general types of research questions (the knowledge base, the research front, and the social network of scientific collaborations) [18].
Therefore, to clarify the development of existing research on LRER and to better grasp the future trend, in this study, the Bibliometrix R-package was used to systematically summarize and sort out the literature on LRER included in the core database of Web of Science between 1990 and 2022. The objectives of this study are as follows:
(1) To render a review of the research on LRER from 1990 to 2022 (dataset, sources, authors, and documents).
(2) To research the collaboration network feature among countries/institutions in the field.
(3) To analyze the current research status and explore future research directions of LRER.

2. Materials and Methods

The Bibliometrix R-package (http://www.bibliometrix.org (accessed on 1 January 2023)) provides a set of tools for quantitative research in bibliometrics and scientometrics [18]. Biblioshiny helps users perform relevant bibliometric and visual analysis on an interactive web interface and reduce the difficulty of literature analysis operations [19]. The Web of Science has the world’s largest set of comprehensive academic resources with the most disciplines, covering more than 12,000 academic journals in natural sciences, engineering, biomedicine, social sciences, arts, humanities, and so on [20]. The Web of Science core database was used as the data source for retrieval, and the retrieval terms used were TS = (“ecological restoration” or “ecosystem restoration” or “reclamation” or “restoration” or “rehabilitation” or “revegetation” or “remediation” or “mitigation hierarchy” or “repurpose”) and TS = (“mining industry” or “mining area” or “mining site” or “mine site” or “mined land”). The time span of the retrieval was set as 1990–2022. Literature types were limited to “Article”, “Proceeding paper”, “Review Article”, “Early Access”, and “Data Paper”. The search language was English. After eliminating reduplicative and irrelevant data, a total of 2357 documents on LRER were obtained. The download data were converted to R data frame.
After data collection and conversion, the articles were analyzed using the Bibliometrix. Firstly, we analyzed the dataset, authors, sources, and documents on LRER, including annual scientific production, average citation per year, corresponding author’s country, most relevant affiliations, most relevant sources, globally most cited documents, and high-frequency keywords, so as to give an overview of the research in that field from 1990 to 2022. Secondly, we analyzed cooperation between countries and institutions to find out the feature of a collaboration network. Finally, the conceptual structure, including topic dendrogram and thematic evolution, was analyzed to obtain the current research topics and future research directions for LRER (Figure 1).

3. Results and Analysis

3.1. Analysis of the Annual Scientific Production on LRER

The research progress on LRER can be obtained by counting the number of documents published each year. From 1990 to 2022, the number of papers published on LRER showed an increasing trend year on year (Figure 2), indicating that LRER attracted more and more attention of scholars. From 1990 to 2000, the total number of published relevant papers was 124, with an annual average number less than 20, accounting for only 7.47% of the total number. The annual growth of papers was low and slow, indicating, at that stage, the research on LRER was still in its infancy. Subsequently, between 2001 and 2014, published relevant papers increased significantly, with an average annual number of about 50, indicating that LRER research was closely related to socio-economic development during that period and more and more scholars paid attention to it. After 2015, the number of published relevant papers on LRER continued to increase significantly. In particular, the number of papers published in 2021 and 2022 reached 255 and 261, respectively. It can be seen that LRER has become a hotspot of current research.

3.2. Analysis of Literature Citations on LRER

3.2.1. Annual Citation Rate

The annual average citation rate of pieces of literature on LRER is gradually increasing (Figure 3). The citation rate in 1990–2000 was very low (<1), indicating that the research was still in the initial stage of exploration and did not yet receive widespread attention of researchers. The average citation frequencies during 2001–2015 and 2009–2022 were 1.51 and 2.39, respectively. It peaked in 2018 (3.41). From 2018 to 2020, the citation frequency of the literature remained at a historical high level. In general, the number of citations has been increasing over time, indicating that the influence of LRER is increasing.

3.2.2. Analysis of Highly Cited Articles

Table 1 shows the top 10 most cited publications on LRER from 1990 to 2022. Among the literature related to LRER published from 1990 to 2022, the most frequently cited article in the world is the one titled Heavy Metal Removal Mechanism of Acid Mine Drainage in Wetlands: a Critical Review, published in Minerals Engineering by AS Sheoran and V. Sheoran [21] of Jai Jai Narain Vyas University, with 474 citations worldwide. Since about 1985, passive treatment has been used more and more frequently as a method for treating acid mine drainage [22]. In that article, the latest progress of passive treatment systems in constructed wetlands was reviewed, and suggestions were made for new trends in the development of passive treatment technology. The article further promoted the development of passive treatment technology for acid mine drainage. The second most frequently cited article is Metal Contamination of Soils and Crops Affected by the Chenzhou Lead/Zinc Mine Spill (Hunan, China), published in Science of the Total Environment by Hongyu Liu et al. [23] of Hunan University, with 473 citations worldwide. The article showed that frequent mining activities caused heavy metal contamination in large areas of farmlands. The article pointed out that the heavy metal accumulation effect was not entirely depending on total element concentrations in soil. The article has important reference value for the research on remediation of heavy metal pollution in mines. The third most frequently cited article is Arsenic and Heavy Metal Pollution of Soil, Water and Sediments in a Semi-Arid Climate Mining Area in Mexico, with 296 citations worldwide [24]. The article assessed the impact of mining on environment and identified the main factors involved in the dispersion of arsenic and heavy metals under semi-arid conditions. It is of great significance to control arsenic and heavy metal pollution under semi-arid conditions.

3.3. Main Countries/Regions Conducting Research on LRER

According to our statistic (Table 2), the ten countries with the most publications on LRER are China, Australia, the USA, Canada, Germany, Poland, India, Spain, Brazil, and the UK. The publications of the top five countries accounted for 28.26%, 10.82%, 9.63%, 6.07%, and 3.52%, respectively, indicating those countries made the greatest contributions to the research on LRER. For example, in China, there are many studies on LRER in coal mining areas, and the research areas are mainly concentrated in ecologically fragile areas in Northwest China [4,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44] and high water level areas in Eastern China [6,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52]. The research focuses include reclamation of open-pit coal mines [8,38,39,53,54,55,56,57,58], reclamation of coal mining subsidence sites [7,51,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77], and ecological restoration of coal gangue hills [78,79,80]. The research objects of LRER in the USA are extensive, from restoration of open pit coal mines to reclamation of various production and construction projects, and the research focuses are acid mine drainage treatment [81,82,83], soil reconstruction, and vegetation restoration [84,85]. Australia is in the top three countries with land areas impacted by mining, and it was a leader in land rehabilitation in the field of theory, application, demonstration, and communication late last century [86,87,88].
Additionally, the numbers of single-country publications (SCP) and multiple-country publications (MCP) were used to determine the level of international cooperation. China has the highest number of articles (666), the highest MCP (564), and the highest SCP (102). The collaboration network of 50 countries (Figure 4) publishing articles on LRER was drawn to demonstrate the status and level of cooperation between countries. The radius of the circle is used to reflect the number of articles published by each country, and the thickness of the lines between countries is used to indicate the degree of cooperation between countries. Clearly, there is more collaboration among China, the USA, Australia, Canada, and the UK, especially between China and the USA and between China and Australia. As countries attach importance to the issue of LRER, promoting national and regional cooperative research has become a consensus.

3.4. Main Institutions Conducting Research on LRER

The top ten LRER research institutions were determined according to their publication quantities (Table 3), and they are China Univ Min and Technol, Univ Queensland, China Univ Geosci, Univ Western Australia, Curtin Univ, China Univ Min and Technol Beijing, Univ Chinese Acad Sci, Key Lab Land Consolidat and Rehabil, Univ Cagliari, and Univ Quebec Abitibi Temiscamingue.
China Univ Min and Technol published 133 articles in that field, followed by the Univ Queensland with 98 articles, and China Univ Geosci with 84 articles. Among the top ten research institutions, five are from China and three are from Australia, indicating China and Australia attach great importance to LRER research.
The collaboration network of 50 institutions is shown in Figure 5. It can be seen that institutional cooperation is mainly carried out within the same country, for example, the cooperation between Univ Western Australia and Curtin Univ happened in Australia. The two research institutions of LRER, China Univ Min and Technol and China Univ Geosci, have more cooperation with other research institutions in China. Compared with the level of institutional cooperation within the same countries, the level of international institutional cooperation is still low.

3.5. Research Categories on LRER

A bibliometric analysis was carried out on the literature disciplines of LRER research with the data from Web of Science to explore the main research areas. It can be seen that the field of ecological restoration involves multiple disciplines (Figure 6), including environmental science, engineering environment, water resource, etc. Among the research disciplines related to LRER, environmental science is the principal category, accounting for 46.6% of the total, followed by engineering environment (13.9%), water resources (10.7%), mining mineral proceedings (10.6%), ecology (10.4%), geosciences multidisciplinary (10.4%), soil science (8.9%), green sustainable science technology (5.45%), and environmental studies (5.3%). There are also other categories involved, such as geochemistry geophysics, remote sensing, plant science, and public environmental occupational health; however, none of their percentages are higher than 5%. The most attention is paid to environmental science and engineering environment, and in these two disciplines there are the most extensive publications. The key issues are related to soil and water pollution by heavy metals in mining areas, especially the pollution of heavy metals such as Cd and Pb, heavy metal phytoremediation, and vegetation reconstruction. Water resource is concerned in terms of the discharge and treatment of acidic water containing heavy metals in mining areas and the pollution of river water. The discipline of ecology focuses on topics such as mining damage to ecosystems, impacts on ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, and ecosystem spontaneous succession.

3.6. Main Journals on LRER

The most abundant journals that publish research articles on LRER are shown in Table 4. The top ten journals are from The Netherlands, USA, Germany, UK, and Switzerland. The main journals according to the number of LRER articles are Science of the Total Environment, Environmental Science and Pollution Research, and Restoration Ecology. The journal with the most published articles is Science of the Total Environment, which has a JCR division of Q1 in 2022 and an impact factor of 10.753. It published 74 articles related to LRER in total from 1990 to 2022. The second is Environmental Science and Pollution Research, which has a JCR division of Q2 and an impact factor of 5.190. It published 53 articles related to LRER in total from 1990 to 2022. The third is Restoration Ecology, which has a JCR division of Q2 and an impact factor of 4.181. It published 51 articles related to LRER in total from 1990 to 2022.

3.7. Hot Research Topics and Trends on LRER

3.7.1. High-Frequency Keyword Analysis

Keywords are a high-level summary of research contents [89]. The cloud map of the top 50 keywords related to LRER is shown in Figure 7. The larger the keyword font in the figure, the higher the frequency of occurrence. As seen from Figure 7, the high-frequency keywords that appear include “heavy-metals”, “mining area”, “soil”, “remediation”, “accumulation”, “reclamation”, “restoration”, “water”, “growth”, “pollution”, “cadmium”, “vegetation”, “diversity”, and so on. As it shows, the scope of research on LRER is very wide. For a long time, the discharge of mineral acidic wastewater has often led to heavy metal pollution [21], especially Cd and Pb pollution. Remediation aims to remove degradation to achieve safe, stable, and nonpolluting landscapes, and it is a pre-requisite for ecological restoration, reclamation, or rehabilitation after mining [12]. Soil occupies an important position in the ecosystem because it provides the environment with places where various plants, soil, animals, and microorganisms grow. Soil heavy metal pollution remediation is the key to LRER, and it is also a current research hotspot. Vegetation cover provides a cost-effective and environmentally sustainable method for stabilizing the bare area and minimizing the pollution problem, and the growth of plants (biomass, growth rates, and biomass of nodules) is the focus of research [90,91,92]. The objective of LRER is to assist the recovery of the ecosystem, thus terms such as accumulation, vegetation, and growth are also high-frequency keywords on LRER.

3.7.2. Cluster Analysis (CA) and Multiple Correspondence Analysis (MCA) of High-Frequency Keywords

CA is one of the main methods for analyzing multivariate data [93]. The CA results of high-frequency keywords are shown in Figure 8. In this study, keywords are clustered into two categories. The first is mainly related to “heavy metals”, “soil amendments”, “mine tails”, “biochar”, “toxicity”, etc. This type of research focuses on heavy metal pollution in metal mine wasteland and tailings, especially the remediation of heavy metal pollution in soil by biochar, which is a current research hotspot [94,95]. The second is mainly related to “organic matter”, “organic carbon”, “nitrogen”, “vegetation”, “succession”, “quality”, “diversity”, etc. This type of research focuses on soil organic carbon, nitrogen, natural succession, vegetation reconstruction, biodiversity, etc. Since the major problems of land after mining include physical properties (structure, stability, moisture), nutrition (macronutrients, micronutrients), and toxicity (pH, heavy metals, salinity) [96,97], research on LRER is also mainly conducted on those aspects.
MCA is an unsupervised learning algorithm for visualizing the patterns of large and multidimensional categorical data [98]. The results of MCA on keywords are shown in Figure 9, where there are two clusters on the figure, one is centered on heavy metals, and the other is centered on restoration. CA and MCA of high-frequency keywords show that, currently, there are two clusters in LRER research, one is heavy metal pollution caused by mining, and the other is ecological restoration in mining areas, especially soil reconstruction and vegetation restoration.

3.7.3. Thematic Evolution Analysis

In the past 30 years, the research direction on LRER has had both continuity and development. Figure 10 shows the chronological order of the evolution of various themes. Connections between keywords are indicated by gray lines connected to various rectangular colored shapes. Before 2000, the research on LRER was in its infancy, and researchers began to explore topics such as reclamation, rehabilitation, and acid rock drainage (acid mine drainage) treatment. From 2001 to 2014, the contents of LRER research were gradually enriched, mainly involving land reclamation, mine site rehabilitation, mine site restoration, the impact of mining and reclamation on soil physical and chemical properties (especially bulk density), and heavy metals pollution, especially mercury (Hg) and arsenic (As) contamination. The research on LRER from 2015 to 2020 mainly focused on reclamation, mine site restoration, phytoremediation, heavy metals, reforestation, etc. In the past two years, the research on LRER has focused on heavy metals and their pollution, arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi microbial restoration, mine vegetation restoration, and coal gangue ecological restoration. Overall, for more than 30 years, mine acid wastewater treatment and heavy metal pollution control, soil reconstruction (soil profile reconstruction, soil improvement), and vegetation restoration have been the key topics of research.

4. Discussion

Before 2004, there were few studies on LRER. From 2005 to 2014, the number of relevant publications increased steadily. A big increase of relevant articles occurred from 2015 to 2022, especially in 2021 and 2022. A series of actions, such as UN SDGs for 2030, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the UN Decade of Ecosystem Restoration 2021–2030, have greatly promoted research on LRER. In addition, the three consecutive International Symposiums on LRER held in 2014, 2017, and 2021 promoted academic exchanges and strongly promoted international cooperation in LRER [99].
LRER is closely related to the development and utilization of mineral resources. Therefore, countries that contributed more publications on LRER are also those that have rich mineral resources and pay more attention to ecological and environmental issues, such as China, Australia, USA, Canada, and Germany. In recent years, the number of articles published by Chinese scholars gradually increased. Since 2012, China has put the construction of ecological civilization in a prominent position. China’s adherence to the green development strategy and strict laws and regulations (such as the Land Reclamation Regulations, the Implementation Measures for Land Reclamation Regulations) have made ecological and environmental protection a hard constraint for mine development. As a result, the number of research institutions on LRER in China has also increased. The field of LRER involves categories such as environmental science, engineering environment, water resources, mining mineral proceeding, ecology, etc., showing a trend of multidisciplinary development. There are many kinds of periodicals that publish articles about land reclamation and ecology, mainly focusing on environmental science and ecology, earth science, and engineering technology, which are related to the research content and direction of LRER.
For the heavy metal pollution in metal mine wasteland and tailings, the remediation of heavy metal pollution in soil by biochar is a current research hotspot [94,95]. For energy mines, such as coal mines, more attention is paid to terrain remodeling [100], soil profile reconstruction and improvement [4,101], revegetation [102,103,104], dynamic reclamation methods for subsidence band [105], and biodiversity [106], and that is why more articles on LRER are published in popular journals of environment and ecology. The CA and MCA of high-frequency keywords show that the current LRER research has two clusters, one is around heavy metal pollution (Cd, Pb, etc.), and the other is around ecological restoration in mining areas, including soil reconstruction and vegetation restoration. Renee E. Young et al. [12] put forward the idea of stepwise ecological restoration in 2022. The idea of stepwise ecological restoration is to use three restorative modes for different levels of ecosystem degradation, i.e., environmental remediation for seriously degraded ecosystems, ecological rehabilitation for moderately degraded ecosystems, and ecological (even natural) restoration for slightly degraded ecosystems. It can be seen that current LRER research is in different stages of stepwise ecological restoration, i.e., remediation stage and ecological restoration (rehabilitation) stage. The analysis results of high-frequency keywords are consistent with the theory of stepwise ecological restoration [12]. From this perspective, it is also necessary to carry out stepwise ecological restoration based on targets and end goals for post-mining recovery of ecosystems with different degrees of degradation [107].
Thematic evolution analysis shows that mine acid wastewater treatment and heavy metal pollution control, soil reconstruction (soil profile reconstruction, soil improvement), and vegetation restoration have been the focus of research for more than 30 years. Judging from the three consecutive international conferences on LRER held in 2014, 2017, and 2021, soil reconstruction and landform remodeling, solid waste and acidic water treatment, reclamation and ecological restoration of coal mining subsidence, open-pit mine reclamation and ecological restoration, and restoration of contaminated land are also hot topics. The UN SDGs for 2030, the Convention on Biological Diversity, the UN Decade of Ecosystem Restoration 2021–2030, and other international initiatives have brought opportunities and challenges to the field of LRER. For mine ecosystems, as one of the degraded ecosystems, the future LRER should not only focus on traditional hotspots such as soil reconstruction and landform remodeling, solid waste and acid water treatment, mining subsidence and ecological restoration, open pit mine reclamation and ecological restoration, and polluted land restoration, but also focus on the relationship between LRER and carbon sequestration and the relationship between LRER and biodiversity. In addition, from the analysis of the national cooperation network and institutional cooperation network of LRER, it can be seen that the international cooperation is mainly concentrated among countries such as China, the USA, and Australia; the current international cooperation among other countries is not so frequent, and institutional cooperation is mainly carried out within the same country. Therefore, the technical exchanges and international cooperation should be strengthened. A series of ecological restoration goals and initiatives of the UN also require the cooperation of all countries.
Insufficiencies and recommendations. Articles retrieved through the core database of Web of Science in this study are only a subset of the research field of LRER. For example, some articles published in international conferences on LRER and national reclamation societies (societies of ecological restoration) of different countries are included by EI and ISTP, but not by SCI. In addition, setting the search language to English also blocks articles published in other languages. For example, there are many articles written by experts on reclamation in China, and some articles are written in Chinese, which are missed in the search. Therefore, future bibliometric research should include articles from different databases and languages for more comprehensive analysis.

5. Conclusions

In this study, an R runtime environment was set up and the Bibliometrix software packages (version 3.1.4) were used to systematically summarize and sort out the literature on LRER. The trends in publications, major research journals, institutions, countries, research hotspots, and themes were analyzed, and the future research directions were discussed.
The annual scientific output results show that the number of articles published on LRER and the number of annual average citations increased gradually from 1990 to 2022. China, Australia, the USA, Canada, and Germany made the greatest contribution to the research on LRER.
There is more collaboration among China, the USA, Australia, Canada, and the UK, especially between China and the USA as well as between China and Australia. The technical exchanges and international cooperation should be strengthened. There are five Chinese institutions ranking top ten on LRER research. China attaches great importance to LRER research. The field shows the interdisciplinary development trend of environmental sciences, engineering environment, mining resources, proceedings, and ecology. The top five prolific journals are Science of the Total Environment, Environmental Science and Pollution Research, Restoration Ecology, Ecological Engineering, and Journal of Cleaner Production. The globally most cited articles focus on passive treatment of contaminated acid wastewater, phytostabilization of mine tailings, and biochar on mine tailings.
Currently, there are two major concerns of LRER, one is heavy metal pollution caused by mining, and the other is ecological restoration in mining areas, especially soil reconstruction and vegetation restoration. Those two major concerns of LRER correspond to different stages of stepwise ecological restoration, i.e., remediation stage and ecological restoration (rehabilitation) stage. The mine acid wastewater treatment, heavy metal pollution control, soil reconstruction (soil profile reconstruction, soil improvement), and vegetation restoration are the focus of research. In addition to traditional reclamation hotspots, future LRER should also focus on the relationship between LRER and carbon sequestration as well as the relationship between LRER and biodiversity. In addition, technology exchanges, international cooperation, and industrialization of LRER should be strengthened in the future.
We try to sort out the research status quo, dig out the research hotspots, forecast the future research trends, and provide references for future research on LRER.

Author Contributions

Y.S.: methodology, software, data curation, and writing—original draft; Q.X.: conceptualization and funding acquisition; Y.S. and Q.X.: writing—review and editing; X.W.: investigation and validation; Y.S., Q.X. and X.W.: proofreading. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Project of National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant number 42067014), Guangxi Key Research and Development Program (grant number AB21220049), and Doctoral Research Foundation of Guilin University of Technology (grant number GUTQDJJ2007059).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

All relevant datasets in this study are described in the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

CACluster analysis
LRERLand reclamation and ecological restoration
MCAMultiple correspondence analysis
MCPMultiple-country publications
SCPSingle-country publications
SDGsSustainable Development Goals

References

  1. PwC. Mine 2022: A Critical Transition. Available online: https://www.pwc.com/mine (accessed on 27 January 2023).
  2. Zhang, L.; Hu, Z.; Yang, D.; Li, H.; Liu, B.; Gao, H.; Cao, C.; Zhou, Y.; Li, J.; Li, S. Land Use Dynamic Evolution and Driving Factors of Typical Open-Pit Coal Mines in Inner Mongolia. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 9723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Sonter, L.J.; Moran, C.J.; Barrett, D.J.; Soares, B.S. Processes of land use change in mining regions. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 84, 494–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Liu, X.Y.; Bai, Z.K.; Zhou, W.; Cao, Y.G.; Zhang, G.J. Changes in soil properties in the soil profile after mining and reclamation in an opencast coal mine on the Loess Plateau, China. Ecol. Eng. 2017, 98, 228–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Wang, J.M.; Yang, R.X.; Bai, Z.K. Spatial variability and sampling optimization of soil organic carbon and total nitrogen for Minesoils of the Loess Plateau using geostatistics. Ecol. Eng. 2015, 82, 159–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Hu, Z.Q.; Xiao, W. Optimization of concurrent mining and reclamation plans for single coal seam: A case study in northern Anhui, China. Environ. Earth Sci 2013, 68, 1247–1254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. He, T.T.; Xiao, W.; Zhao, Y.L.; Deng, X.Y.; Hu, Z.Q. Identification of waterlogging in Eastern China induced by mining subsidence: A case study of Google Earth Engine time-series analysis applied to the Huainan coal field. Remote Sens. Environ. 2020, 242, 111742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Liu, X.; Shi, H.; Bai, Z.; Zhou, W.; Liu, K.; Wang, M.; He, Y. Heavy metal concentrations of soils near the large opencast coal mine pits in China. Chemosphere 2020, 244, 125360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. United Nations. UN Sustainable Development Goals. Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/goals (accessed on 27 January 2023).
  10. McNeely, J.A. The Convention on Biological Diversity. In Encyclopedia of the Anthropocene; Dellasala, D.A., Goldstein, M.I., Eds.; Elsevier: Oxford, UK, 2018; pp. 321–326. [Google Scholar]
  11. United Nations. The Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. Available online: https://www.decadeonrestoration.org/about-un-decade (accessed on 27 January 2023).
  12. Young, R.E.; Gann, G.D.; Walder, B.; Liu, J.; Cui, W.; Newton, V.; Nelson, C.R.; Tashe, N.; Jasper, D.; Silveira, F.A.O.; et al. International principles and standards for the ecological restoration and recovery of mine sites. Restor. Ecol. 2022, 30, e13771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Gann, G.D.; McDonald, T.; Walder, B.; Aronson, J.; Nelson, C.R.; Jonson, J.; Hallett, J.G.; Eisenberg, C.; Guariguata, M.R.; Liu, J.G.; et al. International principles and standards for the practice of ecological restoration. Second edition. Restor. Ecol. 2019, 27, S3–S46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. BS ISO 20305-2020; Mine Closure and Reclamation. Vocabulary. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2020.
  15. Society for Ecological Restoration International Science & Policy Working Group. The SER International Primer on Ecological Restoration. Available online: https://www.ser-rrc.org/resource/the-ser-international-primer-on/ (accessed on 27 January 2023).
  16. Hu, Z.Q. Land Reclamation and Ecological Restoration; China University of Mining and Technology Press: Xuzhou, China, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  17. Gerwing, T.G.; Hawkes, V.C.; Gann, G.D.; Murphy, S.D. Restoration, reclamation, and rehabilitation: On the need for, and positing a definition of, ecological reclamation. Restor. Ecol. 2022, 30, 13461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Aria, M.; Cuccurullo, C. bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J. Informetr. 2017, 11, 959–975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Xie, H.; Zhang, Y.; Wu, Z.; Lv, T. A Bibliometric Analysis on Land Degradation: Current Status, Development, and Future Directions. Land 2020, 9, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Liu, Z.; Ye, C.; Chen, R.; Zhao, S.X. Where are the frontiers of sustainability research? An overview based on Web of Science Database in 2013–2019. Habitat. Int. 2021, 116, 102419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Sheoran, A.S.; Sheoran, V. Heavy metal removal mechanism of acid mine drainage in wetlands: A critical review. Miner. Eng. 2006, 19, 105–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Rose, A.W. Passive Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage (Wetlands). In Water Encyclopedia; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2005; pp. 423–426. [Google Scholar]
  23. Liu, H.; Probst, A.; Liao, B. Metal contamination of soils and crops affected by the Chenzhou lead/zinc mine spill (Hunan, China). Sci. Total Environ. 2005, 339, 153–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Razo, I.; Carrizales, L.; Castro, J.; Diaz-Barriga, F.; Monroy, M. Arsenic and heavymetal pollution of soil, water and sediments in a semi-arid climate mining area in Mexico. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2004, 152, 129–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Bao, N.S.; Ye, B.Y.; Bai, Z.K. Rehabilitation of Vegetation Mapping of ATB Opencast Coal-Mine Based on GIS and RS. Sens. Lett. 2012, 10, 387–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Cao, Y.G.; Wang, J.M.; Bai, Z.K.; Zhou, W.; Zhao, Z.Q.; Ding, X.; Li, Y.N. Differentiation and mechanisms on physical properties of reconstructed soils on open-cast mine dump of loess area. Environ. Earth Sci. 2015, 74, 6367–6380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Cao, Y.G.; Zhou, W.; Bai, Z.K.; Wang, J.M.; Zhang, X.R. Differentiations in nutrients of reconstructed soils on open-cast mine dump of loess area. Fresenius Environ. Bull. 2016, 25, 2331–2342. [Google Scholar]
  28. Feng, Y.; Wang, J.M.; Bai, Z.K.; Reading, L. Effects of surface coal mining and land reclamation on soil properties: A review. Earth-Sci. Rev. 2019, 191, 12–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Gao, L.; Miao, Z.W.; Bai, Z.K.; Zhou, X.Y.; Zhao, J.K.; Zhu, Y.M. A case study of ecological restoration at the Xiaoyi Bauxite Mine, Shanxi Province, China. Ecol. Eng. 1998, 11, 221–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Guan, Y.J.; Wang, J.; Zhou, W.; Bai, Z.K.; Cao, Y.G. Identification of land reclamation stages based on succession characteristics of rehabilitated vegetation in the Pingshuo opencast coal mine. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 305, 114352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Guan, Y.J.; Zhou, W.; Bai, Z.K.; Cao, Y.G.; Huang, Y.H.; Huang, H.Y. Soil nutrient variations among different land use types after reclamation in the Pingshuo opencast coal mine on the Loess Plateau, China. Catena 2020, 188, 104427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Huang, Y.H.; Cao, Y.G.; Pietrzykowski, M.; Zhou, W.; Bai, Z.K. Spatial distribution characteristics of reconstructed soil bulk density of opencast coal-mine in the loess area of China. Catena 2021, 199, 105116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Huang, Y.H.; Kuang, X.Y.; Cao, Y.G.; Bai, Z.K. The soil chemical properties of reclaimed land in an arid grassland dump in an opencast mining area in China. RSC Adv. 2018, 8, 41499–41508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Hui, J.W.; Bai, Z.K.; Ye, B.Y.; Wang, Z.H. Remote Sensing Monitoring and Evaluation of Vegetation Restoration in Grassland Mining Areas-A Case Study of the Shengli Mining Area in Xilinhot City, China. Land 2021, 10, 743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Wang, J.M.; Jiao, Z.Z.; Bai, Z.K. Changes in carbon sink value based on RS and GIS in the Heidaigou opencast coal mine. Environ. Earth Sci. 2014, 71, 863–871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Wang, J.M.; Wang, H.D.; Cao, Y.G.; Bai, Z.K.; Qin, Q. Effects of soil and topographic factors on vegetation restoration in opencast coal mine dumps located in a loess area. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 22058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Wang, J.M.; Zhang, M.; Bai, Z.K.; Guo, L.L. Multi-fractal characteristics of the particle distribution of reconstructed soils and the relationship between soil properties and multi-fractal parameters in an opencast coal-mine dump in a loess area. Environ. Earth Sci. 2015, 73, 4749–4762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Wang, S.F.; Cao, Y.G.; Geng, B.J.; Yang, K.; Bai, Z.K. Succession law and model of reconstructed soil quality in an open-pit coal mine dump of the loess area, China. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 312, 114923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Wang, S.F.; Cao, Y.G.; Pietrzykowski, M.; Zhou, W.; Bai, Z.K. Research on the influence of vegetation restoration in loess open-pit coal mines of China: Influencing factors and mechanism. Ecol. Eng. 2022, 177, 106549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Yang, K.; Wang, S.F.; Cao, Y.G.; Li, S.P.; Zhou, W.X.; Liu, S.H.; Bai, Z.K. Ecological Restoration of a Loess Open-Cast Mining Area in China: Perspective from an Ecological Security Pattern. Forests 2022, 13, 269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Yuan, Y.; Zhao, Z.Q.; Niu, S.Y.; Bai, Z.K. The reclaimed coal mine ecosystem diverges from the surrounding ecosystem and reaches a new self-sustaining state after 20-23 years of succession in the Loess Plateau area, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 727, 138739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Zhang, L.; Wang, J.M.; Bai, Z.K.; Lv, C.J. Effects of vegetation on runoff and soil erosion on reclaimed land in an opencast coal-mine dump in a loess area. Catena 2015, 128, 44–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Zhang, X.R.; Cao, Y.G.; Bai, Z.K.; Wang, J.M.; Zhou, W.; Ding, X. Relationships between vegetation coverage and soil properties on the reclaimed dump of opencast coal mine in loess plateau, China. Fresenius Environ. Bull. 2016, 25, 4767–4776. [Google Scholar]
  44. Zhao, Z.Q.; Shahrour, I.; Bai, Z.K.; Fan, W.X.; Feng, L.R.; Li, H.F. Soils development in opencast coal mine spoils reclaimed for 1–13 years in the West-Northern Loess Plateau of China. EUR J. Soil. Biol. 2013, 55, 40–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Cui, X.Q.; Peng, S.P.; Lines, L.R.; Zhu, G.W.; Hu, Z.Q.; Cui, F. Understanding the Capability of an Ecosystem Nature-Restoration in Coal Mined Area. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 19690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Duo, L.H.; Hu, Z.Q. Soil Quality Change after Reclaiming Subsidence Land with Yellow River Sediments. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Feng, Z.J.; Hu, Z.Q.; Li, G.S.; Zhang, Y.H.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, H. Improving mine reclamation efficiency for farmland sustainable use: Insights from optimizing mining scheme. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 379, 134615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Han, J.Z.; Hu, Z.Q.; Mao, Z.; Li, G.S.; Liu, S.G.; Yuan, D.Z.; Guo, J.X. How to Account for Changes in Carbon Storage from Coal Mining and Reclamation in Eastern China? Taking Yanzhou Coalfield as an Example to Simulate and Estimate. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Hu, Z.Q.; Fu, Y.H.; Xiao, W.; Zhao, Y.L.; Wei, T.T. Ecological restoration plan for abandoned underground coal mine site in Eastern China. Int. J. Min. Reclam. Environ. 2015, 29, 316–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Hu, Z.Q.; Wang, X.T.; McSweeney, K.; Li, Y. Restoring subsided coal mined land to farmland using optimized placement of Yellow River sediment to amend soil. Land Degrad. Dev. 2022, 33, 1029–1042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Li, G.S.; Hu, Z.Q.; Yuan, D.Z.; Li, P.Y.; Feng, Z.J.; He, Y.B.; Wang, W.J. A new approach to increased land reclamation rate in a coal mining subsidence area: A case-study of Guqiao Coal Mine, China. Land Degrad. Dev. 2022, 33, 866–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Ren, H.; Xiao, W.; Zhao, Y.L.; Hu, Z.Q. Land damage assessment using maize aboveground biomass estimated from unmanned aerial vehicle in high groundwater level regions affected by underground coal mining. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 21666–21679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Zhu, Q.; Hu, Z.Q.; Liu, X.R.; Wu, Y.J. Topsoil alternatives selection for surface coal-mined land reclamation in Inner Mongolia, China: An experimental study. Int. J. Min. Reclam. Environ. 2021, 35, 421–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Du, W.F.; Chen, L.; He, Y.L.; Wang, Q.M.; Gao, P.Q.; Li, Q.S. Spatial and Temporal Distribution of Groundwater in Open-Pit Coal Mining: A Case Study from Baorixile Coal Mine, Hailaer Basin, China. Geofluids 2022, 2022, 8753217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Hu, Z.Q.; Zhu, Q.; Liu, X.R.; Li, Y. Preparation of topsoil alternatives for open-pit coal mines in the Hulunbuir grassland area, China. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2020, 147, 103431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Liu, X.Y.; Zhou, W.; Bai, Z.K. Vegetation coverage change and stability in large open-pit coal mine dumps in China during 1990–2015. Ecol. Eng. 2016, 95, 447–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Wang, S.G.; Huang, J.; Yu, H.C.; Ji, C.N. Recognition of Landscape Key Areas in a Coal Mine Area of a Semi-Arid Steppe in China: A Case Study of Yimin Open-Pit Coal Mine. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Zhang, L.J.; Zhai, Z.H.; Zhou, Y.; Liu, S.A.; Wang, L.W. The Landscape Pattern Evolution of Typical Open-Pit Coal Mines Based on Land Use in Inner Mongolia of China during 20 Years. Sustainability 2022, 14, 9590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Bi, Y.L.; Xiao, L.; Guo, C.; Christie, P. Revegetation type drives rhizosphere arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and soil organic carbon fractions in the mining subsidence area of northwest China. Catena 2020, 195, 104791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Chen, Y.; Hu, Z.Q.; Li, P.Y.; Li, G.S.; Yuan, D.Z.; Guo, J.X. Assessment and Effect of Mining Subsidence on Farmland in Coal-Crop Overlapped Areas: A Case of Shandong Province, China. Agriculture 2022, 12, 1235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Gu, Y.Y.; Zhou, D.W.; Zhang, D.M.; Wu, K.; Zhou, B.H. Study on subsidence monitoring technology using terrestrial 3D laser scanning without a target in a mining area: An example of Wangjiata coal mine, China. Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 2020, 79, 3575–3583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. He, T.T.; Xiao, W.; Zhao, Y.L.; Chen, W.Q.; Deng, X.Y.; Zhang, J.Y. Continues monitoring of subsidence water in mining area from the eastern plain in China from 1986 to 2018 using Landsat imagery and Google Earth Engine. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 279, 123610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Hu, T.H.; Chang, J.; Liu, X.X.; Feng, S.S. Integrated methods for determining restoration priorities of coal mining subsidence areas based on green infrastructure: -A case study in the Xuzhou urban area, of China. Ecol. Indic. 2018, 94, 164–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Hu, Z.Q.; Xu, X.L.; Zhao, Y.L. Dynamic monitoring of land subsidence in mining area from multi-source remote-sensing data—A case study at Yanzhou, China. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2012, 33, 5528–5545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Jing, Z.R.; Wang, J.M.; Zhu, Y.C.; Feng, Y. Effects of land subsidence resulted from coal mining on soil nutrient distributions in a loess area of China. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 177, 350–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Li, L.; Li, T.L.; Meng, H.S.; Xie, Y.H.; Zhang, J.; Hong, J.P. Effects of Seven-Year Fertilization Reclamation on Bacterial Community in a Coal Mining Subsidence Area in Shanxi, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 12504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Qiu, L.; Bi, Y.L.; Jiang, B.; Wang, Z.G.; Zhang, Y.X.; Zhakypbek, Y. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi ameliorate the chemical properties and enzyme activities of rhizosphere soil in reclaimed mining subsidence in northwestern China. J. Arid. Land 2019, 11, 135–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Sun, J.F.; Yuan, X.Z.; Liu, H.; Liu, G.D.; Zhang, G.X. Emergy evaluation of a swamp dike-pond complex: A new ecological restoration mode of coal-mining subsidence areas in China. Ecol. Indic. 2019, 107, 105660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Wang, J.M.; Wang, P.; Qin, Q.; Wang, H.D. The effects of land subsidence and rehabilitation on soil hydraulic properties in a mining area in the Loess Plateau of China. Catena 2017, 159, 51–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Xiao, L.; Bi, Y.L.; Du, S.Z.; Wang, Y.; Guo, C. Effects of re-vegetation type and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal inoculation on soil enzyme activities and microbial biomass in coal mining subsidence areas of Northern China. Catena 2019, 177, 202–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Xie, K.; Zhang, Y.Q.; Yi, Q.T.; Yan, J.P. Optimal resource utilization and ecological restoration of aquatic zones in the coal mining subsidence areas of the Huaibei Plain in Anhui Province, China. Desalin. Water Treat. 2013, 51, 4019–4027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Zeng, F.X.; Wu, K.; He, Q.; Diao, X.P.; Li, L. Model Establishment for Ponding in Coal Mining Subsidence Areas and its Prediction: Case Study of Northern Jining, China. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 2017, 35, 83–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Zhang, Q.; Ma, J.; Yang, Y.J.; Luo, Z.B.; Wang, Y.F.; Chen, F. Mining Subsidence-Induced Microtopographic Effects Alter the Interaction of Soil Bacteria in the Sandy Pasture, China. Front. Environ. Sci. 2021, 9, 656708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Zhang, Y.X.; Bi, Y.L.; Shen, H.H.; Zhang, L.J. Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi Enhance Sea Buckthorn Growth in Coal Mining Subsidence Areas in Northwest China. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2020, 30, 848–855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Zhang, Y.X.; Du, L.Z.; Liu, J. Identifying the reuse patterns of coal mining subsidence areas: A case-study of Jixi City (China). Land Degrad. Dev. 2021, 32, 4858–4870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Zhong, S.Q.; Wei, C.F.; Liu, B.; Zhang, W.H.; Du, J.; Zhang, S.C. Restoration technologies of damaged paddy in hilly post-mining and subsidence-stable area of Southwest China. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 2015, 8, 46–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Zhu, M.; Bazail, N.A.; Li, X.L.; Huang, M.N.; Mohammad, T.; Lei, M.; Wang, H. Research on wetland ecological restoration of coal mining subsidence area in suzhou, China. Fresenius Environ. Bull. 2017, 26, 5177–5183. [Google Scholar]
  78. Du, T.; Wang, D.M.; Bai, Y.J.; Zhang, Z.Z. Optimizing the formulation of coal gangue planting substrate using wastes: The sustainability of coal mine ecological restoration. Ecol. Eng. 2020, 143, 105669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Hao, J.; Guo, D.G.; Li, H.Y.; Meng, W.Q. Ecological restoration status index for evaluating the restored coal gangue pile: A chronosequence study based on the plant-soil system in the shanxi mining area, China. Appl. Ecol. Environ. Res. 2019, 17, 11587–11604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Wang, J.M.; Li, X.F.; Bai, Z.K.; Huang, L.B. The effects of coal gangue and fly ash on the hydraulic properties and water content distribution in reconstructed soil profiles of coal-mined land with a high groundwater table. Hydrol. Process. 2017, 31, 687–697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Skousen, J.; Zipper, C.E.; Rose, A.; Ziemkiewicz, P.F.; Nairn, R.; McDonald, L.M.; Kleinmann, R.L. Review of Passive Systems for Acid Mine Drainage Treatment. Mine Water Environ. 2017, 36, 133–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  82. Neff, A.N.; DeNicola, D.M.; Maltman, C. Passive treatment for acid mine drainage partially restores microbial community structure in different stream habitatsina. Water 2021, 13, 3300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Ramos-Perez, D.; Alcantara-Hernandez, R.J.; Romero, F.M.; Gonzalez-Chavez, J.L. Changes in the prokaryotic diversity in response to hydrochemical variations during an acid mine drainage passive treatment. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 842, 156629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Bodapati, V.S.; Wells, L.G. Automated system to improve levelness of reconstructed soil. Appl. Eng. Agric. 2012, 28, 187–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Trippe, K.M.; Manning, V.A.; Reardon, C.L.; Klein, A.M.; Weidman, C.; Ducey, T.F.; Novak, J.M.; Watts, D.W.; Rushmiller, H.; Spokas, K.A.; et al. Phytostabilization of acidic mine tailings with biochar, biosolids, lime, and locally-sourced microbial inoculum: Do amendment mixtures influence plant growth, tailing chemistry, and microbial composition? Appl. Soil Ecol. 2021, 165, 103962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Maus, V.; Giljum, S.; Gutschlhofer, J.; da Silva, D.M.; Probst, M.; Gass, S.L.B.; Luckeneder, S.; Lieber, M.; McCallum, I. A global-scale data set of mining areas. Sci. Data 2020, 7, 289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Cummings, J. The mining industry and land rehabilitation in Australia—Once were leaders? J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 84, 39–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Dixon, K.; MacDonald, V.; D’Agui, H. Advances in mining restoration. Restor. Ecol. 2022, 30, e13776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Abafe, E.A.; Bahta, Y.T.; Jordaan, H. Exploring biblioshiny for historical assessment of global research on sustainable use of water in agriculture. Sustainability 2022, 14, 10651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Tordoff, G.M.; Baker, A.J.M.; Willis, A.J. Current approaches to the revegetation and reclamation of metalliferous mine wastes. Chemosphere 2000, 41, 219–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Wong, M.H. Ecological restoration of mine degraded soils, with emphasis on metal contaminated soils. Chemosphere 2003, 50, 775–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Ye, Z.H.; Yang, Z.Y.; Chan, G.Y.S.; Wong, M.H. Growth response of Sesbania rostrata and S-cannabina to sludge-amended lead/zinc mine tailings—A greenhouse study. Environ. Int. 2001, 26, 449–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Kettenring, J.R. The Practice of Cluster Analysis. J. Classif. 2006, 23, 3–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Beesley, L.; Inneh, O.S.; Norton, G.J.; Moreno-Jimenez, E.; Pardo, T.; Clemente, R.; Dawson, J.J.C. Assessing the influence of compost and biochar amendments on the mobility and toxicity of metals and arsenic in a naturally contaminated mine soil. Environ. Pollut. 2014, 186, 195–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Fellet, G.; Marchiol, L.; Delle Vedove, G.; Peressotti, A. Application of biochar on mine tailings: Effects and perspectives for land reclamation. Chemosphere 2011, 83, 1262–1267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Bradshaw, A.D. The reconstruction of ecosystems. J. Appl. Ecol. 1983, 20, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Bradshaw, A.D. Restoration of mined lands—Using natural processes. Ecol. Eng. 1997, 8, 255–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Murtagh, F. Multiple correspondence analysis and related methods. Psychometrika 2007, 72, 275–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Chinese Ecological Restoration Network; China University of Mining and Technology(Beijing); China University of Mining and Technology. The 3rd International Symposium on Land Reclamation and Ecological Restoration. Available online: http://enislrer3.er-china.com/ (accessed on 27 January 2023).
  100. Liu, H.; Zhang, M.; Su, L.J.; Chen, X.X.; Liu, C.F.; Sun, A.G. A boundary model of terrain reconstruction in a coal-mining subsidence waterlogged area. Environ. Earth Sci. 2021, 80, 187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Abdelrhman, A.A.; Gao, L.L.; Li, S.P.; Lu, J.J.; Song, X.J.; Zhang, M.N.; Zheng, F.J.; Wu, H.J.; Wu, X.P. Long-term application of organic wastes improves soil carbon and structural properties in dryland affected by coal mining activity. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Vieira, C.K.; Borges, L.G.D.; Bortolini, J.G.; Soares, C.; Giongo, A.; Sturmer, S.L. Does a decrease in microbial biomass alter mycorrhizal attributes and soil quality indicators in coal mining areas under revegetation process? Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 802, 149843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Roy, R.; Sultana, S.; Wang, J.X.; Mostofa, M.G.; Sarker, T.; Shah, M.M.R.; Hossain, M.S. Revegetation of coal mine degraded arid areas: The role of a native woody species under optimum water and nutrient resources. Environ. Res. 2022, 204, 111921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Du, H.D.; Wang, S.M.; Nie, W.J.; Song, S.J. Soil Properties and Bacterial Community Dynamics in a Coal Mining Subsidence Area: Active Versus Passive Revegetation. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2021, 21, 2573–2585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Chen, Q.J.; Hang, M.R. Dynamic reclamation methods for subsidence land in the mining area with high underground water level. Open Geosci. 2018, 10, 639–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Bi, Y.L.; Guo, Y.; Christie, P. Mining subsidence area reconstruction with N-2-fixing plants promotes arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal biodiversity and microbial biomass C:N:P stoichiometry of cyanobacterial biocrusts. Forest Ecol. Manag. 2022, 503, 119763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Lima, A.T.; Mitchell, K.; O’Connell, D.W.; Verhoeven, J.; Van Cappellen, P. The legacy of surface mining: Remediation, restoration, reclamation and rehabilitation. Environ. Sci. Policy 2016, 66, 227–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 15 10458 g001 550
Figure 1. Technical flow of the Bibliometrics approach (* as of 15 January 2023).
Figure 1. Technical flow of the Bibliometrics approach (* as of 15 January 2023).
Sustainability 15 10458 g001
Sustainability 15 10458 g002 550
Figure 2. Numbers of relevant papers published each year from 1990 to 2022.
Figure 2. Numbers of relevant papers published each year from 1990 to 2022.
Sustainability 15 10458 g002
Sustainability 15 10458 g003 550
Figure 3. Average total citation rates per year on LRER from 1990 to 2022.
Figure 3. Average total citation rates per year on LRER from 1990 to 2022.
Sustainability 15 10458 g003
Sustainability 15 10458 g004 550
Figure 4. Collaboration network of countries publishing articles on LRER.
Figure 4. Collaboration network of countries publishing articles on LRER.
Sustainability 15 10458 g004
Sustainability 15 10458 g005 550
Figure 5. Collaboration network of main institutions on LRER.
Figure 5. Collaboration network of main institutions on LRER.
Sustainability 15 10458 g005
Sustainability 15 10458 g006 550
Figure 6. Main research categories on LRER.
Figure 6. Main research categories on LRER.
Sustainability 15 10458 g006
Sustainability 15 10458 g007 550
Figure 7. Cloud map of high-frequency keywords on LRER from 1990 to 2022.
Figure 7. Cloud map of high-frequency keywords on LRER from 1990 to 2022.
Sustainability 15 10458 g007
Sustainability 15 10458 g008 550
Figure 8. Dendrogram of keywords on LRER from 1990 to 2022.
Figure 8. Dendrogram of keywords on LRER from 1990 to 2022.
Sustainability 15 10458 g008
Sustainability 15 10458 g009 550
Figure 9. Word map of keywords on LRER from 1990 to 2022.
Figure 9. Word map of keywords on LRER from 1990 to 2022.
Sustainability 15 10458 g009
Sustainability 15 10458 g010 550
Figure 10. Thematic evolution on LRER.
Figure 10. Thematic evolution on LRER.
Sustainability 15 10458 g010
Table
Table 1. Top 10 most cited publications on LRER from 1990 to 2022.
Table 1. Top 10 most cited publications on LRER from 1990 to 2022.
RankPaperDOIYearJournalTC
1SHEORAN AS, 2006, MINER ENG10.1016/j.mineng.2005.08.0062006Minerals Engineering474
2LIU HY, 2005, SCI TOTAL ENVIRON10.1016/j.scitotenv.2004.07.0302005Science of the Total Environment473
3RAZO I, 2004, WATER AIR SOIL POLL10.1023/B:WATE.0000015350.14520.c12004Water Air and Soil Pollution296
4LI MS, 2007, ENVIRON POLLUT10.1016/j.envpol.2006.08.0062007Environmental Pollution264
5LI MS, 2006, SCI TOTAL ENVIRON10.1016/j.scitotenv.2005.05.0032014Science of the Total Environment264
6YU HY, 2016, ENVIRON POLLUT10.1016/j.envpol.2015.11.0212006Environmental Pollution197
7QIAO JT, 2018, CHEMOSPHERE10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.12.0812018Chemosphere192
8SHRESTHA RK, 2011, GEODERMA10.1016/j.geoderma.2010.12.0152011Geoderma173
9RIOS CA, 2008, J HAZARD MATER10.1016/j.jhazmat.2007.11.1232008Journal of Hazardous Materials170
10MACINTOSH DJ, 2002, ESTUAR COAST SHELF S10.1006/ecss.2001.08962002Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science169
Table
Table 2. Top 10 countries in terms of the literature numbers on LRER.
Table 2. Top 10 countries in terms of the literature numbers on LRER.
RankCountryNumber of ArticlesSingle-Country Publications
(SCP)		Multiple-Country Publications
(MCP)
1China666564102
2Australia25518966
3USA22720423
4Canada14311825
5Germany836815
6Poland75696
7India73667
8Spain695019
9Brazil644915
10UK503812
Table
Table 3. Top 10 research institutions related to LRER.
Table 3. Top 10 research institutions related to LRER.
RankResearch InstitutionCountryNumber of Articles
1The China Univ Min and TechnolChina133
2Univ QueenslandAustralia98
3China Univ GeosciChina84
4Univ Western AustraliaAustralia70
5Curtin UnivAustralia46
6China Univ Min and Technol BeijingChina42
7Univ Chinese Acad SciChina36
8Key Lab Land Consolidat and RehabilChina33
9Univ CagliariItaly27
10Univ Quebec Abitibi TemiscamingueCanada27
Table
Table 4. Top 10 journals in terms of the literature quantity on LRER.
Table 4. Top 10 journals in terms of the literature quantity on LRER.
RankJournalCountryJournal Citation Report
(JCR)		Impact Factor
(If)		Articles
1Science of the Total EnvironmentThe NetherlandsQ110.75374
2Environmental Science and Pollution ResearchGermanyQ25.19053
3Restoration EcologyUnited StatesQ24.18151
4Ecological EngineeringThe NetherlandsQ24.37946
5Journal of Cleaner ProductionUnited StatesQ111.07244
6Environmental Earth SciencesGermanyQ23.11941
7Journal of Environmental ManagementEnglandQ18.91041
8SustainabilitySwitzerlandQ23.88941
9ChemosphereEnglandQ18.94336
10Remote SensingSwitzerlandQ15.34929
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

Shao, Y.; Xu, Q.; Wei, X. Progress of Mine Land Reclamation and Ecological Restoration Research Based on Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability 2023, 15, 10458. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310458

AMA Style

Shao Y, Xu Q, Wei X. Progress of Mine Land Reclamation and Ecological Restoration Research Based on Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability. 2023; 15(13):10458. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310458

Chicago/Turabian Style

Shao, Ya, Qinxue Xu, and Xi Wei. 2023. "Progress of Mine Land Reclamation and Ecological Restoration Research Based on Bibliometric Analysis" Sustainability 15, no. 13: 10458. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310458

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