Has “Ecological Economics” betrayed its roots? Revealing its state, internal tensions and evolution through a multi-level and multi-scale bibliometric assessment

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorCorsi, Giulio
dc.contributor.authorGuarino, Raffaele
dc.contributor.authorMuñoz Ulecia, Enrique
dc.contributor.authorGrande, U.
dc.contributor.authorBuonocore, Elvira
dc.contributor.authorSapio, Alessandro
dc.contributor.authorFranzese, Pier Paolo
dc.contributor.orcidMuñoz Ulecia, Enrique [0000-0002-7153-7660]
dc.date.accessioned2025-11-06T10:27:14Z
dc.date.available2025-11-06T10:27:14Z
dc.date.issued2025-11-04
dc.date.updated2025-11-06T06:45:08Z
dc.description.abstractThis paper uses a mixed methods approach to investigate the development of Ecological Economics (EE), combining a critical literature review with quantitative bibliometric analysis. It maps the intellectual trajectory of the field, its thematic shifts and its authorship networks from inception to the present time. Three phases are identified: (i) 1983–1997: the founding period; (ii) 1998–2011: the establishment of ecosystem services' valuation; and (iii) 2012–2024: the contemporary EE, characterized by internal tensions and increasing integration into mainstream environmental initiatives. Our findings reveal a global surge in interest in the field, accompanied by an expansion in the intellectual scope and research themes, as well as a broader geographic distribution of authors. This is associated with the emergence of numerous new journals, with Ecological Economics maintaining a central, albeit declining, position. Our research shows that while EE began as a critique of neoclassical economics, during its establishment phase it embraced market-based solutions and monetary valuation. However, contemporary trends indicate a critical reassessment of these approaches, with a shift towards exploring issues such as climate justice, degrowth and social metabolism. This dynamic evolution highlights the ongoing importance of EE as a platform for transdisciplinary research that challenges conventional economic thinking.
dc.description.sponsorshipEsta investigación no recibió ninguna subvención específica de organismos de financiación del sector público, comercial o sin ánimo de lucro.
dc.identifier.citationCorsi, G., Guarino, R., Muñoz-Ulecia, E., Grande, U., Buonocore, E., Sapio, A., & Franzese, P. P. (2026). Has “Ecological Economics” betrayed its roots? Revealing its state, internal tensions and evolution through a multi-level and multi-scale bibliometric assessment. Ecological Economics, 240, 108845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2025.108845
dc.identifier.issn0921-8009
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10532/7941
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherElsevier B.V.
dc.relation.citaSi
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Spainen
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/
dc.subject.agrovocDesarrollo sostenible
dc.subject.agrovocEconomía medioambiental
dc.subject.agrovocFactor climático
dc.subject.sdgProducción y consumo responsables
dc.subject.sdgVida de ecosistemas terrestres
dc.titleHas “Ecological Economics” betrayed its roots? Revealing its state, internal tensions and evolution through a multi-level and multi-scale bibliometric assessment
dc.typeartículo original
dc.type.hasVersionversión publicada

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
10251145.pdf
Size:
5.45 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

Artículos científicos, técnicos y divulgativos