Next Article in Journal
Analysing the Water–Energy Nexus Considering Rainwater Harvesting in Buildings
Previous Article in Journal
Snapshot of the Bacterial Composition of Two Invertebrates, Peltodoris atromaculata and Petrosia ficiformis, from a Shallow Hydrothermal Spring on the West Coast of Sicily
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Water
Volume 17
Issue 7
10.3390/w17071035
water-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
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Mapping the Landscape: A Bibliometric Analysis of Water Security, Governance, and Trading in Australia

by
Jaba Sarker
1,2,*,
John Rolfe
1 and
Delwar Akbar
1
1
School of Business and Law, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, QLD 4702, Australia
2
Department of Agricultural Economics, Gazipur Agricultural University (Former BSMARU), Gazipur 1706, Bangladesh
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Water 2025, 17(7), 1035; https://doi.org/10.3390/w17071035
Submission received: 27 February 2025 / Revised: 11 March 2025 / Accepted: 25 March 2025 / Published: 31 March 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Water Resources Management, Policy and Governance)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Australia has been innovative in water resource management and the design of markets in recent decades, as reflected in policy developments and extensive research literature. However, the diversity of the topic areas makes it difficult to summarise the literature succinctly. Bibliometric analysis allows the investigation of a large volume of scientific data, revealing trends and insights in a specific research field. In this study, we apply a bibliometric analysis over 20 years of research publications (2005–2024) on Australia’s water security, governance, and trading topics, drawing on the Scopus database and VOSviewer. The data analysis revealed contributions from 187 articles and 436 authors, with 5 documents cited more than 100 times. Results have been analysed in several ways to identify patterns in co-authorship, co-occurrence with keywords, citation with countries, bibliographic coupling, and co-citations. Double-log regression was applied to predict the factors underpinning the citation level of a document. References, page count, article age, impact factor, and specific authors positively correlate with total citation count. While bibliometric analysis has some limitations, the results help to summarise the body of published research on water management in Australia and identify the factors that make some papers more influential than others.

1. Introduction

Water is an essential resource that helps improve agricultural productivity, maintains balance in ecosystems, and reinforces human systems [1,2,3] Australia’s variable rainfall and droughts create significant water supply challenges, which are increasingly felt by regional and remote communities, impacting agricultural production and eventually the broader economy [4,5,6]. There is growing concern about water security in Australia because of the changing climate, droughts, and demand for water in agriculture [7,8,9,10,11]. While the supply of fresh water is limited in Australia, the demand is rising from both agricultural and non-agricultural uses, causing sectors such as the irrigation industry to seek improved water use efficiency (WUE) within supply constraints. In recent decades, significant advancements have been made through modernisation and mechanisation of irrigation infrastructure [12]. Sustainable agricultural practices, such as efficient irrigation techniques, rainwater harvesting (irrigating by rainwater and/or rainwater preservation), and the adoption of drought-resistant crops, are essential for enhancing water use efficiency and ensuring food security [13,14,15]. Effective water governance, trading, and marketing (awareness building) have become crucial for optimising water use, enhancing productivity, and ensuring sustainable and resilient agricultural systems [16,17].
The interdependence of water security, governance, and water trading systems creates complexity in water resource management [18]. The Australian experience in designing the governance and institutional and flexible market systems can offer valuable insights into the complexities and challenges of managing water in an increasingly resource-constrained world. There has been substantial research and policy activity in Australia, and it has been a leader in many research areas around developing water governance and water trading [19,20,21,22].
Over the past several decades, Australia has implemented a range of reforms designed to strengthen water management frameworks, develop water markets, and promote efficient water allocation among agricultural users [23]. These advances have attracted substantial academic attention, generating a wealth of studies that analyse complex collaborations between water policy, agricultural productivity, and environmental sustainability [24,25,26]. Underpinning these policy reforms is the National Water Initiative [5], a framework of rules for reserving, using and trading water that is a joint initiative of the national, state and territory governments.
Effective water governance is integral to achieving water security [27,28]. It includes policies and regulations that govern water use, the roles and responsibilities of various stakeholders, and mechanisms for conflict resolution. Water governance encompasses values such as accountability, transparency, public participation, and integrity [29]. The success of water trading systems relies heavily on robust governance structures to mitigate potential adverse social and environmental impacts [30]. The advances in water governance, management and markets in Australia have involved substantial collaborative effort between various parties [19]. Schulte et al. [31] investigated the encounters in the water–energy–food nexus through collaborative engagement and innovative thinking between diverse stakeholders.
However, it is difficult to summarise the relevant literature on water management in a systematic way due to the extensive number and diversity of publications and the complexity of topics, including urban, rural and industrial water use and governance [10,32,33,34,35,36,37,38]. A bibliometric analysis can be used for this type of analysis to identify key themes and trends and highlight gaps in the literature that require further exploration [39,40,41,42]. Bibliometric approaches are quantitative and expressive by nature but can also be used to make statements about qualitative views [43]. Some studies have utilised bibliometric methodologies to analyse pattern and gaps in research related to water resource management. For example, Zhang et al. [44] performed a bibliometric analysis of water footprint using the Web of Science database from 2006 to 2015, while Velasco-Muñoz et al. [45] analysed the literature on water use efficiency in agriculture using the Scopus database. Meng et al. [46] used the Web of Science database to perform a bibliometric analysis of water rights from 1971 to 2020, and Gajurel et al. [47] analysed the existing literature on global aspects of water governance and water security studies between 2000 and 2020 using both Scopus and Web of Science databases. However, little attention has been given to examining the existing literature on water security, markets, and governance based on Australia, which is the leader in water policy reform.
To address this, a bibliometric analysis of water security, markets, and governance in Australia has been applied assess research trends, identify key authors and institutions, and map knowledge networks within these interconnected fields. By evaluating citation patterns, the analysis can be used to reveal influential studies and impacts, thereby guiding policymakers and practitioners in their decision-making processes. Ultimately, this approach not only informs the scholarly community but also facilitates funding bodies in resource allocation, contributing to the development of effective strategies for addressing water challenges.
The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review of the evolution and trend of water security, trading, and governance for agricultural water management in Australia from 2005 to 2024 through bibliometric methodology to research patterns and evaluate citation trends, collaborative efforts, and factors that influence citations. The remainder of this article proceeds as follows: Section 2 presents the materials and methods; Section 3 provides the results and discussions of the bibliometric analysis and regression analysis; the limitations of the study are shown in Section 4; and recommendations for future research are presented in Section 5. Conclusions follow in Section 5.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Data Collection

Scopus is a major abstract and citation database that provides extensive coverage of scientific journals, conference proceedings, and books, ensuring high-quality data through a rigorous selection process by an independent advisory board [48]. Due to the substantial differences in formats and types of data between various bibliographic databases, Scopus was the only database used in this bibliometric analysis. Using several databases would have necessitated greater data richness, which could have introduced bias too. A strong, consistent, and repeatable analysis was guaranteed by Scopus’s standardised structure and extensive coverage of Australian water security research (journals and conferences). Data integration complexity was decreased, and methodological uniformity was improved by using a single database.
In the context of agricultural water management in Australia, our keyword search strategy sought to thoroughly capture the pertinent literature on water security, governance, and trading. The documents were searched within article titles, abstracts, and keywords as “water security” OR “water governance” AND (“irrigation” OR “agriculture” OR “farming”) OR “risk” OR “supplemented water” OR “surface water” OR “ground water” OR (“water trading” OR “water market”) AND “Australia” in search documents in Scopus. Subsequent searches were performed focusing on main keywords, “Water security” AND “Australia” AND “irrigation”, “Water market” AND “Australia” AND “irrigation”, “Water governance” AND “Australia” AND “irrigation”, to identify any additional publications on these topics. The above keywords were selected to reflect and focus only on water security, water market and water governance in the agriculture sector of Australia. This combined strategy sought to strike a balance between targeted precision and coverage breadth.
We carried out a comprehensive literature review to guide keyword selection and made sure synonyms and related terms were included to reduce any potential biases. To make sure the search was both sensitive and specific, we also experimented with various keyword combinations. Although the goal of this strategy was to reduce bias, it is recognised that subjectivity is inevitably introduced by the keywords chosen. The output reflects 335 documents. Then, documents were limited between 2005 and 2024 (20 years), country (Australia), subject area (environmental science, social science, agricultural and biological sciences), and language (English), which resulted in 187 documents. Few pertinent publications were found prior to 2005, according to a preliminary search, indicating that the field’s research output and policy focus sharply increased after that year. In particular, Turral et al. [49] evaluate the effectiveness of surface water markets in the Murray–Darling Basin for irrigators. We can examine a period of notable water evolution within this time frame. Export information was limited to citation information, bibliographical information, abstract and keywords, and other information about references. The protocols for the Scopus search and data filtering are shown in Table 1. Data were downloaded from SCOPUS on 16 August 2024 and 14 September 2024.

2.2. Empirical Methods

2.2.1. Bibliometric Analysis

For discovering and analysing extensive volumes of scientific data, bibliometric analysis is a widely accepted method [40]. In recent years, bibliometric analysis has become popular in business [50,51], health [52,53,54,55], environmental management [56,57,58] and natural resource management [59,60,61,62,63] research. The analysis can be used to identify the contributions of and relationships between different authors, support for different types of publications and journals, and factors that explain citation rates.
Table 2 highlights the units of analysis that have been performed using VOSviewer 1.6.20 software in this study. The analyses include co-authorship with authors, co-occurrence with author keywords, citation documents with countries, bibliographic coupling with documents, and co-citation with cited authors. Analysing co-authorship (the collaboration between two or more authors on a single publication) can provide insights into various aspects of collaborations and networks within academic fields. Co-occurrence analysis refers to the examination of how often two or more keywords appear together in research publications [64] and provides insights into themes and the interconnectedness of topics within a specific field. Bibliographic coupling refers to the situation where two or more documents (e.g., research papers or articles) cite the same third document [65]. Co-citation analysis is a bibliometric method that examines how often two or more documents are cited together in subsequent research and can reveal important insights into the relationships and influence of authors within academic fields.

2.2.2. Double-Log Regression Model

A double logarithm regression model has been utilised in this study to analyse the effects of various explanatory variables on the total citation count. This analytical approach involves taking the natural logarithm of both the dependent variable (total citation count) and the independent (continuous) variables (number of references; page count; article age; impact factors; number of authors; conference paper; book chapter; first author Australian affiliation; Author—Wheeler, Sarah; Author—Grafton, Quentin; Author—Kiem, Anthony), allowing for a more robust examination of the relationships between them. Using citations as a dependent variable in double-log regression analysis presents several challenges related to model fit, potential biases, and limitations. While the logarithmic transformation can help linearise relationships and normalise citation data, it assumes a constant elasticity that may not always be valid. Model fit should be assessed using metrics like R-squared and residual analysis to ensure that residuals are randomly distributed; patterns in residuals may indicate issues such as model misspecification or omitted variable bias. It is noted that binary variables are not transformed into log form. By employing a double-log model, we can effectively capture the multiplicative interactions between the variables, thereby providing insights into how percentage changes in the independent variables are associated with percentage changes in the total citation count. This is particularly valuable in understanding the nuances of citation dynamics, which may not be evident through standard linear regression methods. The total citation (Y) was specified as a function of the following independent variables:
L n Y = α + b 1 L n X 1 + b 2 L n X 2 + b 3 L n X 3 + b 4 L n X 4 + b 5 L n X 5 + b 6 X 6 + b 7 X 7 + b 8 X 8 + b 9 X 9 + b 10 X 10 + b 11 X 11 + U
The explanatory variables considered were as follows:
X1  =  number of references (in numbers), X2  =  page count (in numbers), X3  =  article age (in numbers), X4  =  impact factors (in numbers), X5  =  number of authors (in numbers), X6  =  conference paper (binary), X7  =  book chapter (binary), X8  =  first author Australian affiliation (binary), X9  =  Wheeler, Sarah (Binary), X10  =  Grafton, Quentin (Binary), X11  =  Kiem, Anthony (Binary), U  =  error-term, and ln  =  natural logarithm.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Results from Bibliometric Analysis

3.1.1. Publication Outputs

A total of 187 documents relating to Australia’s water security, water governance and water trading were collected between 2005 and 2024. These documents were classified into articles (n = 152), conference papers (n = 10), review articles (n = 10), book chapters (n = 14), and report and editorial (n = 1), as shown in Figure 1.
The findings reveal a strong emphasis on original research, as indicated by the high number of articles (152) compared to other document types. This suggests that scholars in this field are primarily focused on generating new knowledge and sharing findings through journals. The relatively low quantity of book chapters (14) implies a preference for shorter, standalone publications rather than lengthy contributions to edited volumes. Additionally, the limited number of conference papers (10) may reflect a trend towards peer-reviewed journals over conference presentations, possibly indicating a more formal approach to dissemination. The solitary editorial (1) points to a lack of active debate or commentary in the field, which might suggest a less engaged discourse among researchers. Finally, the modest count of review articles (10) indicates that comprehensive summaries of existing research are not a primary focus, further emphasising the priority on new research contributions. Collectively, these trends highlight a research community that values original studies while potentially missing opportunities for broader discussions and reviews of the literature.

3.1.2. Total Number of Publications with Citations

The data (Figure 2) illustrate the dynamic nature of academic recognition, highlighting the importance of aligning research focus with current trends and maintaining the quality of publication platforms to sustain citation counts. The data reflect trends in publication numbers and total citations from 2005 to 2024, indicating the evolving impact of research over time. In the initial years, publications were low, with only four documents published in 2005, but citations rapidly increased. The period from 2011 to 2014 marks a significant growth in citations, peaking in 2013 with 12 publications and 583 citations. This suggests that research during this time gained substantial attention and impact. However, from 2015 onward, while the number of publications has varied, fluctuations have been observed in total citations and total publications. Remarkably, while the years leading up to 2015 demonstrate strong research output and engagement, the subsequent decline suggests a possible shift in research focus within the community.

3.1.3. Top Contributing Journals

Table 3 provides a comparative analysis of various journals in the field of water-related research based on key bibliometric statistics. “Agricultural Water Management” leads in total publications (TP) with 11 articles and has the highest total citations (TC) at 303, resulting in a significant average of citations per paper (CPP) of 27.545. In the meantime, “Water Resources Research” boasts the highest CPP of 36.556 with 9 publications and 329 total citations, indicating its influential presence in the field. “Journal of Hydrology” also demonstrates a strong performance with a CPP of 27.222 and a total of 245 citations. In contrast, “Water” (Switzerland), while having a lower total citation count (TC = 195) and a CPP of 24.375, still shows respectable publication metrics. All journals listed are classified in the Q1 quartile, highlighting their status as top-tier publications within their respective areas. Other metrics such as CiteScore, SNIP, and SJR further emphasise the journals’ impact and prestige, supporting researchers in determining suitable outlets for their work based on visibility and citation potential in the scholarly community. Other journals like the “Journal of Rural Studies”, “Land Use Policy”, “International Journal of Water Resources Development” and “Environmental Research Letters” also perform well, particularly in citations per paper, but “Agricultural Water Management” clearly leads overall. On the other hand, the SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) of “Environmental Research Letters” (2.134) and “Journal of Cleaner Production” (2.058) places these in the first quartile (Q1) of journals, signifying their prestigious status in scholarly circles. The presence of varying quartile rankings among the journals further highlights the competitive landscape, with those in Q1 indicating higher impact and respect within the academic community.

3.1.4. Author Collaboration and Net Working

An author collaboration network is a type of social network that has been widely used to analyse the structure of scientific collaborations and assess the standing of individual authors [66]. There are 435 authors in the identified studies, but after considering the minimum number of documents (2) and the minimum number of citations of an author (2), 74 meet the thresholds. From those 74, the largest set of connections with 46 items has been selected. Figure 3 presents a collaborative network in the field of water security, trading, and governance in Australia, with authors grouped by the colour indicating differing research affiliations and potential collaborative dynamics. The Red Group, comprising 11 authors, stands out as the largest, suggesting a strong collaborative focus, while the Green and Blue Groups, each with 6 authors, indicate interdisciplinary connections that could enhance collaborative research efforts. Smaller groups, such as the Yellow, Purple, and Sky Groups, involving four to five authors, indicate niche areas of specialisation that may benefit from partnerships with larger networks. On the other hand, the Orange, Brown, and Pink Groups exhibit fewer collaborators, highlighting opportunities for strategic alliances that could direct innovation in the field. The author co-authorship network has also been studied by Xue et al. [67] and Khan et al. [68].
The comparison of article numbers against fractionalisation scores demonstrates that productivity (number of articles) does not always correlate with impact (fractionalisation). The ten most productive authors according to the number of articles and articles fractionalised are presented in Table 4. Sarah Wheeler has 25 articles, while Henning Bjornlund and Alec Zuo have authored 15 articles each. However, the fractionalised scores, which account for various factors such as the quality, impact, or significance of the articles, provide a more nuanced view of each author’s influence. In this context, it appears that Wheeler’s work is not only more numerous but also holds a greater weight or value, as reflected in the higher fractionalised score. Authors with lower fractionalised scores may have a smaller number of collaborative publications and a more focused or specialised research agenda.

3.1.5. Keyword Used by the Authors

Author keywords are terms chosen by authors to summarise and represent the core content of scientific publications [69,70]. Author keywords may differ from the terms used in the abstracts and title [71]. Keyword co-occurrence analysis can be employed to identify thematic clusters and relationships between various research fields [72]. Visualising keyword co-occurrence analysis guides future and interdisciplinary research directions, helping advance scientific fields [73].
In VOSviewer, 85 out of 558 keywords met the threshold of a minimum of two occurrences of the keyword in a research article. The network mapping resulted in 15 clusters, 560 connecting links, and a total link strength of 908 (Figure 4). The top ten keywords are water markets (43 times), Murray–Darling Basin (41 times), Australia (28 times), irrigation (21 times), climate change (19 times), water governance (19 times), water security (17 times), drought (15 times), water policy (13 times), and water trading (12 times). The prevalence of primary keywords in the bibliometric study of Australian water resources indicates the main themes and issues in the area. To begin with, the Murray–Darling Basin is the largest river system in Australia, serving as a key area for studies on water distribution, ecological flows, and the effects of climate change. Australia is a world leader in the development of water markets, positioning it as a key area for research attention. Secondly, the terms water market and governance cover a wide array of subjects, including institutional structures, regulatory systems, and policies designed to promote water sustainability. Ultimately, irrigation is crucial in Australian agriculture; hence, it emphasises enhancing irrigation efficiency, regulating water consumption, and tackling the environmental effects of irrigation. The top five clusters are Cluster 1 (climate change, governance, groundwater, water, markets, water pricing, water storage, infrastructure, risk management); Cluster 2 (water trading, adaptation, climate variability, water scarcity, irrigation water, risk aversion, water price, water sharing); Cluster 3 (drought, agriculture, climate change adaptation, adaptive management, desalination, flood risk, water efficiency); Cluster 4 (water policy, water management, economic analysis, water recovery, basin plan, policy transfer, water quality); and Cluster 5 (Murray–Darling Basin, water reform, environmental water, climate adaptation, adaptive governance, adaptive water governance, climate risk).
How climate change is increasingly seen as a key factor influencing Australia’s water resource management is highlighted in Cluster 1. This theme’s development demonstrates a change from concentrating mostly on the infrastructure and allocation processes of the water supply to specifically integrating risk and climate variability into decision-making. The term “governance” is included to emphasise the significance of institutional and policy frameworks in addressing the effects of climate change. The emergence of “groundwater” indicates a growing interest in investigating this alternate source of water. The existence of “markets” and “water pricing” indicates that there is still interest in managing water resources through economic means. Cluster 2 demonstrates a persistent emphasis on water markets and trading as tools for controlling water scarcity, especially in light of climate uncertainty and variability. This theme’s development demonstrates a growing understanding of the risks connected to water markets, particularly with regard to price volatility and risk aversion, or uncertainty about future water availability. The focus on “adaptation” highlights the necessity of adaptable and robust water management plans to address the effects of climate change, including the use of water markets as an adaptation tool. The substantial effects of droughts on Australian agriculture are reflected in Cluster 3, which also highlights the necessity of efficient drought adaptation and mitigation measures. Cluster 3 reflects the significant impact of droughts on Australian agriculture and the need for effective drought mitigation and adaptation strategies. This theme’s development shows a distance from reactive drought responses and toward proactive ones, such as adaptive management techniques. The terms “desalination” and “flood risk” are included to emphasise the use of technology to enhance water security and control extreme weather. The economic and policy aspects of water management are represented by Cluster 4. The themes’ development here points to a growing emphasis on economic analysis in the process of making decisions. The inclusion of “basin plan” and “water recovery” shows how legislators are attempting to alleviate water scarcity and enhance environmental results. “Policy transfer” denotes a desire to enhance Australia’s water policies and management by taking inspiration from other nations’ experiences. Australia’s largest and most intricate river system, the Murray–Darling Basin (MDB), presents unique water management challenges, which are highlighted in Cluster 5. The development of this theme demonstrates a distinct move toward adaptive governance as a fundamental idea to address the particular difficulties faced by the MDB. The terms “environmental water” and “climate adaptation” are used to highlight how crucial it is to incorporate ecological factors and predictions of climate change into water management strategies. The importance of adaptive governance is emphasised. The keyword occurrence trend and clustering were also studied by Zhang et al. [74], Zhang and Feng [75], and Farah and Shahrour [76]. Other than searching keyword “water markets”, “Murray Darling Basin” is the most frequently used keyword in water management research in Australia. For example, other than the search keyword “water footprint”, the most frequently used author keyword was “energy” in water footprint research [44].

3.1.6. Citation Network with Different Countries

A citation network with different countries implies citation flow from one country to another in different documents [77]. In this citation document analysis, a total of 23 countries are included, each having a minimum of two documents (Figure 5). Out of these, 10 countries meet the specified threshold. Notably, the largest set of connected items comprises seven individual elements. The citation network data indicate the extent to which various countries engage with Australian research and practices related to water governance and security. Australia leads with six citations and a high total link strength of 112, suggesting that its research is widely recognised and cited, possibly indicating a strong influence in the field of water management. This importance may suggest Australia’s innovative strategies and effective governance measures in managing water resources. Canada has four citations and a strength of 85, implying a solid engagement with Australian literature, possibly leveraging its research in developing its own water governance policies. This indicates a collaborative interest in addressing similar water issues. In contrast, China (two citations, strength of 2) and France (one citation, strength of 3) have fewer citations, suggesting they may be less engaged or reliant on Australian research in this domain. This could indicate limitations in their research output related to water governance or a different focus on their water management strategies. The United Kingdom (four citations, strength of 29) and the United States (three citations, strength of 8) show moderate engagement but with relatively lower strength, indicating that while there is some connection to Australian research, it may not be as impactful. This could signify opportunities for these countries to enhance their use of Australian research in shaping their own water policies.

3.1.7. Bibliographic Coupling Network with Documents

The bibliographic coupling network is the appropriate lens to look at how knowledge is combined into scientific work [78]. Kessler [79] introduced bibliographic coupling as a method for grouping scientific documents to facilitate information provision and retrieval. In this study, out of 187 documents, 49 meet the threshold considering the minimum number of 30 citations in a document, where the largest set of connected items consists of 44 items. The results in Table 5 provide a list of documents attributed to various authors, categorised into clusters based on thematic similarities, methodologies, or findings. In other words, each group of papers likely addresses related topics or research questions, suggesting cohesive themes within each cluster. The cluster numbers (ranging from 1 to 8) group these documents, indicating their relevance and connection to specific topics or themes within the larger field. For example, Cluster 1 may incorporate foundational studies from earlier years, while Clusters 2 and 3 likely address evolving issues or case studies related to water governance, and Clusters 4 and 5 may feature critical insights or contemporary research shaping current discourse. Clusters 6 and 7 address the specific location and specific group of people whereas Cluster 8 addresses the water security in Australia. These clusters not only highlight concentrated areas of research but can also uncover gaps for future exploration, aiding in understanding the landscape and evolution of knowledge within the specific domain. The bibliographic coupling network is also presented in Figure 6.

3.1.8. Co-Citation Network with Cited Authors

Co-citation with cited authors has been analysed considering the minimum number of 20 citations of an author, where out of the 12,564 authors, 68 meet the threshold (Figure 7). The ranking of authors based on their “Total Link Strength” is presented in Table 6, indicating the degree of collaboration or connectivity of authors within their research network. Higher link strength values imply greater interconnection among researchers, which can enhance the dissemination and impact of their work. At the top of the list is Sarah Wheeler, with an outstanding total link strength of 9990, suggesting she has considerable collaboration and weight in her field. Following her, Henning Bjornlund and Alec Zuo also show strong linkages with strengths of 8261 and 7295, respectively, underlining their active engagement in collaborative research. Other notable authors include Quentin Grafton and Adam Loch, who exhibit significant link strengths of 5342 and 5121, indicating robust research networks. These authors significantly engaged in joint research networks, partnering on articles with other prominent scholars. Robust collaborative connections broaden research impact and result in increased publication volume.

3.2. Regression Analysis

3.2.1. Factors Influencing Citation Count

A double-log regression analysis was also performed to identify the factors that drive citation rates. The descriptive statistics for the variables in this study are summarised in Table 7. The publications in the dataset include research articles, conference papers and book chapters, while key authors found to be significant in the models included Wheeler, Kiem, and Grafton.

3.2.2. Results from Double-Log Regression

Findings from the double-log regression model are given in Table 8. In a double-log model, the relationship between the variables is expressed in terms of their logarithms, which generally allows for the interpretation of coefficients as elasticities. Only the significant variables have been used in the model, with eleven article-related factors found to have a statistically significant relation to an article’s citation count. The positive and strongly significant coefficient for the number of references suggests that a 1% increase in the number of references is associated with an approximate 0.532% increase in the citation count, assuming all else is constant. The finding is consistent with Sigala et al. [116]. This implies a strong and significant relationship between the number of references cited and the total citations in the model. The age of an article, the impact factor of the journal, the page count, and the number of authors are all strongly and positively related to the total citation count, as are the presence of Grafton, Kiem or Wheeler in the authorship. These authors are exceptionally efficient scholars, frequently sharing their findings in esteemed journals and making substantial contributions to the body of knowledge in Australian water resource management. Their works are likely to be extensively referenced, further boosting their prominence and authority in bibliometric assessments. High citation counts reflect influence and impact within the research community. Their investigation revolves around critical and current challenges in the management of Australia’s water resources. For example, their studies might emphasise urgent topics such as the effects of climate change on water supply, the effectiveness of water markets, or the social and environmental dimensions of water distribution, all of which are extremely pertinent issues for Australia in light of its climate. Conversely, articles published as conference papers or book chapters, or with an Australian affiliation as a first author, had lower citation levels.

3.3. Discussion of Main Themes, Subfields, and Interdisciplinary Connections Within the Theme

3.3.1. Climate Change Impact on Water Security

Global climate change threatens the viability of agricultural production [117], and it is predicted to increase water demand for irrigation and decrease groundwater’s natural recharge [118]. Gonzalez et al. [118] emphasise the need for an interdisciplinary approach that examines the advantages and disadvantages of various water management approaches, such as water banking, to address the effects of climate change on water. Rainfall characteristics (intensity, frequency, and magnitude) and rainfall–runoff relationships have already been changed by climate change, including recent warming trends [119]. They demonstrate that, for Sydney, the average annual streamflow has decreased by more than 40% in comparison to the longer-term average due to recent warming since 1990. Kiem et al. [120] and Gonzalez et al. [118] pointed out that the instrumental record underestimates the risk of drought because it fails to account for multi-decadal variability. By claiming that billions of dollars in investment resulted from the underestimation of drought risks based on scant instrumental data, the authors subtly connect this to economics (e.g., G. desalination plants) without having a clear idea of how reliable those expenditures will be in averting future water shortages.

3.3.2. Water Resource Management and Water Security

Enhancing water security through a combination of water supply augmentation, efficient water use, and readiness for future water shortages is crucial, according to the multi-layered safety (MLS) approach to drought resilience [121]. Research also focuses on how current water use efficiency (WUE) practices might compensate for diminished water entitlements [122]. The MDB’s water reform, which involves redistributing water from agriculture to the environment, is the backdrop for the research. Jackson et al. [123] and Khan et al. [124] draw attention to the intricate interactions between social, economic, environmental, and legal aspects of managing water resources and stress the necessity of interdisciplinary approaches. For example, economic results (farm profitability), water use efficiency, and agricultural practices (crop selection, irrigation techniques) are all directly correlated in the study of water security and water resource management.

3.3.3. Water Trading and Allocation Mechanisms

According to research on the MDB water market, selling water allocations can result in windfall gains or large returns, but there is a great deal of uncertainty involved [124,125]. Researchers are also focusing on the unidirectional nature of volatility spillovers (from price to volume), the vulnerability of temporary water markets, and the conflicting effects of government water recovery programmes [126]. Government intervention raises volatility in short-term markets, which increases uncertainty for irrigators who depend on this market, even though it has little effect on prices. Econometric modelling forms the basis of the analysis in order to comprehend volatility, spillovers, and price and volume dynamics.

3.3.4. Water Market Modelling and Forecasting

Mathematical modelling such as positive mathematical programming and bioeconomic simulation has been used to assess the impacts of climate variability on Australian agriculture, focusing on the MDB [127,128,129]. Through crop selection, water management, technology adoption, and interactions with water markets, the study looks at how irrigators adjust to climate variability and diminished water entitlements. The study emphasises how various disciplines interact. In the fundamental area of economics, these studies, for instance, examine the economic effects of climate variability by assessing the profitability of agriculture under various policy scenarios and adaptation options. An essential component of the assessment is the analysis of net present value.

3.3.5. Institutional Arrangements and Water Governance

According to Upton and Niel-sen-Pincus [130], their study highlights the intricacy of water governance and the necessity of integrated approaches that take institutional, social, and ecological factors into account. The Australian case study highlights the need for better governance frameworks and a more nuanced understanding of the factors influencing both individual and collective responses to climate change by exposing significant challenges in water measurement, compliance, and policy effectiveness [131,132]. Because it highlights disparities in water access and benefits, the idea of “water colonialism” is especially noteworthy and highlights the need for justice frameworks that specifically take socio-ecological factors into account [54]. Economic models are used to assess the profitability of various farming methods in a range of water availability and climate scenarios. To achieve this, economic concepts must be combined with agricultural knowledge of crop yields, water needs, and input prices.

3.3.6. Policy Instruments and Water Governance

The research assesses the transferability of Australian water policies intended to mitigate the effects of climate change, examining which policies were more successful in promoting adaptation and which were less successful [133]. Policies emphasising individual carry-over rights, flexible water markets, and water extraction caps are found to be generally effective and possibly transferable to other contexts. These are associated with improved flexibility and effective water distribution [134]. The necessity of adaptive governance is emphasised, indicating the importance of integrating impartial audits and assessments into policymaking procedures to facilitate input and education [3]. The necessity of more complex meta-governance structures to guarantee climate change resilience is closely related to this. Ayre and Nettle [9] and Samnakay et al. [135] have conducted research on adaptive governance in relation to climate change adaptation and water management reforms in Australia’s MDB.

3.4. The Practical Implications of the Findings

A bibliometric analysis of water security, trade, and governance in Australia provides crucial insights for policymakers and water managers. For example, a surge in publications on climate change impacts necessitates prioritising climate adaptation strategies, including resilient infrastructure and water conservation measures. Limited research on water trading highlights the need for further investigation into its economic, social, and environmental consequences, informing fair and efficient allocation policies. The growing prominence of interdisciplinary research encourages integrating social, ecological, and economic perspectives into water governance decisions. Finally, identifying key research clusters (e.g., Murray–Darling Basin, agricultural water management, water rights) guides targeted research funding and resource allocation, ensuring efficient use of resources to address critical water challenges. There are many practical implications from this study, for example, using climate change projections to estimate future water availability in the MDB and inform the development of drought mitigation strategies [119], conducting cost–benefit analyses of various water trading mechanisms, including assessment of social equity and environmental outcomes [122], and applying economic modelling to evaluate the efficiency and equity of water markets under different regulatory frameworks.

4. Limitations of the Study

While this study provides a detailed analysis of the literature on water security, trading, and governance in Australia, some caveats should also be noted. The data collection depends heavily on the scope and coverage of databases like Scopus, which may not include all relevant journals, especially niche or regional ones, and some research reports that have not been published in journals. There is also a potential bias towards frequently cited and English-language publications, which can skew results. The interdisciplinary nature of these topics complicates analysis as nuances across fields might be missed. Furthermore, bibliometric studies often rely on quantitative metrics like citation counts, which may not accurately reflect the research’s quality or societal impact. Additionally, there may be time-based constraints, as these analyses may not capture the most current research or emerging trends. The use of citation counts alone to assess the quality of research has several drawbacks because it does not fully account for the significance and impact of a study. Numerous factors, including research trends, publication location, and the propensity for particular topics to receive greater attention, can affect citation counts, which may not always be indicative of the calibre of the work itself. High citation counts can also occasionally be linked to well-known but flawed research, whereas controversial or innovative studies may receive fewer citations even though they have the potential to advance knowledge. This is particularly difficult when evaluating nontraditional research that questions accepted wisdom or investigates new concepts because it may be viewed with suspicion at first, which lowers citation rates. A more nuanced approach that takes into account the work’s originality, context, and wider contributions is therefore needed to evaluate the quality of research rather than depending solely on quantitative indicators like citation counts. However, future research should consider these limitations.

5. Conclusions and Recommendations

This study provides an analytical summary of the literature on Australian water resource management focusing on agriculture. The findings show that Agricultural Water Management is the leading journal in terms of total publication whereas Water Resources Research is the leading one in terms of total citations. The top three used keywords are “Water Markets”, “Murray Darling Basin” and “Australia”. Analysis of the publications and fractionalised score for authors identifies some important author effects, with Sarah Wheeler making the largest contribution to the literature.
The citation network reflects Australia’s authoritative position in the global platform on water governance and security while highlighting different levels of engagement from other countries. The regression employed to predict the factors underpinning the citation rates indicates that variables such as the number of references, page count, article age, impact factor, number of authors, and some specific authors have a positive and significant association with total citation count. However, publications involving conference papers, book chapters, and first author Australian affiliation have a negative and significant association with total citation count.
Future initiatives like networking events and joint research projects among different groups can promote collaboration, ensuring a robust and innovative research environment. The findings of the study can serve as a valuable tool for informing and enhancing water-related policies in Australia, contributing to more effective governance and sustainable water resource management. Policymakers can use the findings to identify emerging issues and prioritise funding and resources for relevant research areas.

Author Contributions

J.S.: conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, methodology, software, visualisation, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing. J.R.: conceptualization, methodology, supervision, writing—review and editing. D.A.: supervision, writing—review and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

Funding support from the CRCNA Water Security for Northern Australia (project reference number—AT.7.2223014) is gratefully acknowledged.

Data Availability Statement

Data will be available on request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

CPPcitations per paper
DCCEEWDepartment of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water
MDBMurray–Darling Basin
SNIPSource Normalised Impact Per Paper
SJRScimago Journal Ranking
TPtotal publications
TCtotal citations
WUEwater use efficiency

References

  1. Gordon, L.J.; Finlayson, C.M.; Falkenmark, M. Managing water in agriculture for food production and other ecosystem services. Agric. Water Manag. 2010, 97, 512–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Groenfeldt, D. Multifunctionality of agricultural water: Looking beyond food production and ecosystem services. Irrig. Drain. 2006, 55, 73–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Rockström, J.; Folke, C.; Gordon, L.; Hatibu, N.; Jewitt, G.; de Vries, F.P.; Rwehumbiza, F.; Sally, H.; Savenije, H.; Schulze, R. A watershed approach to upgrade rainfed agriculture in water scarce regions through Water System Innovations: An integrated research initiative on water for food and rural livelihoods in balance with ecosystem functions. Phys. Chem. Earth Parts A/B/C 2004, 29, 1109–1118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. National Water Initiative. 2024. Available online: https://www.dcceew.gov.au/water/policy/policy/nwi (accessed on 10 December 2024).
  5. Kiem, A.S.; Austin, E.K. Drought and the future of rural communities: Opportunities and challenges for climate change adaptation in regional Victoria, Australia. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2013, 23, 1307–1316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Kingwell, R.S. Climate change in Australia: Agricultural impacts and adaptation. Australas. Agribus. Rev. 2006, 14, 1. [Google Scholar]
  7. Allan, C.; Xia, J.; Pahl-Wostl, C. Climate change and water security: Challenges for adaptive water management. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2013, 5, 625–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Chami, D.E.; Moujabber, M.E. Drought, climate change and sustainability of water in agriculture: A roadmap towards the NWRS2. S. Afr. J. Sci. 2016, 112, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Falkenmark, M. Adapting to climate change: Towards societal water security in dry-climate countries. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 2013, 29, 123–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Stewart, I.T.; Rogers, J.; Graham, A. Water security under severe drought and climate change: Disparate impacts of the recent severe drought on environmental flows and water supplies in Central California. J. Hydrol. X 2020, 7, 100054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Stringer, L.C.; Mirzabaev, A.; Benjaminsen, T.A.; Harris, R.M.; Jafari, M.; Lissner, T.K.; Stevens, N.; der Pahlen, C.T.-V. Climate change impacts on water security in global drylands. One Earth 2021, 4, 851–864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Koech, R.; Langat, P. Improving Irrigation Water Use Efficiency: A Review of Advances, Challenges and Opportunities in the Australian Context. Water 2018, 10, 1771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Arouna, A.; Dzomeku, I.K.; Shaibu, A.-G.; Nurudeen, A.R. Water management for sustainable irrigation in rice (Oryza sativa L.) production: A review. Agronomy 2023, 13, 1522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Evans, R.G.; Sadler, E.J. Methods and technologies to improve efficiency of water use. Water Resour. Res. 2008, 44, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Suna, T.; Kumari, A.; Paramaguru, P.K.; Kushwaha, N. Enhancing agricultural water productivity using deficit irrigation practices in water-scarce regions. In Enhancing Resilience of Dryland Agriculture Under Changing Climate: Interdisciplinary and Convergence Approaches; Springer: Singapore, 2023; pp. 177–206. [Google Scholar]
  16. Alam, M.Z.; Carpenter-Boggs, L.; Mitra, S.; Haque, M.; Halsey, J.; Rokonuzzaman, M.; Saha, B.; Moniruzzaman, M. Effect of Salinity Intrusion on Food Crops, Livestock, and Fish Species at Kalapara Coastal Belt in Bangladesh. J. Food Qual. 2017, 2017, 2045157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Solanes, M.; Jouravlev, A. Water Governance for Development and Sustainability; ECLAC: Santiago, Chile, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  18. De Loë, R.C.; Patterson, J.J. Rethinking water governance: Moving beyond water-centric perspectives in a connected and changing world. Nat. Resour. J. 2017, 57, 75–100. [Google Scholar]
  19. Ayre, M.L.; Nettle, R.A. Enacting resilience for adaptive water governance: A case study of irrigation modernization in an Australian catchment. Ecol. Soc. 2017, 22, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Grafton, R.Q.; Horne, J. Water markets in the Murray-Darling Basin. Agric. Water Manag. 2014, 145, 61–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Kiem, A.S. Drought and water policy in Australia: Challenges for the future illustrated by the issues associated with water trading and climate change adaptation in the Murray–Darling Basin. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2013, 23, 1615–1626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Wheeler, S.; Bjornlund, H.; Zuo, A.; Shanahan, M. The changing profile of water traders in the Goulburn-Murray Irrigation District, Australia. Agric. Water Manag. 2010, 97, 1333–1343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Australian Government. National Water Reform 2024. 2024. Available online: https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/water-reform-2024#report (accessed on 1 November 2024).
  24. Bjornlund, H. Water Governance for Sustainable Irrigation: The Role of Civil; WIT Press: Edinburgh, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Grafton, R.Q.; Chu, H.L.; Stewardson, M.; Kompas, T. Optimal dynamic water allocation: Irrigation extractions and environmental tradeoffs in the Murray River, Australia. Water Resour. Res. 2011, 47, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Qureshi, M.E.; Schwabe, K.; Connor, J.; Kirby, M. Environmental water incentive policy and return flows. Water Resour. Res. 2010, 46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Bakker, K.; Morinville, C. The governance dimensions of water security: A review. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical. Phys. Eng. Sci. 2013, 371, 20130116. [Google Scholar]
  28. Pahl-Wostl, C. A conceptual framework for analysing adaptive capacity and multi-level learning processes in resource governance regimes. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2009, 19, 354–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Gemede, E.J.; Senbeta, F.; Zeleke, T.; Hagos, F. Assessment of water governance practices in the central rift valley of ethiopia: Transparency, accountability and participation. Water Environ. Sustain. 2024, 4, 40–51. [Google Scholar]
  30. Liu, Y.; Li, P.; Zhang, Z. Resilient or Not: A Comparative Case Study of Ten Local Water Markets in China. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Schulte, S.; Davis, G.; Brown, J. Water Security: Challenges to the Irrigation Water-Energy Nexus in Australia. In Sustaining our Environment for Better Future: Challenges and Opportunities; Omran, A., Schwarz-Herion, O., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2020; pp. 85–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Brodnik, C.; Brown, R. Strategies for developing transformative capacity in urban water management sectors: The case of Melbourne, Australia. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2018, 137, 147–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Brown, R.R.; Keath, N.; Wong, T.H.F. Urban water management in cities: Historical, current and future regimes. Water Sci. Technol. 2009, 59, 847–855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Dhakal, R.S.; Syme, G.; Andre, E.; Sabato, C. Sustainable water management for urban agriculture, gardens and public open space irrigation: A case study in Perth. Agric. Sci. 2015, 6, 676–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Furlong, C.; Gan, K.; De Silva, S. Governance of integrated urban water management in melbourne, Australia. Util. Policy 2016, 43, 48–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Gany, A.H.A.; Sharma, P.; Singh, S. Global Review of Institutional Reforms in the Irrigation Sector for Sustainable Agricultural Water Management, Including Water Users’ Associations. Irrig. Drain. 2018, 68, 84–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kirby, M.; Bark, R.; Connor, J.; Qureshi, M.E.; Keyworth, S. Sustainable irrigation: How did irrigated agriculture in Australia’s Murray–Darling Basin adapt in the Millennium Drought? Agric. Water Manag. 2014, 145, 154–162. [Google Scholar]
  38. Leonard, R.; Walton, A.; Farbotko, C. Using the Concept of Common Pool Resources to Understand Community Perceptions of Diverse Water Sources in Adelaide, South Australia. Water Resour. Manag. 2015, 29, 1697–1711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Poddar, R.; Qureshi, M.E.; Shi, T. A Comparison of Water Policies for Sustainable Irrigation Management: The Case of India and Australia. Water Resour. Manag. 2014, 28, 1079–1094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Donthu, N.; Kumar, S.; Mukherjee, D.; Pandey, N.; Lim, W.M. How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 133, 285–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Linnenluecke, M.K.; Marrone, M.; Singh, A.K. Conducting systematic literature reviews and bibliometric analyses. Aust. J. Manag. 2019, 45, 175–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Passas, I. Bibliometric Analysis: The Main Steps. Encyclopedia 2024, 4, 1014–1025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Montazeri, A.; Mohammadi, S.; Hesari, P.M.; Ghaemi, M.; Riazi, H.; Sheikhi-Mobarakeh, Z. Preliminary guideline for reporting bibliometric reviews of the biomedical literature (BIBLIO): A minimum requirements. Syst. Rev. 2023, 12, 239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Zhang, Y.; Huang, K.; Yu, Y.; Yang, B. Mapping of water footprint research: A bibliometric analysis during 2006–2015. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 149, 70–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Velasco-Muñoz, J.F.; Aznar-Sánchez, J.A.; Belmonte-Ureña, L.J.; López-Serrano, M.J. Advances in Water Use Efficiency in Agriculture: A Bibliometric Analysis. Water 2018, 10, 377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Meng, H.; Bai, G.; Wang, L. Research trends and areas of focus on water rights: A bibliometric analysis 1971–2020. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 75119–75133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Gajurel, S.; Maheshwari, B.; Hagare, D.; Ward, J.; Singh, P.K. Evolving research on groundwater governance and collective action for water security: A Global bibliometric analysis. Groundw. Sustain. Dev. 2024, 26, 101224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Baas, J.; Baas, J.; Schotten, M.; Schotten, M.; Plume, A.; Plume, A.; Côté, G.; Côté, G.; Karimi, R.; Karimi, R. Scopus as a curated, high-quality bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies. Quant. Sci. Stud. 2020, 1, 377–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Turral, H.N.; Etchells, T.; Malano, H.M.M.; Wijedasa, H.A.; Taylor, P.; McMahon, T.A.M.; Austin, N. Water trading at the margin: The evolution of water markets in the Murray-Darling Basin. Water Resour. Res. 2005, 41, W07011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Castillo-Vergara, M.; Alvarez-Marin, A.; Placencio-Hidalgo, D. A bibliometric analysis of creativity in the field of business economics. J. Bus. Res. 2018, 85, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Khan, M.A.; Pattnaik, D.; Ashraf, R.; Ali, I.; Kumar, S.; Donthu, N. Value of special issues in the journal of business research: A bibliometric analysis. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 125, 295–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Bouchard, L.; Albertini, M.; Batista, R.; de Montigny, J. Research on health inequalities: A bibliometric analysis. Soc. Sci. Med. 2015, 141, 100–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Guo, Y.; Hao, Z.; Zhao, S.; Gong, J.; Yang, F. Artificial intelligence in health care: Bibliometric analysis. J. Med. Internet Res. 2020, 22, e18228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Jalali, M.S.; Razak, S.; Gordon, W.; Perakslis, E.; Madnick, S. Health care and cybersecurity: Bibliometric analysis of the literature. J. Med. Internet Res. 2019, 21, e12644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Sikandar, H.; Abbas, A.F.; Khan, N.; Qureshi, M.I. Digital Technologies in Healthcare: A Systematic Review and Bibliometric Analysis. Int. J. Online Biomed. Eng. 2022, 18, 34–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Jin, S.; Chang, H. The trends of blockchain in environmental management research: A bibliometric analysis. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 30, 81707–81724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Letunovska, N.; Lyuolyov, O.; Pimonenko, T.; Aleksandrov, V. Environmental management and social marketing: A bibliometric analysis. In Proceedings of the the International Conference on Innovation, Modern Applied Science & Environmental Studies, Kenitra, Morocco, 25–27 December 2020. [Google Scholar]
  58. Su, Y.; Yu, Y.; Zhang, N. Carbon emissions and environmental management based on Big Data and Streaming Data: A bibliometric analysis. Sci. Total. Environ. 2020, 733, 138984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Durán-Sánchez, A.; Álvarez-García, J.; De la Cruz Del Río-Rama, M. Sustainable water resources management: A bibliometric overview. Water 2018, 10, 1191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Li, Q.; Guo, X.; Zhang, L. Bibliometric Analysis of Water Resource Management. J. Coast. Res. 2020, 105, 210–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Lv, T.; Wang, L.; Xie, H.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, Y. Evolutionary overview of water resource management based on a bibliometric analysis in Web of Science. Ecol. Inform. 2021, 61, 101218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Pandey, D.K.; Hunjra, A.I.; Bhaskar, R.; Al-Faryan, M.A.S. Artificial intelligence, machine learning and big data in natural resources management: A comprehensive bibliometric review of literature spanning 1975–2022. Resour. Policy 2023, 86, 104250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Yu, J.; Wang, S.; Yang, W. Natural resources governance and geopolitical risks: A literature review and bibliometric analysis. Resour. Policy 2023, 86, 104299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Klarin, A. How to conduct a bibliometric content analysis: Guidelines and contributions of content co-occurrence or co-word literature reviews. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2024, 48, e13031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Pandey, D.K.; Hassan, M.; Kumari, V.; Ben Zaied, Y.; Rai, V.K. Mapping the landscape of FinTech in banking and finance: A bibliometric review. Res. Int. Bus. Financ. 2023, 67, 102116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Garfield, E. Citation indexing. J. Inf. Sci. 1980, 2, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Xue, Y.; Niu, Z.; Zhang, R.; Jia, L.; Guo, S. Current Status and Future Research of Groundwater Under Climate Change: A Bibliometric Analysis. Water 2024, 16, 3438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Khan, M.O.; DKeesstra, S.; Słowik-Opoka, E.; Klamerus-Iwan, A.; Liaqat, W. Determining the Role of Urban Greenery in Soil Hydrology: A Bibliometric Analysis of Nature-Based Solutions in Urban Ecosystem. Water 2025, 17, 322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Kwon, S. Characteristics of interdisciplinary research in author keywords appearing in Korean journals. Malays. J. Libr. Inf. Sci. 2018, 23, 77–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Lu, W.; Liu, Z.; Huang, Y.; Bu, Y.; Li, X.; Cheng, Q. How do authors select keywords? A preliminary study of author keyword selection behavior. J. Inf. 2020, 14, 101066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Gbur, E.E.; Trumbo, B.E. Key words and phrases—the key to scholarly visibility and efficiency in an information explosion. Am. Stat. 1995, 49, 29–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. González, L.-M.; García-Massó, X.; Pardo-Ibañez, A.; Peset, F.; Devís-Devís, J. An author keyword analysis for mapping Sport Sciences. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0201435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Radhakrishnan, S.; Erbis, S.; Isaacs, J.A.; Kamarthi, S. Novel keyword co-occurrence network-based methods to foster systematic reviews of scientific literature. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0172778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Zhang, Q.; Rong, G.; Meng, Q.; Yu, M.; Xie, Q.; Fang, J. Outlining the keyword co-occurrence trends in Shuanghuanglian injection research: A bibliometric study using CiteSpace III. J. Tradit. Chin. Med. Sci. 2020, 7, 189–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Zhang, N.; Feng, G. Analysis of Big Data Research Hotspots Based on Keyword Co-occurrence. In Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE 9th International Conference on Data Science in Cyberspace (DSC), Jinan, China, 26 August 2024. [Google Scholar]
  76. Farah, E.; Shahrour, I. Water Leak Detection: A comprehensive review of methods, challenges, and future directions. Water 2024, 16, 2975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Gomez, C.J.; Herman, A.C.; Parigi, P. Leading countries in global science increasingly receive more citations than other countries doing similar research. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2022, 6, 919–929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Biscaro, C.; Giupponi, C. Co-authorship and bibliographic coupling network effects on citations. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e99502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Kessler, M. An experimental study of bibliographic coupling between technical papers (Corresp.). IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 1963, 9, 49–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Wheeler, S.; Bjornlund, H.; Zuo, A.; Edwards, J. Handing down the farm? The increasing uncertainty of irrigated farm succession in Australia. J. Rural. Stud. 2012, 28, 266–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Tozer, C.R.; Vance, T.R.; Roberts, J.L.; Kiem, A.S.; Curran, M.A.J.; Moy, A.D. An ice core derived 1013-year catchment-scale annual rainfall reconstruction in subtropical eastern Australia. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2016, 20, 1703–1717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Alexandra, J. Evolving Governance and Contested Water Reforms in Australia’s Murray Darling Basin. Water 2018, 10, 113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Wheeler, S.A. Insights, lessons and benefits from improved regional water security and integration in Australia. Water Resour. Econ. 2014, 8, 57–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Graversgaard, M.; Hedelin, B.; Smith, L.; Gertz, F.; Højberg, A.L.; Langford, J.; Martinez, G.; Mostert, E.; Ptak, E.; Peterson, H.; et al. Opportunities and barriers for water co-governance—A critical analysis of seven cases of diffuse water pollution from agriculture in Europe, Australia and North America. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Hartwig, L.D.; Jackson, S.; Markham, F.; Osborne, N. Water colonialism and Indigenous water justice in south-eastern Australia. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 2021, 38, 30–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Maraseni, T.N.; Mushtaq, S.; Reardon-Smith, K. Climate change, water security and the need for integrated policy development: The case of on-farm infrastructure investment in the Australian irrigation sector. Environ. Res. Lett. 2012, 7, 034006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Wheeler, S.A.; Garrick, D.E. A tale of two water markets in Australia: Lessons for understanding participation in formal water markets. Oxf. Rev. Econ. Policy 2020, 36, 132–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Gaupp, F.; Hall, J.; Dadson, S. The role of storage capacity in coping with intra- and inter-annual water variability in large river basins. Environ. Res. Lett. 2015, 10, 125001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Robinne, F.; Hallema, D.W.; Bladon, K.D.; Flannigan, M.D.; Boisramé, G.; Bréthaut, C.M.; Doerr, S.H.; Di Baldassarre, G.; Gallagher, L.A.; Hohner, A.K.; et al. Scientists’ warning on extreme wildfire risks to water supply. Hydrol. Process. 2021, 35, e14086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Fielding, K.S.; Roiko, A.H. Providing information promotes greater public support for potable recycled water. Water Res. 2014, 61, 86–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Grafton, R.Q.; Williams, J. Rent-seeking behaviour and regulatory capture in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 2020, 36, 484–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Hart, B.T. The Australian Murray-Darling Basin Plan: Factors leading to its successful development. Ecohydrol. Hydrobiol. 2016, 16, 229–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Hartwig, L.D.; Jackson, S.; Osborne, N. Trends in Aboriginal water ownership in New South Wales, Australia: The continuities between colonial and neoliberal forms of dispossession. Land. Use Policy 2020, 99, 104869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Mushtaq, S.; Maraseni, T.; Reardon-Smith, K. Climate change and water security: Estimating the greenhouse gas costs of achieving water security through investments in modern irrigation technology. Agric. Syst. 2013, 117, 78–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Brocca, L.; Tarpanelli, A.; Filippucci, P.; Dorigo, W.; Zaussinger, F.; Gruber, A.; Fernández-Prieto, D. How much water is used for irrigation? A new approach exploiting coarse resolution satellite soil moisture products. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 2018, 73, 752–766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Short, M.D.; Peirson, W.L.; Peters, G.M.; Cox, R.J. Managing Adaptation of Urban Water Systems in a Changing Climate. Water Resour. Manag. 2012, 26, 1953–1981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Loch, A.; Wheeler, S.; Boxall, P.; Hatton-Macdonald, D.; Adamowicz, W.L.; Bjornlund, H. Irrigator preferences for water recovery budget expenditure in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia. Land. Use Policy 2014, 36, 396–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Grafton, R.Q.; Wheeler, S.A. Economics of water recovery in the murray-darling basin, Australia. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 2018, 10, 487–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Breinl, K.; Di Baldassarre, G.; Mazzoleni, M.; Lun, D.; Vico, G. Extreme dry and wet spells face changes in their duration and timing. Environ. Res. Lett. 2020, 15, 074040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Horne, J. Economic approaches to water management in Australia. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 2013, 29, 526–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Cooper, B.; Crase, L.; Pawsey, N. Best practice pricing principles and the politics of water pricing. Agric. Water Manag. 2014, 145, 92–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Zuo, A.; Wheeler, S.A.; Adamowicz, W.; Boxall, P.C.; Hatton-MacDonald, D. Measuring Price Elasticities of Demand and Supply of Water Entitlements Based on Stated and Revealed Preference Data. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2015, 98, 314–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Gibbs, L.M. Just Add Water: Colonisation, Water Governance, and the Australian Inland. Environ. Plan. A Econ. Space 2009, 41, 2964–2983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Alexandra, J. Risks, Uncertainty and Climate Confusion in the Murray–Darling Basin Reforms. Water Econ. Policy 2016, 3, 1650038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Alston, M.; Whittenbury, K. Climate change and water policy in Australia’s irrigation areas: A lost opportunity for a partnership model of governance. Environ. Politi. 2011, 20, 899–917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Wheeler, S.; Loch, A.; Zuo, A.; Bjornlund, H. Reviewing the adoption and impact of water markets in the Murray–Darling Basin, Australia. J. Hydrol. 2014, 518, 28–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Wheeler, S.; Bjornlund, H.; Shanahan, M.; Zuo, A. Who trades water allocations? Evidence of the characteristics of early adopters in the Goulburn–Murray Irrigation District, Australia 1998–1999. Agric. Econ. 2009, 40, 631–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Bjornlund, H. Can water markets assist irrigators Managing Increased Supply Risk? Some Australian experiences. Water Int. 2006, 31, 221–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Grafton, R.Q.; Jiang, Q. Economic effects of water recovery on irrigated agriculture in the Murray-Darling Basin. Aust. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 2011, 55, 487–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Wheeler, S.; Bjornlund, H.; Shanahan, M.; Zuo, A. Price elasticity of water allocations demand in the Goulburn–Murray Irrigation District. Aust. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 2008, 52, 37–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Skinner, D.; Langford, J. Legislating for sustainable basin management: The story of Australia’s Water Act. Water Policy 2013, 15, 871–894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Nguyen-Ky, T.; Mushtaq, S.; Loch, A.; Reardon-Smith, K.; An-Vo, D.-A.; Ngo-Cong, D.; Tran-Cong, T. Predicting water allocation trade prices using a hybrid Artificial Neural Network-Bayesian modelling approach. J. Hydrol. 2018, 567, 781–791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Zaman, A.; Malano, H.; Davidson, B. An integrated water trading–allocation model, applied to a water market in Australia. Agric. Water Manag. 2008, 96, 149–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Qureshi, M.E.; Grafton, R.Q.; Kirby, M.; Hanjra, M.A. Understanding irrigation water use efficiency at different scales for better policy reform: A case study of the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia. Water Policy 2011, 13, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Zuo, A.; Nauges, C.; Wheeler, S.A. Farmers’ exposure to risk and their temporary water trading. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 2014, 42, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Sigala, M.; Kumar, S.; Donthu, N.; Sureka, R.; Joshi, Y. A bibliometric overview of the Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management: Research contributions and influence. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2021, 47, 273–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Khan, S. Managing climate risks in Australia: Options for water policy and irrigation management. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 2008, 48, 265–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Gonzalez, D.; Dillon, P.; Page, D.; Vanderzalm, J. The Potential for Water Banking in Australia’s Murray–Darling Basin to Increase Drought Resilience. Water 2020, 12, 2936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Kiem, A.S.; Kuczera, G.; Kozarovski, P.; Zhang, L.; Willgoose, G. Stochastic Generation of Future Hydroclimate Using Temperature as a Climate Change Covariate. Water Resour. Res. 2021, 57, 2020WR027331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Kiem, A.S.; Vance, T.R.; Tozer, C.R.; Roberts, J.L.; Pozza, R.D.; Vitkovsky, J.; Smolders, K.; Curran, M.A. Learning from the past—Using palaeoclimate data to better understand and manage drought in South East Queensland (SEQ), Australia. J. Hydrol. Reg. Stud. 2020, 29, 100686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Brent, D.A.; Gangadharan, L.; Lassiter, A.; Leroux, A.; Raschky, P.A. Valuing environmental services provided by local stormwater management. Water Resour. Res. 2017, 53, 4907–4921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Ticehurst, J.L.; Curtis, A.L. Can existing practices expected to lead to improved on-farm water use efficiency enable irrigators to effectively respond to reduced water entitlements in the Murray–Darling Basin? J. Hydrol. 2015, 528, 613–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Jackson, S.; MacDonald, D.H.; Bark, R.H. Public Attitudes to Inequality in Water Distribution: Insights From Preferences for Water Reallocation From Irrigators to Aboriginal Australians. Water Resour. Res. 2019, 55, 6033–6048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Khan, S.; Rana, T.; Hanjra, M.A.; Zirilli, J. Water markets and soil salinity nexus: Can minimum irrigation intensities address the issue? Agric. Water Manag. 2009, 96, 493–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Wheeler, S.A.; Rossini, P.; Bjornlund, H.; Spagnoletti, B. Chapter 18—The Returns from Investing in Water Markets in Australia. In Handbook of Environmental and Sustainable Finance; Ramiah, V., Gregoriou, G.N., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2016; pp. 371–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Zuo, A.; Qiu, F.; Wheeler, S.A. Examining volatility dynamics, spillovers and government water recovery in Murray-Darling Basin water markets. Resour. Energy Econ. 2019, 58, 101113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Qureshi, M.E.; Ahmad, M.-U.; Whitten, S.M.; Kirby, M. A multi-period positive mathematical programming approach for assessing economic impact of drought in the Murray–Darling Basin, Australia. Econ. Model. 2014, 39, 293–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Qureshi, M.; Whitten, S. Regional impact of climate variability and adaptation options in the southern Murray–Darling Basin, Australia. Water Resour. Econ. 2014, 5, 67–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Brennan, D. Policy interventions to promote the adoption of water saving sprinkler systems: The case of lettuce on the Gnangara Mound. Aust. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 2007, 51, 323–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Upton, E.; Nielsen-Pincus, M. Climate Change and Water Governance: Decision Making for Individual Vineyard Owners in Global Wine Regions. Front. Clim. 2021, 3. [Google Scholar]
  131. Olsson, R.C.; Wyborn, C.A.; van Kerkhoff, L.E. How the Resist-Accept-Direct framework is being used by communities for socio-economic climate adaptation: A case study in Australia’s Murray-Darling Basin. Reg. Environ. Chang. 2024, 24, 136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Hong, P.; Wei, Y.; Bouckaert, F.; Johnston, K.; Head, B. Assessing stakeholder structure in water governance in the Murray-Darling Basin, a public submission perspective. Environ. Sci. Policy 2024, 156, 103746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Palomo-Hierro, S.; Loch, A.; Pérez-Blanco, C.D. Improving water markets in Spain: Lesson-drawing from the Murray-Darling Basin in Australia. Agric. Water Manag. 2022, 259, 107224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Crase, L.; Connor, J.; Michaels, S.; Cooper, B. Australian water policy reform: Lessons learned and potential transferability. Clim. Policy 2020, 20, 641–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Samnakay, N.; Alexandra, J.; Wyborn, C.A.; Bender, I. Climate adaptive water policy in Australia’s Murray Darling basin: Soft options or hard commitments? Ecol. Soc. 2024, 29, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Water 17 01035 g001
Figure 1. Types of documents for the study.
Figure 1. Types of documents for the study.
Water 17 01035 g001
Water 17 01035 g002
Figure 2. Total publication and citation from 2005 to 2024.
Figure 2. Total publication and citation from 2005 to 2024.
Water 17 01035 g002
Water 17 01035 g003
Figure 3. Author collaboration network based on papers published on Australia’s water security, governance, and trading. Note(s): Each node represents an author, with size indicating the number of collaborations. Links between nodes illustrate authors’ collaboration, showing how often authors collaborate with others, with thicker links indicating stronger collaboration. Different colours denote thematic clusters, which highlight various research topics and illustrate the relationships among authors within each cluster.
Figure 3. Author collaboration network based on papers published on Australia’s water security, governance, and trading. Note(s): Each node represents an author, with size indicating the number of collaborations. Links between nodes illustrate authors’ collaboration, showing how often authors collaborate with others, with thicker links indicating stronger collaboration. Different colours denote thematic clusters, which highlight various research topics and illustrate the relationships among authors within each cluster.
Water 17 01035 g003
Water 17 01035 g004
Figure 4. Keyword network occurrence of water security, market, and governance. Note(s): Each node represents a keyword, with size indicating the frequency of occurrence. Links between nodes illustrate co-occurrences of keywords, with thicker links showing greater frequency of these pairings. Different colours represent thematic clusters, which highlight the topics covered and the relationships among them within each theme.
Figure 4. Keyword network occurrence of water security, market, and governance. Note(s): Each node represents a keyword, with size indicating the frequency of occurrence. Links between nodes illustrate co-occurrences of keywords, with thicker links showing greater frequency of these pairings. Different colours represent thematic clusters, which highlight the topics covered and the relationships among them within each theme.
Water 17 01035 g004
Water 17 01035 g005
Figure 5. Country collaboration network on Australia’s water security, governance, and trading. Note(s): Each node represents a country, with size indicating the frequency of collaboration. Links between nodes illustrate collaborative relationships, with thicker links representing stronger or more frequent partnerships. Different colours signify thematic clusters, highlighting the various collaborative topics and the relationships among countries within each theme.
Figure 5. Country collaboration network on Australia’s water security, governance, and trading. Note(s): Each node represents a country, with size indicating the frequency of collaboration. Links between nodes illustrate collaborative relationships, with thicker links representing stronger or more frequent partnerships. Different colours signify thematic clusters, highlighting the various collaborative topics and the relationships among countries within each theme.
Water 17 01035 g005
Water 17 01035 g006
Figure 6. Authors’ bibliographic coupling network based on Australia’s water security, governance and trading. Note(s): Each node represents an author, with size indicating the number of publications. Links between nodes illustrate bibliographic coupling, showing how often authors reference the same works, with thicker links indicating stronger or more frequent coupling. Different colours denote thematic clusters, highlighting the various research topics and the relationships among authors within each cluster.
Figure 6. Authors’ bibliographic coupling network based on Australia’s water security, governance and trading. Note(s): Each node represents an author, with size indicating the number of publications. Links between nodes illustrate bibliographic coupling, showing how often authors reference the same works, with thicker links indicating stronger or more frequent coupling. Different colours denote thematic clusters, highlighting the various research topics and the relationships among authors within each cluster.
Water 17 01035 g006
Water 17 01035 g007
Figure 7. Co-citation network with cited authors based on Australia’s water security, governance and trading. Note(s): Each node represents an author being cited, with size reflecting the number of citations received. Links between nodes indicate co-citation, demonstrating how often two authors are cited together in publications, with thicker links signifying stronger or more frequent co-citation connections. Different colours represent thematic clusters, emphasising various research areas and the relationships among cited authors within each theme.
Figure 7. Co-citation network with cited authors based on Australia’s water security, governance and trading. Note(s): Each node represents an author being cited, with size reflecting the number of citations received. Links between nodes indicate co-citation, demonstrating how often two authors are cited together in publications, with thicker links signifying stronger or more frequent co-citation connections. Different colours represent thematic clusters, emphasising various research areas and the relationships among cited authors within each theme.
Water 17 01035 g007
Table 1. Specific protocol followed to download water security, governance, and trading papers from Scopus.
Table 1. Specific protocol followed to download water security, governance, and trading papers from Scopus.
Time period2005 to 2024 (20 years)
Search fieldArticle title, abstract, keywords
Keywords put to the search engine
  • “water security” OR “water governance” AND (“irrigation” OR “agriculture” OR “farming”) OR “risk” OR “supplemented water” OR “surface water” OR “ground water” OR (“water trading” OR “water market”) AND “Australia”
  • “Water security” AND “Australia” AND “irrigation”
  • “Water market” AND “Australia” AND “irrigation”
  • “Water governance” AND “Australia” AND “irrigation”
Export information limited toCitation information, bibliographical information, abstract and keywords, and other information—including references
The subject area is limited toEnvironmental science, social science, agricultural and biological sciences
Document type limited toArticle, conference paper, review article, book chapter, editorial
Table 2. Types and units of analysis in the VOSviewer software.
Table 2. Types and units of analysis in the VOSviewer software.
Types of Analysis (5)Unit of Analysis (19)Counting Method
Co-authorship✓Authors
Organisations
Countries		Full counting
Co-occurrence All Keywords
✓Author keywords
Index keywords		Full counting
Citation DocumentsSources
Authors
Organisations
✓Countries		Full counting
Bibliographic coupling✓Documents
Sources
Authors
Organisations
Countries		Full counting
Co-citationCited references
Cited sources
✓Cited authors		Full counting
Note: ✓ signifies the unit of analysis that has been followed in the study.
Table 3. Publication and citation structure of Australia’s water security, governance, and trading papers in different journals from 2005 to 2024.
Table 3. Publication and citation structure of Australia’s water security, governance, and trading papers in different journals from 2005 to 2024.
JournalsTPTCCPPCiteScore aSNIP aSJR b
Agricultural Water Management1130327.54512.1001.8751.579Q1
Journal of Hydrology924527.22211.0001.6591.764Q1
Water Resources Research932936.5568.8001.4271.574Q1
Water (Switzerland)819524.3755.8000.9990.724Q1
Australian Journal of Water Resources7395.5715.1000.7070.506Q2
Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics614323.8336.3001.3010.929Q1
International Journal of Water Resources Development619332.1678.1001.2560.814Q1
WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment6233.8331.1000.1870.176Q4
Water Policy512324.6003.1000.6610.445Q2
Environmental Research Letters412130.25011.9001.5822.134Q1
Journal of Cleaner Production44711.75020.4002.2362.058Q1
Water Resources Management49824.5007.4001.1510.898Q1
Agricultural Systems38327.66713.3001.911.585Q1
Hydrological Processes38127.0006.0000.8790.954Q1
Journal of Rural Studies310836.0009.8001.8511.542Q2
Land Use Policy310033.33313.7001.8941.847Q1
Sustainability (Switzerland)34515.0006.8001.0860.672Q1
Water Resources and Economics37324.3335.0000.9480.608Q2
Note(s): TP = total publications; TC = total citations; CPP = citation per publication; SNIP = Source Normalised Impact Per Paper; SJR = Scimago Journal Ranking. “a” = Figures for 2024 provided by SCOPUS; “b” = Figures for 2024 provided by ScimagoJR.
Table 4. Most productive authors according to the number of articles and articles fractionalised.
Table 4. Most productive authors according to the number of articles and articles fractionalised.
SL NoAuthors ArticlesAuthorsArticles Fractionalised
1Wheeler, Sarah25Wheeler, Sarah8.73
2Bjornlund, Henning15Bjornlund, Henning6.33
3Zuo, Alec15Zuo, Alec4.32
4Loch, Adam9Alexandra, Jason3.84
5Grafton, Quentin8Loch, Adam3.39
6Kiem, Anthony7Brennan, Donna3
7Alexandra, Jason6Grafton, Quentin2.87
8Jackson, Sue5Horne, James2.5
9Khan, Stuart4Kiem, Anthony2.28
10Malano, Hector4Harris, Edwyna2
Table 5. Different clusters according to bibliographic coupling with documents.
Table 5. Different clusters according to bibliographic coupling with documents.
Cluster 1Cluster 2Cluster 3Cluster 4Cluster 5Cluster 6Cluster 7Cluster 8
Wheeler et al [80]Tozer et al. [81]Alexandra [82]Grafton and Horne [20]Wheeler [83]Graversgaard [84]Hartwig et al. [85]Maraseni et al. [86]
Wheeler and Garrick [87]Gaupp et al. [88]Robinne et al. [89]Fielding and Roiko [90]Grafton and Williams [91]Hart [92]Hartwig et al. [93]Mushtaq et al. [94]
Wheeler et al. [22]Brocca et al [95]Wheeler and Garrick [80]Short et al. [96]Loch et al. [97]Grafton and Wheeler [98]
Turral et al. [49]Kiem and Austin [5]Breinl [99]Horne [100]Cooper et al. [101]
Zuo et al. [102]Gibbs [103]Alexandra [104]Alston and Whittenbury [105]Wheeler et al. [106]
Wheeler et al. [107]Kiem [21]Grafton et al. [25]
Bjornlund [108]Grafton and Rupert [109]
Wheeler at al. [110]Skinner and Langford [111]
Nguyen-Ky et al. [112]Grafton and Jiang [109]
Zaman et al. [113]Qureshi et al. [114]
Zuo et al. [115]
Table 6. Total link strength of the top 20 authors.
Table 6. Total link strength of the top 20 authors.
Sl NoAuthorsTLSSl NoAuthorsTLS
1Wheeler, Sarah999011Kiem, Anthony2371
2Bjornlund, Henning826112Kirby, Mac2267
3Zuo, Alec729513Quiggin, John2212
4Grafton, Quentin534214Crase, Lin2197
5Loch, Adam512115Qureshi, Muhammad2104
6Williams, John343716Connell, Daniel2061
7Connor, Jeffery284017Horne, James1916
8Pittock, Jamie271618Young, Michael1670
9Alexandra, Jason245319Shanahan, Martin1560
10Adamson, David243120Khan, Stuart1494
Note(s): TLS = total link strength.
Table 7. Descriptive statistics of related variables used in the double-log regression model.
Table 7. Descriptive statistics of related variables used in the double-log regression model.
VariablesVariable TypeMinimumMaximumMeanStd.
Deviation
Dependent variable
Ln Total citationContinuous 0.004.992.3091.406
Independent variables
Article appearances and quality
Ln Number of referencesContinuous0.005.063.7850.807
Ln Page countContinuous1.393.662.5830.404
Ln Article ageContinuous0.002.941.7880.884
Ln Impact factorContinuous−1.922.501.0650.790
Document types (research article is taken as the reference variable)
Conference paperBinary, 1 = Conference paper, 0 = Otherwise.0.001.000.0540.246
Book chapterBinary, 1 = Book chapter, 0 = Otherwise.0.001.000.0750.264
Variables related to authors
Wheeler, SarahBinary,
1 = Wheeler
0 = Otherwise		0.001.000.1340.341
Kiem, Anthony SBinary,
1 = Kiem
0 = Otherwise		0.001.000.0370.190
Grafton, R. QuentinBinary,
1 = Grafton
0 = Otherwise		0.001.000.0540.226
Table 8. Results from double-log regression to predict citation counts.
Table 8. Results from double-log regression to predict citation counts.
VariablesCoefficientsStd. Error
Intercept−2.832 ***0.680
Number of references0.532 ***0.110
Page count0.433 *0.195
Article age0.965 ***0.086
Impact factor0.392 ***0.100
Conference paper−0.793 **0.297
Book chapter−0.883 **0.283
No of authors0.204 *0.117
First author Australian affiliation−0.410 *0.206
Wheeler, Sarah0.452 *0.202
Kiem, Anthony S0.650 *0.360
Grafton, R. Quentin1.076 ***0.302
Multiple R-squared0.621
Adjusted R-squared0.597
F-statistic26.07 ***
Sample size187
Note(s): *, **, and *** are significant at the p < 0.10, p < 0.05, and p < 0.01 level, respectively.
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

Sarker, J.; Rolfe, J.; Akbar, D. Mapping the Landscape: A Bibliometric Analysis of Water Security, Governance, and Trading in Australia. Water 2025, 17, 1035. https://doi.org/10.3390/w17071035

AMA Style

Sarker J, Rolfe J, Akbar D. Mapping the Landscape: A Bibliometric Analysis of Water Security, Governance, and Trading in Australia. Water. 2025; 17(7):1035. https://doi.org/10.3390/w17071035

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sarker, Jaba, John Rolfe, and Delwar Akbar. 2025. "Mapping the Landscape: A Bibliometric Analysis of Water Security, Governance, and Trading in Australia" Water 17, no. 7: 1035. https://doi.org/10.3390/w17071035

APA Style

Sarker, J., Rolfe, J., & Akbar, D. (2025). Mapping the Landscape: A Bibliometric Analysis of Water Security, Governance, and Trading in Australia. Water, 17(7), 1035. https://doi.org/10.3390/w17071035

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