Next Article in Journal
How Do Natural Environmental Factors Influence the Spatial Patterns and Site Selection of Famous Mountain Temple Complexes in China? Quantitative Research on Wudang Mountain in the Ming Dynasty
Previous Article in Journal
A Method for Identifying Key Areas of Ecological Restoration, Zoning Ecological Conservation, and Restoration
Previous Article in Special Issue
Cynodon dactylon and Sediment Interaction in the Three Gorges Reservoir: Insights from a Three-Year Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Land
Volume 14
Issue 7
10.3390/land14071440
land-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:
Review

The Comparative Bibliometric Analysis of Watershed Ecological Protection and Restoration in the Context of Territorial Spatial Planning: An Overview of Global Research Trends

by
Hengsong Zhao
1,
Guangyu Wang
2,* and
Wanlin Wei
3,*
1
School of Design, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China
2
Faculty of Forestry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada
3
College of Landscape Architecture, Jiyang College of Zhejiang A&F University, Shaoxing 311800, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Land 2025, 14(7), 1440; https://doi.org/10.3390/land14071440
Submission received: 20 May 2025 / Revised: 16 June 2025 / Accepted: 19 June 2025 / Published: 10 July 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Effects of Land Use on the Ecohydrology of River Basin in Accordance with Climate Change II)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Research on watershed ecological protection and restoration within the framework of territorial spatial planning serves as a critical approach to ensuring national ecological security and plays a vital role in enhancing ecosystem stability. In recent years, scholarly interest in this topic has grown significantly. However, development trends and optimization strategies remain unclear, especially regarding comparative insights between Chinese and English research articles within the territorial spatial planning paradigm. A comprehensive review is therefore needed to bridge this gap. This study utilizes bibliometric analysis with CiteSpace, based on publications from the Web of Science (WOS) and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases, to visualize and compare Chinese and English research articles on watershed ecological protection and restoration. By combining quantitative and qualitative approaches, this study identified research hotspots and trajectories and provided directions for future research. The main findings are as follows: (1) A quantitative analysis indicates that the number of publications has increased significantly since 1998, with growing interdisciplinary and cross-sector collaboration. (2) The qualitative analysis reveals three fundamental theoretical principles: holistic management, multi-scale interactions, and dynamic coordination. (3) The Chinese Academy of Sciences led in research output, while other institutions showed wider geographic coverage, stronger collaboration networks, and a decentralized, multi-core structure. (4) Keyword clustering highlights three major themes: evaluation methodologies for ecological protection and restoration, spatiotemporal evolution and driving mechanisms, and integrated governance system development. (5) Within the territorial spatial planning paradigm, future researchers should employ big data analytics and monitoring technologies to better diagnose and address ecological challenges.

1. Introduction

The rapid growth of the global population and economy has exacerbated ecological and environmental challenges, including land degradation, water pollution, and biodiversity loss [1,2]. These issues have intensified conflicts between ecological protection and socio-economic development, disrupting the balance between human activities and natural systems [3]. Ecological protection and restoration are fundamental to advancing ecological civilization and safeguarding human well-being. They also constitute a core objective of China’s territorial spatial planning system [4,5]. China’s territorial spatial planning serves as a spatial and temporal framework that guides national sustainable development; it provides a strategic blueprint and a foundational basis for all construction and conservation initiatives [6,7]. In November 2012, “The Report of the 18th Chinese Congress of the Communists” explicitly proposed the optimization of the spatial development pattern as a strategic measure to promote ecological civilization [8]. In 2019, the implementation of relevant policies [9,10] further refined the spatial governance framework, emphasizing the coordinated approach to protection and development and marking a new phase of ecological protection and restoration in China. By October 2022, the Chinese 20th National Congress underscored the need for a territorial spatial system characterized by complementary advantages and high-quality development [11]. It also reinforced the principle of “promoting harmonious coexistence between humans and nature” as a fundamental requirement for Chinese-style modernization, advocating for an integrated approach to the protection and management of mountains, rivers, forests, farmlands, lakes, grasslands, and deserts [12]. The Chinese Conference on Ecological and Environmental Protection in July 2023 further emphasized the necessity of systematic protection and coordinated governance across environmental resources, extending from terrestrial ecosystems to marine environments. As a fundamental hydrological unit and a complex socio-ecological system, a watershed embodies multidimensional interactions among natural, social, and economic elements. It represents a focal area where conflicts between human activities, land use, and water resources are most pronounced [13] and serves as an optimal unit for spatial planning, management, and policy implementation [14]. Consequently, watershed-scale ecological protection and restoration yield more substantial ecological and socio-economic benefits [15].
Recent research has shifted from single-objective approaches, such as water quality regulation [16], land rehabilitation [17], and vegetation conservation [18], toward integrated watershed-scale protection and restoration. This shift is increasingly evident in strategic territorial spatial planning initiatives. For instance, the planning efforts for the Yangtze River Economic Belt [19] and the Yellow River Basin [20] have played a critical role in advancing systematic watershed governance [21]. However, existing watershed management plans often lack a comprehensive integration of regional natural resources and ecological spatial governance. Addressing this gap requires a more coordinated approach that aligns ecological protection and development objectives within the watershed framework. Exploring innovative strategies for watershed ecological protection and restoration under the territorial spatial planning paradigm is essential for improving watershed ecological quality and enhancing China’s broader territorial spatial planning system [22]. Extensive theoretical research on watershed ecological protection and restoration has been conducted by both domestic and international scholars [23], with the focus of related studies continuously evolving. However, the existing “five levels and three categories” system of territorial spatial planning lacks a dedicated ecological protection and restoration framework for watersheds. As such, planning is a crucial complement to both comprehensive and specialized planning; a systematic review and synthesis of this topic are essential. Among existing research, representative reviews primarily rely on traditional writing techniques [24] and do not incorporate bibliometric methods to analyze the key topics and trends in watershed ecological protection and restoration within Chinese and English research articles [25].
This study uses CiteSpace, which is an effective tool for identifying research trajectories and visualizing the evolution of key topics and emerging trends within a given field [26]. First, we systematically analyze Chinese- and English-language research on watershed ecological protection and restoration from 1998 to 2024, including authorship, institutional contributions, keyword clustering, and the temporal evolution of research themes. This enables a detailed examination of research progress, key focal areas, and developmental trends. Furthermore, by using qualitative analysis to integrate these insights with China’s territorial spatial planning policies, this study offers valuable guidance for future research and practical applications in watershed ecological protection and restoration globally.

2. Data Sources and Methods

2.1. Data Sources

As shown in the experimental flowchart of Figure 1, the data samples in this study were extracted from the core collections of China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Web of Science (WOS), ensuring accuracy and comprehensiveness in literature retrieval [27]. After consulting the literature and conducting translation comparisons, the search keywords were determined. For the Chinese literature, only articles indexed in the Chinese Science Citation SM Database (CSCD), Chinese Social Sciences Citation Index (CSSCI), and core journals listed in CNKI’s authoritative sources were considered. After comparing the keywords in the research papers in Chinese and English, we used advanced search tools, and 844 Chinese-language articles were retrieved based on the keywords “ecological protection,” “ecological restoration,” “ecological protection and restoration,” and “ecological governance” in the context of “watershed” OR “basin,” after excluding irrelevant categories such as news and introductions. For English literature, a topic-based search (TS = (“ecological protection” OR “ecological restoration” OR “ecological protection and restoration”) AND (“watershed” OR “basin”)) was conducted using the same parameters, including language (English) and document type (article or review), yielding 4344 relevant publications.
The selection of the retrieval time span was informed by the 1998 Yangtze River flood, which heightened governmental and public attention toward ecological protection and restoration, leading to the initiation of major ecological protection and restoration projects. To ensure data relevance and comparability, the retrieval period for both Chinese and English research articles was set from January 1998 to October 2024.

2.2. Analysis Method

This study conducted a visual analysis of research articles on the watershed’s ecological protection and restoration at both domestic and international scales. The processed literature data (1998–2024) were imported into CiteSpace 6.3.1 for separate visual analysis of domestic and international literature. The “Pathfinder” and “Pruning” algorithms were applied to identify structural features [28]. Finally, cluster views, co-occurrence maps, and other visualizations were generated through parameter adjustments to extract research hotspots and development trends in the watershed’s ecological protection and restoration. For a comprehensive explanation, refer to Figure 1.

3. Conceptual Development and Theoretical Cognition of Watershed Ecological Protection and Restoration

3.1. Evolution of the Concept of Watershed Ecological Protection and Restoration in China and Abroad

The concept of watershed ecological protection and restoration originated in Europe and the United States, driven by the environmental challenges associated with industrialization. Severe water pollution and extensive habitat loss in rivers and lakes necessitated the early development of watershed-scale ecological protection and restoration programs [29]. One of the earliest initiatives was the establishment of the Tennessee Valley Authority in the early 20th century in the United States. This initiative aimed to address the competing demands of irrigated agriculture and industrial development through watershed-based water resource management, including levee construction and irrigation system implementation. As a result, the foundation for integrated watershed management was laid. The 1960s marked a critical turning point with the enactment of the Clean Water Act in the United States, which formally introduced watershed ecological protection and restoration into national policy. This legislative milestone fostered a shift from fragmented, localized interventions to a systematic and holistic approach that emphasized comprehensive restoration from upstream to downstream, alongside cross-sectoral collaboration. In Europe, the adoption of the Water Framework Directive by the European Union in 2000 further advanced this concept. The directive promoted a transition from isolated water ecosystem protection efforts to a more integrated, watershed-scale management framework. By prioritizing complete ecosystem restoration, it reinforced the necessity of addressing ecological integrity at the watershed level, facilitating the widespread adoption and expansion of watershed ecological protection and restoration practices.
The concept of watershed ecological protection and restoration has emerged relatively recently in China. However, with the gradual enhancement of environmental awareness, the importance has been increasingly recognized. The origin of watershed ecological protection and restoration in China can be traced back to 1984 when the government approved the “Water Pollution Prevention and Control Plan for the Huai River Basin.” This plan represented China’s first national-level initiative specifically addressing watershed-scale pollution prevention. The subsequent enactment of the “Water Pollution Prevention and Control Law” further reinforced legal constraints in this domain. During this initial stage, governance efforts were predominantly centered on pollution control, primarily aimed at improving water quality through pollutant regulation. However, these measures lacked a systematic and holistic ecological perspective. At the start of the 21st century, China began shifting its approach from pollution control to ecosystem protection and restoration. Since 2000, a series of large-scale ecological initiatives have been implemented, including the Grain for Green Program, soil and water protection projects, and wetland protection programs. In 2015, the Ministry of Water Resources introduced the policy [30] aimed at systematically guiding the protection and restoration of aquatic ecosystems across all major watersheds. With the establishment of China’s territorial spatial planning system, the concept of watershed ecological protection and restoration has evolved into an approach that emphasizes comprehensive protection and restoration measures [31]. China has introduced macro-level policies for the Yangtze and Yellow River basins, marking a significant step toward systematic ecological governance at the watershed scale [32]. In summary, the contemporary concept of watershed ecological protection and restoration can be defined as a process aimed at enhancing the integrity and functionality of ecosystems and achieving the sustainable development of watersheds. This is accomplished through the implementation of natural or semi-natural integrated management strategies in response to pollution-induced ecosystem degradation within a defined watershed unit.

3.2. Theoretical Foundations of Watershed Ecological Protection and Restoration

A well-defined theoretical framework is essential for advancing research on watershed ecological protection and restoration. Based on an extensive review of existing literature, its core theoretical underpinnings can be summarized as follows:

3.2.1. The Integral Nature of Watershed Ecological Protection and Restoration

Watersheds function as integrated ecological systems that comprise diverse components, including mountains, rivers, forests, croplands, grasslands, and deserts, all of which collectively sustain essential ecosystem services. The integral nature of watershed management emphasizes the interdependence of these elements. Maintaining ecological integrity and functional connectivity enhances ecosystem stability and resilience, thereby supporting the restoration and optimization of watershed-scale ecosystem services [33].

3.2.2. Multi-Scale Characteristics of Watershed Ecological Protection and Restoration

As a spatially complex unit that encompasses both natural and socio-economic dimensions, a watershed operates across multiple scales. Internally, it consists of hierarchical sub-watersheds, and it may intersect with administrative boundaries such as provinces, cities, and counties, so it has a complex scale effect. The spatial configuration and ecological dynamics of a watershed vary across scales, necessitating differentiated protection and restoration strategies (see Table 1). The multi-scale theory emphasizes the research and planning practice of ecological protection and restoration at different natural and administrative scales [34].

3.2.3. Dynamic Coordination in Watershed Ecological Protection and Restoration

Watershed ecosystems are inherently dynamic and complex and are shaped by climate change, land-use transformations, and human activities that continuously evolve. Given this high degree of dynamism, effective ecological protection and restoration require a coordinated and adaptive framework capable of monitoring and evaluating long-term ecological changes and uncertainties; in particular, it should focus on the change and adaptation of human social activities and needs, strengthen the balance and coordination of ecosystem services in the watershed, and coordinate the harmonious coexistence of man and nature [35].

3.2.4. Theoretical Integration of Watershed Ecological Protection and Restoration

Within the framework of territorial spatial planning, watershed ecological protection and restoration should incorporate three key dimensions in the future: spatial scale, multiple elements, and temporal dynamic changes. Corresponding plans should be formulated from these three aspects and put into restoration practice.

4. Results and Analysis

4.1. Annual Publication Volume Analysis

A statistical analysis of publication timelines identified 844 Chinese-language and 4,344 English-language publications (see Figure 2). Both domestic and international research output has increased in recent years, with a marked surge after 2018. This period saw significant advancements in research on watershed ecological protection and restoration, driving substantial publication growth. However, domestic research started relatively late. Before 2015, domestic research on watershed ecological protection and restoration was still in its early stages, with a slow but steady increase in publications. Between 2015 and 2019, China’s research in this field grew significantly, as reflected in the steady rise in annual publications. This trend may be linked to China’s General Plan for the Reform of the Ecological Civilization System, which was issued in September 2015 [36]. This policy emphasizes the interconnectedness of mountains, rivers, forests, fields, lakes, and grasslands as a unified ecological system and highlights protection and restoration as key measures to implement the ‘Two Mountains” theory.
In 2019, China formally proposed a territorial spatial planning system. Subsequently, the United Nations and the Chinese government each issued significant planning policies concerning ecological restoration. [37,38]. These policies officially elevated watershed ecological protection and restoration to a national strategic priority [39]. The introduction of key policies worldwide has driven a rapid surge in global research on watershed ecological protection and restoration.
Between 1998 and 2024, developed regions, such as North America and Europe, have led in research output on watershed ecological protection and restoration. The United States has produced the highest volume of research in this field, with over 1300 published articles. Although China began studying watershed ecological protection and restoration relatively recently, it has now published over 1200 English research articles, ranking second globally in research output. Research on watershed ecological protection and restoration is inherently regional due to its unique geographic, economic, and cultural contexts.

4.2. Analysis of Research Institutions and Authors

The CiteSpace analysis of the research institution cooperation network reveals the distribution of key institutions and their collaborative relationships, as shown in Figure 3a,b, and Table 2 presents the top 10 Chinese and English research institutions by publication volume.
For Chinese research articles, the University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Chinese Academy of Environmental Sciences are leading contributors. The Yellow River Survey, Planning, and Design Institute and the Yellow River Conservancy Research Institute rank third and fourth, reflecting the national emphasis on the ecological protection and restoration of the Yellow River Basin. This is further corroborated by the high research output in cities where these institutions are based. In terms of authorship, Zuo Qiting, Miao Changhong, Ren Baoping, Mu Xingmin, and Fu Bojie are among the most prolific scholars in this field. The distribution of domestic research institutions is relatively broadly dispersed, with varying levels of collaboration. While overall cooperation remains weak, localized partnerships are stronger, forming a multi-core decentralized structure. In contrast, the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences lead in English research publications, reflecting China’s growing emphasis on watershed ecological protection and restoration. Additionally, Beijing Normal University ranks among the top ten institutions, followed by international entities such as the U.S. Department of Natural Resources, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the French National Center for Scientific Research. As shown in Figure 4, English-language research institutions exhibit a clear polarization in focus and collaboration. On the one hand, domestic institutions, led by the Chinese Academy of Sciences, focus on scientific theories and technical models for the ecological protection and restoration of the Yellow River Basin [40,41], emphasizing land use structure, ecological processes [42], and ecosystem service enhancement [43]. The second component comprises a multi-core research group that includes the U.S. Department of Natural Resources, the U.S. Geological Survey, the French National Center for Scientific Research, and the University of California. French research institutions have previously proposed guidelines for ecological protection and restoration planning based on watershed scale research [44]. In contrast, U.S. research institutions have made significant advances in wetland ecological protection and restoration technologies. The International Wetland Science Research Center is currently located in Florida [45]. Global research on watershed ecological protection and restoration reflects distinct regional characteristics. Compared to China, international research institutions exhibit closer collaboration and stronger cooperation networks.

4.3. Keyword Network Analysis

The co-occurrence network of high-frequency keywords for ecological protection and restoration research in watersheds is illustrated using CiteSpace, where the centrality of a node indicates its role within the network. The greater the centrality, the more significant the keyword’s influence. Since 1998, Chinese research articles have primarily centered on keywords such as “Yellow River Basin,” “Ecological Protection,” “Ecological Restoration,” “Land Use,” “Ecological Environment,” “Coupling and Coordination,” “Land Change,” and “Water Resources” (Figure 5 and Table 3). Additionally, the 16 most frequent keywords in domestic research have been identified, encompassing a range of research themes, including soil and water conservation, human activities, and collaborative governance. These interdisciplinary topics are relevant to various academic disciplines, such as urban and rural planning, geography, landscape architecture, and ecology. Meanwhile, the predominant keywords in English research articles are “Conservation,” “Climate Change,” “Biodiversity,” “Ecosystem Services,” “Management,” and “Land Use.” Other high-frequency keywords have also emerged, including “Dynamics,” “Community,” “Model,” “Habitat,” and “Diversity,” among others (Figure 6). A comparison of the most frequently studied keywords in Chinese and English research articles reveals a high degree of similarity, as both emphasize ecological protection and restoration. Additionally, both languages frequently employ terms such as “Watershed,” “Land Use,” and “Climate Change.” However, a closer analysis reveals notable distinctions between high-frequency keywords in these two contexts. English keywords exhibit greater diversification in their connotations, encompass a broader array of research themes, and typically address a wider range of topics. In contrast, Chinese keywords predominantly focus on single-factor approaches to protection and restoration, making them relatively homogeneous.

4.4. Comparison and Trend Analysis of Hot Research Topics

4.4.1. Evolution Characteristics of English Research Articles

Analyzing the temporal evolution of co-occurring keywords can reveal shifts in research themes, while the evolutionary trends in watershed ecological protection and restoration research can be comprehensively examined through keyword frequency, emergence value, and centrality. In keyword analysis, the timeline view, keyword emergence, and time zone view each emphasize different aspects. The research on watershed ecological protection and restoration for English research articles began earlier, with a notable increase in keyword frequency and a rapid growth trend after 2003, which decelerated after 2019. This may be attributable to the establishment of a relatively mature research framework, as subsequent studies have largely adhered to this framework, expanding the research scope and focus of watershed ecological protection and restoration. From the stage characteristics (Figure 5):
(1) From 1998 to 2000, English research papers on watershed ecological protection and restoration entered a phase of maturation, with a focus on watershed landscape [46], hydrology and water quality [47], and species richness and management [48].
(2) From 2001 to 2009, research primarily centered on ecosystem services [49], ecological restoration design [50], and landscape patterns and connectivity [51].
(3) From 2010 to 2018, the research exhibited a trend of diversification, emphasizing soil pollution, as well as forest protection and restoration [52,53]. Especially with the rapid development of big data and geographic information technology, species distribution models, system dynamics, and other analytical models have been extensively applied, elevating watershed ecological protection and restoration planning to an intelligent decision-making framework.
(4) Since 2018, the emergence of keywords such as “human activities” and “resilience” has indicated a shift in research focus toward a more comprehensive consideration of the impact of human activities on ecological protection and restoration of watersheds. The research content has evolved from a focus on individual elements such as soil, water resources, and forests to the consideration of factor combinations and is increasingly oriented toward the interaction and coupling effect between ecological protection and restoration and the social and economic aspects [54].

4.4.2. Evolution Characteristics of Chinese Research Articles

The number of Chinese research articles on watershed ecological protection and restoration has grown rapidly since 2005, with the most substantial growth occurring between 2015 and 2024. An analysis of stage characteristics (Figure 6) reveals the following findings:
  • From 2001 to 2005, China began prioritizing watershed ecological protection and restoration, predominantly at the engineering and policy stages. The primary focus areas included soil and water conservation, as well as the conversion of farmland to forest, with particular emphasis on the Yellow River and Yangtze River Basins [55,56].
  • From 2005 to 2015, research expanded significantly, primarily addressing single factors that affect watershed ecology [57]. During this period, studies began to explore the influencing and driving factors of watershed ecological protection and restoration.
  • After 2015, with the gradual implementation of China’s territorial spatial planning policy, research on urbanization [58], ecological spatial analysis [59], and watershed evaluation index systems [60] has progressively increased.
  • The period between 2020 and 2024 has seen the most significant increase in published research. Keywords such as “Loess Plateau,” “Upper, middle, and lower reaches of the Yellow River,” and “Urban agglomerations” have emerged in the study area, thereby broadening the scope of watershed research beyond the regional scale. Concurrently, emerging research themes include the evolution of spatio-temporal patterns and driving forces [61], as well as the coupling and coordination of ecological factors [62]. In general, research on watershed ecological protection and restoration in China has experienced significant diversification over the past decade. In the past decade, research on watershed ecological protection and restoration in China has become increasingly diverse, and the influence of multiple factors across different spatial and temporal scales on ecological protection and restoration has been extensively examined [63]. This exploration has been particularly focused on research that is closely combined with relevant national policies. This trend aligns with international research developments observed after 2018.

4.5. Analysis of Research Hotspots

4.5.1. Evolution of Research Hotspots

The occurrence of frequently used terms reflects research hotspots and development trends in the field [64]. Figure 7 presents the top 25 emerging keywords in Chinese and English research articles. In contrast, emerging keywords in English research articles demonstrate greater overall intensity and considerable variation. This indicates that research topics in Chinese research articles are more focused, whereas those in English research articles are more diverse.
From the perspective of emergent intensity, the emergent intensity of keywords in English research articles is ranked as “habitat,” “conservation,” “diversity,” “invest model,” etc. Notably, the term “habitat” emerges as the most prominent, signifying that international research on ecological protection and the restoration of watersheds has placed heightened emphasis on ecosystem services [65], particularly in the domains of biodiversity conservation [66] and habitat construction [67], and these elements serve as critical foundations for evaluating the efficacy of ecological protection and restoration initiatives within watersheds. From the perspective of emergent time series, the emergence time span of English keywords significantly exceeds that in China, with 72% of international keywords emerging over more than five years. Typical topic words include “Diversity,” “Community,” and “Conservation planning,” while topics such as “Biodiversity,” “Social dynamics,” and “Planning management” demonstrate that the comprehensive study of the impact of socioeconomic activities on watershed ecological protection and restoration remains a sustained global concern. However, the emergent keywords in Chinese research articles are more general, with the most prominent emergent keywords being “Ecological restoration” and “Watershed.” Only 32% of words with an emergence time span exceeding five years include keywords such as “soil erosion” [68] and “landscape pattern” [69]. On the whole, Chinese studies tend to focus on the protection and restoration of single ecological elements in typical watersheds [70], and the persistence of research hotspots is weaker compared to English research articles. However, following 2020, emergent terms in English research articles include “China” and “Yellow River basin,” while emergent terms in Chinese literature also include “carbon emission,” “groundwater,” and “green development.” In general, with the implementation of China’s territorial spatial planning system, the Chinese integrated ecological protection and restoration strategies have become a significant focus of international research. A comprehensive statistical analysis of Chinese and English research articles reveals significant variations in the current research focal points, methodologies, and trends within the domain of watershed ecological protection and restoration. However, the research content remains largely consistent. The research content can be broadly divided into three key sections: an evaluation of ecological protection and restoration, the spatio-temporal pattern and driving mechanisms, and the construction of a comprehensive management system.

4.5.2. Main Research Contents

  • Evaluation of the Ecological Protection and Restoration of Watersheds
As the key strategy for addressing the degradation of watershed ecosystems, ecological protection and restoration can provide multiple ecological, social, and economic benefits for watersheds [71]. Ecological protection and restoration serve multiple functions, including protecting water and soil in the watershed [72], mitigating non-point source pollution [73,74], enhancing biodiversity and carbon sink [75,76], and improving landscape aesthetics [77]. Consequently, evaluation has become a prerequisite and a critical component for ecological protection and restoration efforts in watersheds. Current studies largely focus on the assessment of ecological and environmental benefits, which are still dominated by single-factor or one-dimensional evaluations [78], such as those targeting forest cover, soil stability, or water resources. At present, it is difficult to assess the comprehensiveness of the spatial effects of ecological protection and restoration; particularly, studies on the social and economic benefits are generally limited. Nevertheless, various methodological approaches such as species distribution models, investment models, niche theory models, and system dynamics have been applied, reflecting growing interest in more comprehensive evaluations. Additionally, territorial ecological restoration policies have introduced new requirements that emphasize comprehensive functional evaluation beyond single-factor analyses. As a result, research has gradually shifted toward the development of multi-objective, multi-dimensional index systems for evaluating watershed ecological protection and restoration.
2.
Multi-scale spatio-temporal pattern and driving mechanism of watershed ecological protection and restoration
As a complex geographical unit, a watershed undergoes dynamic changes in land use, vegetation types, and landscape structure as a result of ecological protection and restoration [79]. Therefore, studying it on a single scale is challenging, requiring consideration of both temporal and spatial scales. On the one hand, extant studies have analyzed the evolution of spatial and temporal patterns from the perspectives of ecological security patterns, landscape patterns, land use, and ecosystem services, which aids in understanding the spatial structure of watershed ecosystems from a macro perspective. On the other hand, micro-scale analyses have investigated key ecological indicators, such as vegetation cover and soil and water quality, to evaluate restoration effectiveness at the local level. A common thread among these studies is the pursuit of understanding the general rules of watershed ecosystem evolution and identifying the key social, economic, and ecological factors that influence these changes over extended periods and across diverse spatial scales [80]. Therefore, the research must dynamically integrate the multi-temporal dimensions of “past-present-future” [81] and coordinate different spatial scales [82], providing the scientific foundation for the spatial planning policies of ecological protection and restoration in the watershed.
3.
Construction of a Comprehensive Management System for Watershed Ecological Protection and Restoration
According to bibliometric analysis, there has been a notable increase in both the number and diversity of research topics since 2018. On the one hand, new research areas have emerged, including the Loess Plateau, the upper, middle, and lower reaches of the Yellow River, and urban agglomerations [83]; the scope of watershed research has expanded from the regional level. Furthermore, research hotspots include ecological resilience [84], coupling coordination [85], the impact of human activities [86], carbon neutrality, and carbon peaking [87]. The research hotspots demonstrate the influence of watershed ecological protection and restoration on major policies, including climate change mitigation and the promotion of harmonious human–nature interactions. They underscore the complex interactions between ecological protection and restoration and the socio-economic-cultural dimensions of watershed systems. These findings align with the integrative requirements of ecological protection and restoration planning under the “multi-planning integration” framework of territorial spatial planning.

5. Conclusions and Discussions

5.1. Conclusions

This study employed CiteSpace to conduct a bibliometric analysis of watershed ecological protection and restoration research in China and internationally from 1998 to 2024. The analysis covered publication volume, core authors, institutions, keyword clustering, and research hotspots. Publications on this topic have increased steadily. English research articles lead in volume and growth, but Chinese research articles have grown rapidly since 2019. The United States ranks first in total publications, with China now emerging as a key contributor. The keyword clustering shows that English research articles cover a broader scope and more mature frameworks, often linking ecological protection with climate change, ecosystem services, biodiversity, and socio-economic factors. In China, the establishment of the territorial spatial planning system has driven a shift in research focus from single ecological elements, such as soil and water, to the spatio-temporal patterns and driving mechanisms of multiple ecological elements. Research themes are evolving rapidly, aligning with national strategies such as the high-quality development of the Yellow River Basin, green development, and carbon neutrality. Both Chinese and English research share common foci, including evaluation system development, spatial-temporal analysis, and integrated governance. These themes reflect the gradual shift from single-objective to multi-objective ecological protection and restoration. Due to the establishment of the territorial spatial planning system and the alignment between emerging research themes and national strategies, Chinese research tends to exhibit a strong regional and policy-oriented focus.

5.2. Discussions

Over the past three decades, scholars both domestically and internationally have conducted extensive research on the ecological protection and restoration of watersheds, yielding significant theoretical and practical outcomes. This research spans multiple disciplines, including ecology, geography, soil and water conservation, and related fields. Notably, watershed ecological protection and restoration planning are also a crucial component of the territorial spatial planning system. Given the current policy context and practical challenges in China, along with differences in research directions and depth between Chinese and English studies, there remains considerable room for optimization in the theoretical research and practical implementation of watershed ecological protection and restoration in China [79]. Future research should focus on territorial watershed ecological protection and restoration planning, which may be structured within the paradigm of “theory establishment–problem identification–planning interface.”
  • Strengthen the accurate identification and assessment of the watershed’s ecological problems with the use of big data.
The watershed contains two aspects of ecosystem activities and human social activities, and the problems of ecological protection and restoration are also complex and changeable. Accurate assessment and problem identification are prerequisites for the success of the watershed’s ecological protection and restoration. The advent of technologies such as big data and artificial intelligence will facilitate the collection of a more comprehensive array of data within the watershed in the future [88,89]. Using deep learning and artificial intelligence, models will be employed to identify key ecological problems in the watershed from a multi-objective perspective. For instance, the multiple evaluation system for watershed’s ecological protection and restoration should be enhanced in terms of ecosystem service supply and demand, tradeoff and coordination, and human activity interference [90,91]. This enhancement will provide scientific decision-making and guidance for the preparation of ecological protection and restoration planning of watersheds.
2.
Explore multi-scale coordinated planning and management methods for watershed ecological protection and restoration.
Planning for watershed-scale ecological restoration serves as a critical complement to the existing territorial spatial planning framework [92]. As naturally integrated geographic units, watersheds pose significant challenges, including the need for governance coordination across administrative boundaries. However, ecological protection and restoration efforts vary significantly in their challenges, objectives, and strategies across spatial scales. Therefore, it is crucial to establish comprehensive coordination mechanisms at multi-spatial scales to guide targeted planning and research [93]. Efforts should be made to establish effective linkages across spatial scales, such as by formulating zoning guidelines tailored to different levels. Concurrently, it is critical to integrate academic research with planning practice, ensuring the effective implementation of plans and fostering positive outcomes. In doing so, scientific research and planning practices can form a mutually reinforcing cycle.
3.
Improve the Theoretical Framework of Territorial Spatial Planning and Watershed Ecological Protection and Restoration
In the current territorial spatial planning system, ecological restoration planning is a crucial component that is typically formulated at the national, provincial, municipal, and county administrative levels to support local governments in implementing comprehensive ecological governance. Watersheds and administrative units serve as distinct spatial planning boundaries that are shaped by different geographical perceptions and development needs, yet they complement each other. However, as a combination of physical geographical units and administrative divisions, the intrinsic natural and social elements within watersheds are highly interwoven. The ecological restoration planning framework has now reached a relatively mature stage. Watershed-scale ecological protection and restoration planning transcends administrative boundaries and is expected to provide a critical foundation for addressing cross-regional ecological challenges [94]. It is therefore recommended to develop a comprehensive ecological protection and restoration plan for watershed-scale territorial space, clarify its role within the broader spatial planning system, and establish a research and planning framework aligned with national policy directives. In addition, enhanced participation from researchers in urban planning and landscape architecture is encouraged to improve restoration quality through landscape-based approaches and promote harmonious human–nature relationships [95]. Academic research should be fully leveraged to support and enhance government decision-making and planning practices.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, H.Z. and W.W.; methodology, H.Z.; software, H.Z.; validation, H.Z., G.W. and W.W.; formal analysis, H.Z. and W.W.; investigation, H.Z. and G.W.; resources, H.Z.; data curation, H.Z.; writing—original draft preparation, H.Z.; writing—review and editing, H.Z., G.W. and W.W.; visualization, H.Z.; supervision, G.W. and W.W.; project administration, G.W. and W.W.; funding acquisition, W.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Federation of Social Sciences Circles of Zhejiang Province under grant number No. 2024B065.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
CNKIChina National Knowledge Infrastructure
WOSWeb of Science
CSCDChinese Science Citation SM Database
CSSCIChinese Social Sciences Citation Index

References

  1. Peng, J.; Xu, D.; Xu, Z.; Tang, H.; Jiang, H.; Dong, J.; Liu, Y. Ten key issues for ecological restoration of territorial space. Natl. Sci. Rev. 2024, 11, nwae176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Albaladejo, J.; Díaz-Pereira, E.; de Vente, J. Eco-holistic soil conservation to support land degradation neutrality and the sustainable development goals. Catena 2021, 196, 104823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Ziaul, I.; Wang, S. Environmental sustainability: A major component of sustainable development. Int. J. Environ. Sustain. Soc. Sci. 2023, 4, 900–907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Shaker, R.R.; Mackay, B.R. Hidden patterns of sustainable development in Asia with underlying global change correlations. Ecol. Indic. 2021, 131, 108227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Liu, Y.; Zhou, Y. Territory spatial planning and national governance system in China. Land Use Policy 2021, 102, 105288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Dühr, S.; Colomb, C.; Nadin, V. European Spatial Planning and Territorial Cooperation; Routledge: London, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  7. Zhao, H.; Wei, W.; He, M. Sustainable Implementation Strategies for Market-Oriented Ecological Restoration: Insights from Chinese Forests. Forests 2025, 16, 1083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Lin, G.; Jiang, D.; Fu, J.; Zhao, Y. A review on the overall optimization of production–living–ecological space: Theoretical basis and conceptual framework. Land 2022, 11, 345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Hu, G.; Huang, J.; Shi, J.; Chen, S. The formation of the Chinese territorial spatial planning system and international comparison. Trans. Plan. Urban Res. 2023, 2, 16–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Fu, B.; Liu, Y.; Meadows, M.E. Ecological restoration for sustainable development in China. Natl. Sci. Rev. 2023, 10, nwad033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Zhou, L.; Huang, Y. Spatiotemporal dynamics and determinants of human-land relationships in urbanization: A Yangtze River Economic Belt case study. Front. Environ. Sci. 2024, 12, 1412047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Zheng, Y.; Zhuang, G. Systemic governance of mountains, rivers, forests, farmlands, lakes and grasslands: Theoretical framework and approaches. Chin. J. Urban Environ. Stud. 2021, 9, 2150021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Hou, Y.; Chen, Y.; Ding, J.; Li, Z.; Li, Y.; Sun, F. Ecological impacts of land use change in the arid Tarim River Basin of China. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 1894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Xu, L.; Chen, S.S. Coupling coordination degree between social-economic development and water environment: A case study of Taihu Lake basin, China. Ecol. Indic. 2023, 148, 110118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Ding, Z.W.; Zheng, H.; Wang, J.; O’COnnor, P.; Li, C.; Chen, X.; Li, R.; Ouyang, Z. Integrating top-down and bottom-up approaches improves practicality and efficiency of large-scale ecological restoration planning: Insights from a social-ecological system. Engineering 2023, 31, 50–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Zhou, W.; Zhang, Y.; Yin, J.; Zhou, J.; Wu, Z. Evaluation of polluted urban river water quality: A case study of the Xunsi River watershed, China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 68035–68050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Yang, R.; Chen, S.; Ye, Y. Toward potential area identification for land consolidation and ecological restoration: An integrated framework via land use optimization. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2024, 26, 3127–3146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Liu, C.; Zhang, X.; Wang, T.; Chen, G.; Zhu, K.; Wang, Q.; Wang, J. Detection of vegetation coverage changes in the Yellow River Basin from 2003 to 2020. Ecol. Indic. 2022, 138, 108818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Fu, H.; Cai, M.; Jiang, P.; Fei, D.; Liao, C. Spatial multi-objective optimization towards low-carbon transition in the Yangtze River Economic Belt of China. Landsc. Ecol. 2024, 39, 156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Yong, X.U.; Chuansheng, W. Ecological protection and high-quality development in the Yellow River Basin: Framework, path, and countermeasure. Bull. Chin. Acad. Sci. (Chin. Version) 2020, 35, 875–883. [Google Scholar]
  21. Zhao, J.; Zhao, Y.; Yang, X. Evolution characteristics and driving mechanism of the territorial space pattern in the Yangtze River Economic Belt, China. Land 2022, 11, 1447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Li, Z. Thoughts on ecological watershed planning under the territorial spatial planning. Landsc. Archit. Front. 2019, 7, 77–87. [Google Scholar]
  23. Palmer, M.A.; Hondula, K.L.; Koch, B.J. Ecological restoration of streams and rivers: Shifting strategies and shifting goals. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2014, 45, 247–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Valentim, H.I.L.; Feio, M.J.; Almeida, S.F.P. Fluvial protected areas as a strategy to preserve riverine ecosystems—A review. Biodivers. Conserv. 2024, 33, 439–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Han, X.; Bian, Z.; Yu, H.; Lei, S.; Zhao, Y.; Guo, Y. The Historical and Theoretical Rationale for Ecological Protection and Restoration: Experiences from China. Land 2025, 14, 161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Ding, X.; Zhong, Y. Knowledge mapping of platform research: A visual analysis using VOSviewer and CiteSpace. Electron. Commer. Res. 2022, 22, 787–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Harari, M.B.; Parola, H.R.; Hartwell, C.J.; Riegelman, A. Literature searches in systematic reviews and meta-analyses: A review, evaluation, and recommendations. J. Vocat. Behav. 2020, 118, 103377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Rawat, K.S.; Sood, S.K. Knowledge mapping of computer applications in education using CiteSpace. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2021, 29, 1324–1339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Poikane, S.; Kelly, M.G.; Free, G.; Carvalho, L.; Hamilton, D.P.; Katsanou, K.; Lürling, M.; Warner, S.; Spears, B.M.; Irvine, K. A global assessment of lake restoration in practice: New insights and future perspectives. Ecol. Indic. 2024, 158, 111330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Cao, W.; Qin, W.; Wang, D. Appropriate targets for soil erosion control at the national scale determined in China. River 2023, 2, 169–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Luo, Y.; Lv, Y.; Fu, B.; Zhang, Q.; Li, T.; Hu, W.; Comber, A. Half century change of interactions among ecosystem services driven by ecological restoration: Quantification and policy implications at a watershed scale in the Chinese Loess Plateau. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 651, 2546–2557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Wang, S.; Yang, J.; Wang, A.; Yan, Y.; Liu, T. Coupled coordination of water resources–economy–ecosystem complex in the Henan section of the Yellow River basin. Water Supply 2022, 22, 8835–8848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Gao, M.; Hu, Y.; Niu, S.; Bai, Y.; Wang, J. Identifying Priority Areas for Ecological Protection and Restoration by Constructing a Water Ecological Security Pattern. Ecosyst. Health Sustain. 2025, 11, 0310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Bennett, A.F.; Haslem, A.; Cheal, D.C.; Clarke, M.F.; Jones, R.N.; Koehn, J.D.; Lake, P.S.; Lumsden, L.F.; Lunt, I.D.; Mackey, B.G.; et al. Ecological processes: A key element in strategies for nature conservation. Ecol. Manag. Restor. 2009, 10, 192–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Mackay, B.R.; Shaker, R.R. A Megacities Review: Comparing Indicator-Based Evaluations of Sustainable Development and Urban Resilience. Sustainability (2071–1050) 2024, 16, 8076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Guo, Y.; Yang, L.; Wang, L.; Li, H.; Ge, Q. Assessment of ecological civilization construction from the perspective of environment and health in China. Eco-Environ. Health 2024, 3, 281–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Jiang, W.; Zhang, Z.; Ling, Z.; Deng, Y. Experience and future research trends of wetland protection and restoration in China. J. Geogr. Sci. 2024, 34, 229–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Aronson, J.; Goodwin, N.; Orlando, L.; Eisenberg, C.; Cross, A.T. A world of possibilities: Six restoration strategies to support the United Nation’s Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. Restor. Ecol. 2020, 28, 730–736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Liu, B.W.; Wang, M.H.; Chen, T.L.; Tseng, P.C.; Sun, Y.; Chiang, A.; Chiang, P.C. Establishment and implementation of green infrastructure practice for healthy watershed management: Challenges and perspectives. Water-Energy Nexus 2020, 3, 186–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ji, Q.; Liang, W.; Fu, B.; Zhang, W.; Yan, J.; Lü, Y.; Yue, C.; Jin, Z.; Lan, Z.; Li, S.; et al. Mapping land use/cover dynamics of the Yellow River Basin from 1986 to 2018 supported by Google Earth Engine. Remote Sens. 2021, 13, 1299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Zhang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Fu, B.; Lv, Y.; Liang, X.; Yang, Y.; Ma, R.; Yan, S.; Wu, X. Identification of critical ecological areas using the ecosystem multifunctionality-stability-integrity framework: A case study in the Yellow River basin China. J. Environ. Manag. 2023, 348, 119296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Wu, X.; Wang, S.; Fu, B.; Liu, Y.; Zhu, Y. Land use optimization based on ecosystem service assessment: A case study in the Yanhe watershed. Land Use Policy 2018, 72, 303–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Li, R.; Zheng, H.; Lv, S.; Liao, W.; Lu, F. Development and evaluation of a new index to assess hydrologic regulating service at sub-watershed scale. Ecol. Indic. 2018, 86, 9–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Trabucchi, M.; O’FArrell, P.J.; Notivol, E.; Comín, F.A. Mapping ecological processes and ecosystem services for prioritizing restoration efforts in a semi-arid Mediterranean River basin. Environ. Manag. 2014, 53, 1132–1142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Zhang, L.; Thomas, S.; Mitsch, W.J. Design of real-time and long-term hydrologic and water quality wetland monitoring stations in South Florida, USA. Ecol. Eng. 2017, 108, 446–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Kammerbauer, J.; Ardon, C. Land use dynamics and landscape change pattern in a typical watershed in the hillside region of central Honduras. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 1999, 75, 93–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Shmueli, D.F. Water quality in international river basins. Political Geogr. 1999, 18, 437–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Azous, A.L.; Cooke, S.S. Wetland plant communities in relation to watershed development. In Wetlands and Urbanization; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2000; pp. 271–280. [Google Scholar]
  49. Swallow, B.M.; Sang, J.K.; Nyabenge, M.; Bundotich, D.K.; Duraiappah, A.K.; Yatich, T.B. Tradeoffs, synergies and traps among ecosystem services in the Lake Victoria basin of East Africa. Environ. Sci. Policy 2009, 12, 504–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Mander, Ü.; Hayakawa, Y.; Kuusemets, V. Purification processes, ecological functions, planning and design of riparian buffer zones in agricultural watersheds. Ecol. Eng. 2005, 24, 421–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Walters, S. Modeling scale-dependent landscape pattern, dispersal, and connectivity from the perspective of the organism. Landsc. Ecol. 2007, 22, 867–881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. VanHouten, J.W. Large watershed management and restoration: Dioxin sediment remediation case study. Int. J. Environ. Stud. 2014, 71, 570–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Qu, S.; Wang, L.; Lin, A.; Zhu, H.; Yuan, M. What drives the vegetation restoration in Yangtze River basin, China: Climate change or anthropogenic factors? Ecol. Indic. 2018, 90, 438–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Wu, B.; Quan, Q.; Yang, S.; Dong, Y. A social-ecological coupling model for evaluating the human-water relationship in basins within the Budyko framework. J. Hydrol. 2023, 619, 129361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Liao, C.; Pu, Y. Significance and countermeasures of ecological restoration project in Yangtze River Basin. People’s Yangtze River 2003, 11, 37–38+51. Available online: https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=gHWJqxSIlt0nY9to2jDukwFcoorDdQQhDDcR30AGHkqbqBNF1sCuQTzxikiryT7ma9SyfWe8WkQYPjRAHyK5dNAI8kq2NVnAO7o6_PvFdQmINSkM0_1ql6Z5wnP7PhIcFUUsj0S-vebKyPLHJYci-U5rc7pK-TnZcoGBHhlGqTxq6kScVDzhqg==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS (accessed on 23 May 2024). (In Chinese).
  56. Li, G. Unified thinking to promote soil and water conservation in the Yellow River Basin. Soil Water Conserv. China 2003, 12, 9–10. Available online: https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=7c_HF4sgkt7mv2zr5RdfJM6SpCuMFViuxg8NqSpUzo77xGVpJ85cAt_4fnkH_o4s8hAnykPNea4ZeYaWmdNhYkD5FGWp0hrLJXuyM1XxnmobuhCVAabkYP3O7wnUNnPlgeGg6FB7kdgpeWFRhf3clyMNg3mn-ICCoRAi-r1UW1pWjzu5J0J8kBw8oRAHEav&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS (accessed on 23 May 2024). (In Chinese).
  57. Li, A.; Chen, Y. The present situation of China’s environmental protection supervision and management system and perfect countermeasures. Environ. Prot. 2013, 41, 32–34. Available online: https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=7c_HF4sgkt7ItHdXrCERlMYLvd3IwmgFhb4ze5O_95AYn3ZTh1d2Qry5TjKEuc8npQPON9lbPI4w5ACeGkUuepBD6Sn_FJ1cJDzPqfPnKUqvfTw722uXcbSSTbK7E0KnliIuIlEaUcRNntkbNPMKZwhimCsBgyOBApQWSBXnfRxyxPe4u7FKTgu25zBwz10Q&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS (accessed on 23 May 2024). (In Chinese).
  58. Wu, S.; An, Y.; Ma, L. Spatial and temporal differentiation of ecological service value in karst watershed under urbanization: A case study of Nanming River Basin in Guiyang City. Resour. Environ. Yangtze River Basin 2015, 24, 1591–1598. Available online: https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=7c_HF4sgkt5Qjer5HzHjJGMrFTFDPznX-4Ku0H_aVEuNUHhqo4V9I78111iZDwdkHB3CO92ksERMvYUEbLVMF-9_T3YMz5BW4R-F-JylhPD9ifPF91sWwWfl512NgzPQUj8H-JVIzzhF7xtlRccreEPF4LZuefWYnSk8GWJzJ7ODvHu3LYrxz9zi6_Qe1Xnm&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS (accessed on 23 May 2024). (In Chinese).
  59. Deng, W.; Deng, W.; Yuan, X.; Zhang, Y. Qi, Q. Dynamic evolution of ecosystem pattern in the Three Gorges Reservoir area. Resour. Environ. Yangtze River Basin 2015, 24, 661–668. Available online: https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=qvsDeM7pbdkrdVarJ2euX_lQDvO-JhF4OxlW0DdV8sEF8sxgbrYrqCdW_e9pa8lEAlQTs9N1zREfJci9qj_BQHWweK6T6NnKm02idGqd-bN8bbwIqDnUnN8Huw0gFqkTomIlLGuFyPEql8vR4MLm4uOitaLUE-aKtD0A6tA7mSM64dRnnxtGkg==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS (accessed on 23 May 2024). (In Chinese).
  60. Li, J.; Huang, X. Optimization of Evaluation Index of ecological restoration model in Danjiang River Basin based on AHP. People’s Yangze River 2012, 34, 95–97+117. Available online: https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=mV2q5OJ_OLwtx7zKuGYdpuCSHMZmoVbjo9jIDLKKsf4OwqghbbzgLzAjhFri4fpH3YKKf2I4MGOmKDlEAGcqOObd5FQyqjgljDovYj6yd8gIl3lxOqGzqZVTeUbBZvHNeNmaBB4K9QKA7uiisoyIIXN-Yb8QR_XupRUGiTAz7bhGujpt71nzGw==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS (accessed on 23 May 2024). (In Chinese).
  61. Zhang, B.; Miao, C. Spatial-temporal pattern evolution and driving forces of land use in the Yellow River Basin. Resour. Sci. 2020, 42, 460–473. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  62. Zhao, Q. The key to ecological protection and high-quality development in the Yellow River Basin: The optimization of man-land system. J. N. China Univ. Water Resour. Electr. Power (Nat. Sci. Ed.) 2020, 41, 1–6. Available online: https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=7c_HF4sgkt5lUfKTkcM6VxtY1xr9YPgvLKW5xGJzNIeKJMJ_161w-u5yiOYz188lYC_BllAYqJGBxLWNdYNhyx61sHcmMPso9SHT9EMRaarWhqJM-BHL-RCpi_qxB_qR2Z8z1gxGpqi-R19UrQffFJ8IcLNftG46t_nC14ZA6V1RxZpnKapHVZiV4INuT_HB&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS (accessed on 23 May 2024). (In Chinese).
  63. Luo, M.; Yu, E.; Zhou, Y.; Ying, L.; Wang, J.; Wu, G. Distribution and technical strategies of ecological protection and restoration projects for mountains-rivers-forests-farmlands-lakes-grasslands. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2019, 39, 8692–8701. [Google Scholar]
  64. Shao, B.; Li, X.; Bian, G. A survey of research hotspots and frontier trends of recommendation systems from the perspective of knowledge graph. Expert Syst. Appl. 2021, 165, 113764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Alexander, S.; Aronson, J.; Whaley, O.; Lamb, D. The relationship between ecological restoration and the ecosystem services concept. Ecol. Soc. 2016, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Palmer, M.A.; Reidy Liermann, C.A.; Nilsson, C.; Flörke, M.; Alcamo, J.; Lake, P.S.; Bond, N. Climate change and the world’s river basins: Anticipating management options. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2008, 6, 81–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Huang, L.; Wang, J.; Chen, X. Ecological infrastructure planning of large river basin to promote nature conservation and ecosystem functions. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 306, 114482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Jia, Z.; Sun, T.; Lang, W.; Zhou, J.; Ding, B. Consideration on sustainable development of soil and water conservation and ecological construction in the Yellow River. Soil Water Conserv. China 2005, 12, 34–35. Available online: https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=7c_HF4sgkt4GUaoiJEI2lMRPV7P-E1bir17j0AijU5PWOCduJlix5ItmMx2okP53EtdNNB-5Uqw1P2B6SBa_i5QDnj9xcQ1Wt8o9EJl3CZHz2iqU6n0iyc4V4-JoV2T3tHSvHBWKBswsjus9ZGdJglqgrhS4ksV9lufLykX0jwAc19fv3cbfSTNLBXzQbfMV&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS (accessed on 23 May 2024). (In Chinese).
  69. Tan, J.; Dong, Z.; Fu, X.; Xu, W.; Liu, Q. Analysis on the evolution of landscape ecological health and its driving factors. J. Hohai Univ. (Nat. Sci.) 2015, 43, 107–113. Available online: https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=7c_HF4sgkt6DBcfN5Yc8AD7gTrD1TVqi1dCzp5QjPXMh-OPJDHPoOI1czCnm140bWruxZ-wj8MKnESbvqiMs6pxbfkRtQokb0gFbR1CvpSoMshYBLYCPxykXYDjxC03QJLjvdZUqsDbuMu5Xqp_VJfwCcfMRK3Y8eqIXPv2ujG2ACGJYza9AgZRX9gfS69_u&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS (accessed on 23 May 2024). (In Chinese).
  70. Fu, B. Several key points to be grasped urgently in the restoration of territorial space ecology. Bull. Chin. Acad. Sci. 2021, 36, 64. Available online: https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=7c_HF4sgkt7ZeNa8SvyFBHHoPc862viGweg9y8nM5CmiR9kgducjmGkxdLPG2yz4fGpFWrDaBuh3zfWO_B42iAjJ1QlM3M-tLSj0oVUZm5VqzfvK4uC_0hUz96ZmRKeu5uFwObEbQRtxQ2oTyUdEsZmP3jwOnrnaB5SY3AUtyE-2pN8rcjoERpB6ZWLMZ7wq&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS (accessed on 23 May 2024). (In Chinese).
  71. Basak, S.M.; Hossain, S.; Tusznio, J.; Grodzińska-Jurczak, M. Social benefits of river restoration from ecosystem services perspective: A systematic review. Environ. Sci. Policy 2021, 124, 90–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Sun, P.; Wu, Y.; Gao, J.; Yao, Y.; Zhao, F.; Lei, X.; Qiu, L. Shifts of sediment transport regime caused by ecological restoration in the Middle Yellow River Basin. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 698, 134261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. De Groot, R.S.; Alkemade, R.; Braat, L.; Hein, L.; Willemen, L. Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecol. Complex. 2010, 7, 260–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Jain, S.K.; Singh, V.P. Water Resources Systems Planning and Management; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  75. Li, P.; Li, D.; Sun, X.; Chu, Z.; Xia, T.; Zheng, B. Application of ecological restoration technologies for the improvement of biodiversity and ecosystem in the river. Water 2022, 14, 1402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Zhou, J.; Zhao, Y.; Huang, P.; Zhao, X.; Feng, W.; Li, Q.; Xue, D.; Dou, J.; Shi, W.; Wei, W.; et al. Impacts of ecological restoration projects on the ecosystem carbon storage of inland river basin in arid area, China. Ecol. Indic. 2020, 118, 106803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Peng, S.H.; Han, K.T. Assessment of aesthetic quality on soil and water conservation engineering using the scenic beauty estimation method. Water 2018, 10, 407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Keppo, I.; Butnar, I.; Bauer, N.; Caspani, M.; Edelenbosch, O.; Emmerling, J.; Fragkos, P.; Guivarch, C.; Harmsen, M.; Lefèvre, J.; et al. Exploring the possibility space: Taking stock of the diverse capabilities and gaps in integrated assessment models. Environ. Res. Lett. 2021, 16, 053006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Zhang, Y.; Yang, Y.; Chen, Z.; Zhang, S. Multi-criteria assessment of the resilience of ecological function areas in China with a focus on ecological restoration. Ecol. Indic. 2020, 119, 106862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Moss, T. The governance of land use in river basins: Prospects for overcoming problems of institutional interplay with the EU Water Framework Directive. Land Use Policy 2004, 21, 85–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Ćwiąkała, P.; Gruszczyński, W.; Stoch, T.; Puniach, E.; Mrocheń, D.; Matwij, W.; Matwij, K.; Nędzka, M.; Sopata, P.; Wójcik, A. UAV applications for determination of land deformations caused by underground mining. Remote Sens. 2020, 12, 1733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Li, X.Y.; Long, D.; Scanlon, B.R.; Mann, M.E.; Li, X.; Tian, F.; Sun, Z.; Wang, G. Climate change threatens terrestrial water storage over the Tibetan Plateau. Nat. Clim. Change 2022, 12, 801–807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Nika, C.E.; Gusmarol, L.; Ghafourian, M.; Atanasova, N.; Buttiglieri, G.; Katsou, E. Nature-based solutions as enablers of circularity in water systems: A review on assessment methodologies, tools and indicators. Water Res. 2020, 183, 115988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Shi, F.; Liu, S.; Sun, Y.; An, Y.; Zhao, S.; Liu, Y.; Li, M. Ecological network construction of the heterogeneous agro-pastoral areas in the upper Yellow River basin. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2020, 302, 107069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Ahn, S.R.; Kim, S.J. Assessment of watershed health, vulnerability and resilience for determining protection and restoration priorities. Environ. Model. Softw. 2019, 122, 103926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Qi, Y.; Lian, X.; Wang, H.; Zhang, J.; Yang, R. Dynamic mechanism between human activities and ecosystem services: A case study of Qinghai lake watershed, China. Ecol. Indic. 2020, 117, 106528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Sadeghi, S.H.; Hazbavi, Z.; Gholamalifard, M. Interactive impacts of climatic, hydrologic and anthropogenic activities on watershed health. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 648, 880–893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Gu, T.; Peng, J.; Jiang, H.; He, C. Watershed-based territorial ecological restoration: Theoretical cognition and key planning issues. J. Nat. Resour. 2023, 38, 2464–2474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Lu, Y.; Chen, S. Exploring the realization pathway of carbon peak and carbon neutrality in the provinces around the Yangtze river of China. J. Clean. Prod. 2024, 466, 142904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Sun, A.Y.; Scanlon, B.R. How can Big Data and machine learning benefit environment and water management: A survey of methods, applications, and future directions. Environ. Res. Lett. 2019, 14, 073001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Liu, J.; Pei, X.; Zhu, W.; Jiao, J. Water-related ecosystem services interactions and their natural-human activity drivers: Implications for ecological protection and restoration. J. Environ. Manag. 2024, 352, 120101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Lyu, F.; Tang, J.; Olhnuud, A.; Hao, F.; Gong, C. The impact of large-scale ecological restoration projects on trade-offs/synergies and clusters of ecosystem services. J. Environ. Manag. 2024, 365, 121591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Cheng, G.; Li, X. Integrated research methods in watershed science. Sci. China Earth Sci. 2015, 58, 1159–1168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Zhai, J.; Shen, J.; Ge, N. Cross-administrative solutions for sustainable development: The case of the Watertown Hub. Sustain. Dev. 2025, 33, 1458–1478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Zhao, H.; Li, W. Research on the design for ecological landscape restoration of the mining wasteland. Fresenius Environ. Bull. 2021, 30, 6327–6333. [Google Scholar]
Land 14 01440 g001
Figure 1. Flow and methods outlining the research on watershed ecological protection and restoration in the context of territorial spatial planning.
Figure 1. Flow and methods outlining the research on watershed ecological protection and restoration in the context of territorial spatial planning.
Land 14 01440 g001
Land 14 01440 g002
Figure 2. Literature quantity and country distribution of watershed ecological protection and restoration research from 1998 to 2024. Data sources: WOS and CNKI.
Figure 2. Literature quantity and country distribution of watershed ecological protection and restoration research from 1998 to 2024. Data sources: WOS and CNKI.
Land 14 01440 g002
Land 14 01440 g003
Figure 3. (a,b). Distribution of authors and institutions in Chinese and English research articles from 1998–2024. (a) Chinese keywords. (b) English keywords. Circle diameter-keyword frequency: The diameter of each node reflects the frequency of keyword occurrence. A larger circle indicates that the keyword appears more frequently in the dataset, signifying a high level of attention within the research field. Purple outer ring-betweenness centrality: A purple ring around a node denotes high betweenness centrality, indicating that the keyword serves as a crucial bridge that connects different research subfields. Node color-temporal attribute: The color gradient of each node corresponds to the time of emergence, as indicated by the color bar in the lower-left corner. Darker shades represent earlier occurrences, while lighter tones indicate more recent appearances. Hollow or colorless nodes-low centrality despite high frequency: Large circles without a purple ring represent keywords that, although frequently mentioned, have low betweenness centrality. This suggests limited connectivity across different thematic clusters.
Figure 3. (a,b). Distribution of authors and institutions in Chinese and English research articles from 1998–2024. (a) Chinese keywords. (b) English keywords. Circle diameter-keyword frequency: The diameter of each node reflects the frequency of keyword occurrence. A larger circle indicates that the keyword appears more frequently in the dataset, signifying a high level of attention within the research field. Purple outer ring-betweenness centrality: A purple ring around a node denotes high betweenness centrality, indicating that the keyword serves as a crucial bridge that connects different research subfields. Node color-temporal attribute: The color gradient of each node corresponds to the time of emergence, as indicated by the color bar in the lower-left corner. Darker shades represent earlier occurrences, while lighter tones indicate more recent appearances. Hollow or colorless nodes-low centrality despite high frequency: Large circles without a purple ring represent keywords that, although frequently mentioned, have low betweenness centrality. This suggests limited connectivity across different thematic clusters.
Land 14 01440 g003
Land 14 01440 g004
Figure 4. (a,b). Clustering of Chinese and English research article keywords from 1998–2024. (a) Chinese keywords. (b) English keywords. Clustering of Chinese and English research article keywords from 1998–2024. (a) Chinese keywords. (b) English keywords. Circle diameter—keyword frequency: The diameter of each node reflects the frequency of keyword occurrence. A larger circle indicates that the keyword appears more frequently in the dataset, signifying a high level of attention within the research field. Purple outer ring—betweenness centrality: A purple ring around a node denotes high betweenness centrality, indicating that the keyword serves as a crucial bridge connecting different research subfields. Node color—temporal attribute: The color gradient of each node corresponds to the time of emergence, as indicated by the color bar in the lower-left corner. Darker shades represent earlier occurrences, while lighter tones indicate more recent appearances. Hollow or colorless nodes—low centrality despite high frequency: Large circles without a purple ring represent keywords that, although frequently mentioned, have low betweenness centrality. This suggests limited connectivity across different thematic clusters.
Figure 4. (a,b). Clustering of Chinese and English research article keywords from 1998–2024. (a) Chinese keywords. (b) English keywords. Clustering of Chinese and English research article keywords from 1998–2024. (a) Chinese keywords. (b) English keywords. Circle diameter—keyword frequency: The diameter of each node reflects the frequency of keyword occurrence. A larger circle indicates that the keyword appears more frequently in the dataset, signifying a high level of attention within the research field. Purple outer ring—betweenness centrality: A purple ring around a node denotes high betweenness centrality, indicating that the keyword serves as a crucial bridge connecting different research subfields. Node color—temporal attribute: The color gradient of each node corresponds to the time of emergence, as indicated by the color bar in the lower-left corner. Darker shades represent earlier occurrences, while lighter tones indicate more recent appearances. Hollow or colorless nodes—low centrality despite high frequency: Large circles without a purple ring represent keywords that, although frequently mentioned, have low betweenness centrality. This suggests limited connectivity across different thematic clusters.
Land 14 01440 g004
Land 14 01440 g005
Figure 5. WOS keyword map from 1998–2024 (English).
Figure 5. WOS keyword map from 1998–2024 (English).
Land 14 01440 g005
Land 14 01440 g006
Figure 6. CNKI keyword map from 1998–2024 (Chinese).
Figure 6. CNKI keyword map from 1998–2024 (Chinese).
Land 14 01440 g006
Land 14 01440 g007
Figure 7. Analysis of keyword emergence in Chinese and English research articles from 1998–2024. Keywords: The top 25 most frequently occurring terms are listed, with English keywords on the left and Chinese keywords on the right. The red bar indicates the burst period of a keyword, reflecting the time span during which it experienced a sharp increase in attention. The blue background bar represents the full-time span (1998–2024), providing a reference for the temporal position of each keyword’s burst period.
Figure 7. Analysis of keyword emergence in Chinese and English research articles from 1998–2024. Keywords: The top 25 most frequently occurring terms are listed, with English keywords on the left and Chinese keywords on the right. The red bar indicates the burst period of a keyword, reflecting the time span during which it experienced a sharp increase in attention. The blue background bar represents the full-time span (1998–2024), providing a reference for the temporal position of each keyword’s burst period.
Land 14 01440 g007
Table 1. Distinctions among watershed ecological protection and restoration studies conducted at varying spatial scales.
Table 1. Distinctions among watershed ecological protection and restoration studies conducted at varying spatial scales.
ScaleStudy AreaEcological Protection and Restoration ObjectivesMain Research Content
MacroscopicWatershed scale (include provinces, cities)To ascertain the factors that have led to the degradation of ecological security patterns, as well as the pivotal nodes that are crucial for the preservation and rehabilitation of the environment.The identification of watershed ecological protection and restoration areas, the analysis of ecological security patterns or landscape pattern space-time evolution and driving mechanisms, and the construction of a comprehensive management system.
Middle viewProtection and restoration unit scale (include cities, counties)Identify problems such as soil erosion and vegetation degradation and seek ways to repair them.The evaluation of ecosystem services at the unit level, the optimization of ecological protection and restoration space.
MicrocosmicSub-project scale (can include counties and towns)Identify ecological stress problems and seek specific solutions and engineering measuresThe project includes habitat restoration, returning the grain plots to forestry, the implementation of soil and water protection measures, and comprehensive land enhancement strategies.
Table 2. Ranking of institutions in terms of the number of published papers on watershed ecological protection and restoration research.
Table 2. Ranking of institutions in terms of the number of published papers on watershed ecological protection and restoration research.
CNKI DatabaseWOS Database
Organization NameNumber of Published PapersOrganization NameNumber of Published Papers
Chinese Academy of Sciences23Chinese Academy of Sciences472
Chinese Academy of Environmental Sciences14University of Chinese Academy of Sciences192
Yellow River Survey Planning Design Institute Co., Ltd.12United States Department of the Interior191
Yellow River Conservancy Research Institute, Yellow River Conservancy Commission12United States Geological Survey157
Yellow River Ecological Protection and Regional Coordinated Development Institute, Zhengzhou University12Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)131
China Research Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower11Beijing Normal University124
Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, Chinese Academy of Sciences11University of California118
Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences (RCEES)10United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 110
College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences8Institute of Geographic Sciences & Natural Resources Research
Institute of Geography and Natural Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences		108
School of Economics, Lanzhou University8United States Forest Service80
School of Hydraulic Science and Engineering, Zhengzhou University8University of Florida67
School of Urban and Environmental Studies, Northwestern University7Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences (RCEES) 62
Table 3. Statistics for keywords from Chinese and English research articles from 1998–2024. (from Figure 5 and Figure 6).
Table 3. Statistics for keywords from Chinese and English research articles from 1998–2024. (from Figure 5 and Figure 6).
Serial NumberChinese Subject TermFrequencyCentralitySerial NumberEnglish Subject TermFrequencyCentrality
1Yellow River Basin3250.4411Conservation11860.04
2Ecological protection910.2212Climate change6450.03
3Ecological restoration340.3813Biodiversity5920.02
4Land use270.1314Ecosystem services5390.03
5Ecological environment240.1415Management4930.03
6Coupling coordination200.0616Land use4740.03
7Spatiotemporal variation190.0517Patterns3540.03
8Water resources180.0818Diversity3520.03
9Human activity150.0619Community2130.04
10Climate change110.0520Model2060.02
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

Zhao, H.; Wang, G.; Wei, W. The Comparative Bibliometric Analysis of Watershed Ecological Protection and Restoration in the Context of Territorial Spatial Planning: An Overview of Global Research Trends. Land 2025, 14, 1440. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14071440

AMA Style

Zhao H, Wang G, Wei W. The Comparative Bibliometric Analysis of Watershed Ecological Protection and Restoration in the Context of Territorial Spatial Planning: An Overview of Global Research Trends. Land. 2025; 14(7):1440. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14071440

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhao, Hengsong, Guangyu Wang, and Wanlin Wei. 2025. "The Comparative Bibliometric Analysis of Watershed Ecological Protection and Restoration in the Context of Territorial Spatial Planning: An Overview of Global Research Trends" Land 14, no. 7: 1440. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14071440

APA Style

Zhao, H., Wang, G., & Wei, W. (2025). The Comparative Bibliometric Analysis of Watershed Ecological Protection and Restoration in the Context of Territorial Spatial Planning: An Overview of Global Research Trends. Land, 14(7), 1440. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14071440

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