Next Article in Journal
Protection Technique of Support System for Dynamic Disaster in Deep Underground Engineering: A Case Study
Previous Article in Journal
The Use of Field Olfactometry in the Odor Assessment of a Selected Mechanical–Biological Municipal Waste Treatment Plant within the Boundaries of the Selected Facility—A Case Study
Previous Article in Special Issue
Thermodynamic Investigation and Study of Kinetics and Mass Transfer Mechanisms of Oily Wastewater Adsorption on UIO-66–MnFe2O4 as a Metal–Organic Framework (MOF)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 9
10.3390/su15097164
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Water Safety and Water Governance: A Scientometric Review

by
Kelly Andrea Aguirre
1,* and
Diego Paredes Cuervo
2
1
CIAB Research Group, Center for Agriculture and Biotechnology Research, School of Agricultural, Livestock and Environmental Sciences, Universidad Nacional Abierta y a Distancia UNAD, Dosquebradas 661001, Colombia
2
Water and Sanitation Research Group GIAS, Environmental Science Faculty, Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira UTP, Pereira 660003, Colombia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(9), 7164; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097164
Submission received: 25 February 2023 / Revised: 3 April 2023 / Accepted: 4 April 2023 / Published: 25 April 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Drinking Water and Wastewater Resilience)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Water safety and water governance are critical concerns, as water is a vital and finite resource that is essential for ecological processes, human survival, and economic and social development, requiring collaborative and coordinated work of all related actors. The subject literature is scattered and fragmented, making it difficult to identify the key contributions and understand the current state of research; however, these considerations are an increasing preoccupation. To address this issue, a scientometric analysis was conducted in this work to identify the main contributions in the field. The methodology of the research was divided into two sections: the first section presents a scientometric mapping, including an analysis of scientific production by country, journal, and author. The second section identified the main theoretical contributions through the use of the Tree of Science metaphor. The main subfields identified include social governance structures and capacities, drinking water management, and socio-hydrogeology and collaborative governance. This research provides valuable insights for decision makers to develop and promote effective strategies to improve water safety and participatory efforts.

1. Introduction

Water governance refers to the policies, processes, and institutions that are put in place to manage and allocate water resources [1]. It encompasses a wide range of issues, including water supply and distribution, water quality, flood management, and the protection of aquatic ecosystems. Effective water governance is essential for ensuring the sustainable use and management of water resources, as well as addressing the needs of all stakeholders, including communities, businesses, and the environment [2]. Good governance involves the participation of all stakeholders in decision making, transparency, and accountability in the management of water resources. This includes involving local communities in the management of their water resources, ensuring that water is allocated equitably, and promoting the use of best practices for water conservation and management [3]. However, water governance can be complex and challenging and requires the cooperation of multiple sectors and levels of government, as well as the private sector and civil society.
In the last decade, there have been three reviews related to water safety or water governance: the first review studied the capacity of building and training for Water Safety Plans in the World Health Organization (WHO) methodology and provided recommendations for multiple stakeholders [4]. The second review took survey data from the Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking Water (2008 to 2016) related to pro-poor governance [5]. The third document is a narrative review related to urban water security [6]. However, there is no systematic review with a scientometric analysis on water governance and water safety. In this vein, the purpose of this review is to identify and prioritize the scientific literature on water safety and water governance and understand the evolution, perspectives, and the behavior of the scientific production. There is a common focus: an increasing concern about water safety.
For this, the equation search was applied in Web of Science and Scopus, extracting all the records and cited references. Then, results (from both WoS and Scopus) were merged into a single dataset to subsequently apply the Tree of Science (ToS) methodology to extract the contributions to this topic over time using the Tosr R package (https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/tosr/index.html, accessed on 20 January 2023). Then, a scientometric analysis was carried out to understand the global scientific production trends.
This article is divided into three sections. First, the Methods section gives a detailed explanation of paper selection and scientometric analysis. Second, the Results section presents and analyzes the scientometric elements followed by the documentary analysis, which is divided according to the Tree of Science analogy: roots, trunk, and branches with an analysis of top relevant results. Lastly, the conclusions are outlined.

2. Methods

This study employed a scientometric analysis to identify relevant research on water safety and water governance by utilizing Scopus and WoS databases [7]. Both Scopus and WoS offer a vast collection of scholarly records, with Scopus boasting over 60 million and WoS over 90 million records. Merging the datasets from both databases can be a complex task, which has been addressed by tools such as Bibliometrix [8] and the Tosr package, allowing for the main records and cited references to be merged. The use of both datasets provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of the research on water safety and governance and facilitates scientometric analysis, including citation and collaboration network analysis. Recent studies have emphasized the importance of combining Scopus and WoS for certain research topics, and this study aligns with these recommendations [9]. Using both datasets allows for a more general and complete understanding of the research on water safety and water governance [10].
Table 1 illustrates the parameters used in this study to identify relevant research on water safety and governance. The keywords used in the search were “water safety” and “water governance” in the topic field, resulting in 197 records in WoS and 334 in Scopus. When the datasets were merged, the total number of records was 402. The analysis revealed that 68 papers from WoS were not found in Scopus (17.00%), with the majority of the records being papers (261, or 64.93%), followed by books (41, or 10.20%), reviews (35, or 8.71%), conferences (56, or 13.93%), and other documents such as letters, short surveys, and editorial notes (9, or 2.24%). This analysis demonstrates a clear inclination in this research topic towards writing papers and books.
The scientometric analysis in this study is divided into two sections. The first section presents a general overview of the research on water safety and water governance, including an analysis of production, country, journal, and authors. This perspective provides a broad understanding of the current state of research on this topic and introduces readers to the key findings and trends. The second section examines the evolution of different contributions to the field of water safety and governance using the Tree of Science (ToS) metaphor. Figure 1 displays a PRISMA diagram outlining the process of paper selection for reference in this study. The preprocessing step is crucial for conducting the data analysis. This step was performed using R code developed by Core of Science (https://github.com/coreofscience, accessed on 20 of January 2023), which extracts key data from the references and scraps missing values to enable more a sophisticated analysis. The result is a file containing 22 spreadsheets, which were analyzed using various packages in Python and R.

2.1. Scientometric Analysis

Scientometrics is the quantitative analysis of scientific data, such as annual production, author collaboration, and citation networks [11]. Some common scientometric analysis applications are intellectual structure [12], collaboration networks [13], and citation analysis [14]. The workflow of this section is to start with the macro and reach the micro; therefore, the scientometric analysis starts with the scientific annual production, then the country analysis, the journal analysis, and, finally, the author collaboration analysis. Scientific annual production included three variables: total publications per year in Scopus and WoS, total publications in the merged dataset, and total citations. Country, journal, and author analysis have the same pattern. We present a table with the most productive actors and a graph with the relationships.

2.2. Tree of Science (ToS)

ToS is an algorithm to represent the papers with the tree metaphor [15,16]. Papers located in the roots are seminal, papers in the trunks give the structure, and papers in branches are the subfields of the research topic. We applied the new implementation of the ToS algorithm (SAP) that simulates the sap process of the three (see more [17] for a deeper understanding). The ToS algorithm has been used in a wide variety of research topics such as marketing [18], entrepreneurship [19,20], education [21], psychology [22], and economics [23]. Moreover, within a year of launch, ToS had around 5000 users [24].

3. Results

3.1. Scientometric Analysis

3.1.1. Scientific Annual Production Analysis

Figure 2 shows articles produced in the last 22 years related to the water safety and water governance themes. The graph exhibits a similar behavior during the first 12 years; from 2013 (last decade), research increased constantly until 2022 in the Scopus database, presenting a growth rate in the number of publications in WoS of 23.67% per year, whereas in Scopus this was 15.47%.
Initial growth phase (2001–2012): during this period, 61 articles were published. WoS had 16 and Scopus had 45 publications. The first publications about the subject in WoS appeared in 2005, while in Scopus they started in 2001; however, the growth processes in both databases began in 2006. From a total of 402 publications during this time, this initial phase represents 15.2% of them, and citations in this phase represent 30.9% (2466) of total citations (7992). This aspect is important because it represents an increasing interest in the subject. The most cited article was Sabel and Zeitlin [25], which is a general article regarding experimentalist governance in the European Union, creating different normative and regulatory frameworks and decision-making procedures, including the “good water status” topic.
Rapid development phase (2013–2019): since 2013, publications and citations increased, with 181 publications, which represent 44.9% of total publications (402). Citations also grew, with 4798, representing 60% of the total data. Average growth percentage of publications during this phase was 1.98%, with a high production in 2015. The most cited article was Whitmee et al., 2015, relating to the Rockefeller Foundation–Lancet Commission’s planetary health report on Safeguarding Human Health. This document includes a warning and increasing preoccupation concerning climate change that potentially affects renewable surface water and groundwater [26].
Stability phase (2020–2022): during the last three years of total production measurement and total citation trends, 156 articles were published (38.7%), with 728 citations (9.1%) and a growth percentage of 4.79%. This period is short but had similar publication results. The most cited paper was Chen et al. [27], related to the implementation of green chemistry principles in a circular economy system towards sustainable development goals including water resource sustainability.

3.1.2. Country Network

Water safety and governance have long been neglected by governments, resulting in a decline in the quality of water management. However, there is a significant effort by researchers from various countries to address this issue, as evidenced by over 6031 citations in scientific journals from just 10 countries. The academic community as a whole is calling for increased governance over water.
In China, researchers with a significant academic output influence government decisions. There have been 66 publications in prestigious scientific journals by 483 researchers. Out of these 66 publications, 26% (17) were published in the top-ranked Q1 journals, 15% (10) in Q2, 18% (12) in Q3, and 14% (9) in Q4. The most cited article, with 120 citations, aims to reconcile economic growth, resource sustainability, and environmental protection [27].
As for the United States, despite having 59 (14.9%) publications in journals of scientific interest, seven fewer than China, these have been the subject of more consultation and citation than the previous studies (29.92%), amounting to 2355 citations (29.92% of the ten countries with the highest citations). Interestingly, researchers from the United States have achieved 27 (46%) publications in journals cataloged in Q1, of high scientific interest; 8 in Q2; 4 in Q3; and 1 in Q1. The most cited article in the USA has 1117 citations and pertains to The Lancet 2015 commission on health and climate change [28].
Regarding the Netherlands, there are 39 (9.85%) researchers with important publications, of which 22 were published in Q1 journals; 5 in Q2; and 4 in Q3. These publications have achieved 759 citations, 276 more citations than those of the United States, which suggests that this is a topic of greater interest. As for the most cited article [6], it stands out for its 128 citations by researchers and describes how big data and machine learning benefit the environment and water management.
The United Kingdom has a total of 32 scientific publications, with 18 in Q1, 5 in Q2, and 3 in Q3. These publications have been cited in 1362 works, surpassing China and the Netherlands. One noteworthy publication is Paavola’s [29], explaining the top 100 questions about water. In Canada, there are 27 publications, with 9 in Q1, 7 in Q2, and 2 in Q3, cited by 384 highly consulted researchers. One of the most cited articles, Jetoo et al. [30], with 46 citations, addresses the issue of water quality and suitability of use.
As far as Australia is concerned, 17 (4.29%) publications are known, of which there are 7 in Q1, 3 in Q2, and 2 in Q4. It is striking that the number of citations is high compared to the previous countries analyzed, with 461, surpassing Canada. In this country, the most cited article [31] stands out with six citations, specifying studies of changes in the benefits of water with population growth. The country of India has 16 (4.04%) recognized publications in Q2-, Q3-, and Q4-indexed journals, and 80 citations. Portugal has 11 (2.78%) publications, with 4 in Q1, 1 in Q2, and 1 in Q3 journals, and 116 citations in academic media. Brazil has 9 publications (2.27%), with 3 in Q1, 2 in Q2, and 1 in Q3, and 23 citations. Finally, France’s researchers reported on the subject of water governance, like the previous countries analyzed, reaching 7 publications, 1 in journals cataloged in Q1, 1 in Q3, and 2 in Q4, and 8 citations by researchers.
This analysis focuses on 10 countries (as shown in Table 2), which do not necessarily reflect the lack of interest in water safety and governance globally. The purpose is to examine the countries with the highest number of researches, publications, and citations in scientific media. Other researchers’ work in this field may not be published but still plays a role in informing and improving environmental policies. The analysis concludes with 276 notable publications in the 10 countries studied.

3.1.3. Journal Analysis

As shown in Table 3, The International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (IJERPH) has the highest number of publications in this field. However, this journal has an intermediate impact factor when compared with Science of the Total Environment (STE), which has the greatest impact factor in this area. Both journals include multidisciplinary approaches to environmental phenomena, but IJERPH includes the socio-cultural, political, economic, and legal aspects related to environmental issues. The second journal with the highest number of publications in this area is Sustainability, which has been growing rapidly, offers a wide perspective of environmental science, and has the highest number of citations in Scopus in this top ten.
The citation network analysis was performed using Scopus and WoS search results (Figure 3). In this network, each node is a journal, and the edges are the references among the journals. Interestingly, the network shows three main perspectives conformed by the three largest communities. The first community (red) is related to the impact of different types of interventions on the environment. The journal with the largest connection is Chemosphere. A recent study from this journal presents the effects of microplastics on the soil structure and how this phenomenon affects water quality [32], showing an increasing concern in environmental conditions. The second community (yellow) is related to the impact of environmental issues on public health. The journal with the largest connection is The International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. A recent study from this journal identified the presence of 14 organochlorines in the soil of Xiamen City (China), which was positively correlated with the organochlorine water content. However, the content in water was considered very low. As a conclusion, the authors recommended further studies due to the fact that organochlorines are highly bioaccumulative and could pose a risk to ecosystems and human health [33]. The third community (green) is related to water management, governance, and environmental decisions. The journal with the largest connection is Sustainability. A recent publication from this journal presents an analysis on the connection between biophysical and sociocultural components in the use of water, generating a model of water supply [34].
Figure 3 displays nodes and links over time. In 2014, the number of links surpassed the number of nodes, indicating that scientific production was being shared and new knowledge was built upon previous studies. This demonstrates recognition and collaboration within the scientific community.
On the other hand, Figure 4 shows the nodes and links over time, which are generated thanks to the citation network among different journals in the field of water security and water governance. It also displays three publication communities, where the larger nodes represent a higher degree of citation.

3.1.4. Author Analysis

The author analysis is split into two sections: the first one shows the most productive researchers in water safety and water governance; the second explains the personal academic collaboration network (ego network). According to Table 4, eight out of ten researchers are from China and the others from the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Professor Li Ying and Professor Hao Wang are the most productive, with seven and five papers, respectively (both professors are from Beijing Normal University). The most recent paper by Dr. Ying is about the use of water in desert steppes [35], and Dr. Wang presents a framework to analyze extreme precipitation under the influence of climate change [36]. Professor Xuemei Wang has published about more technical topics of water safety, for example, evaluating arsenic in waters [37], focusing on water quality.
Figure 5 presents three groups (components) of the personal collaboration networks of the main researchers. Surprisingly, the ten top authors created only three components. The first component has two subgroups: the first one represents the researchers from China and the second represents one researcher from the United Kingdom. However, Dr. Bartram has worked with authors who have different country affiliations [4]. The second component represents the ego network created by Professor Peter J. J. Driessen. Dr. Driessen has focused his research on diseases related to sanitation difficulties [38].

3.2. Tree of Science

3.2.1. Roots

For the year 2000, the world’s most important organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO), UNICEF, and Water Supply and Sanitation analyzed the world’s water supply and sanitation assessment [39]. This study shows the international efforts to achieve health and dignity and thus be able to plan, implement, and improve the supply of water and sanitation for future generations. However, it is necessary to add to the aforementioned problems the impacts of natural changes such as climate change [40]. This study shows an interesting analysis, from the physical and ecological systems to human adjustments to the availability of the resource and the related risk. The authors study adaptation and its implications, managing to show the importance of effectiveness, efficiency, equity, legitimacy, and sustainability, but also the uncertainty of the future.
Our investigation also examines other countries, such as the Netherlands, which is facing serious water problems that are viewed with concern [41]. The physical infrastructure and water management system of the Netherlands is considered unsustainable in every sense, leading to a shift from a technocratic scientific style of management to a participatory approach. Public policy and needs drive changes in the water management system over time, as seen in different parts of the world. The World Health Organization’s manual on water safety plans and risk management for drinking water providers highlights the importance of risk assessment in this area [42].
Despite talking about risks, we see that there are countries that have implemented preventive management in terms of drinking water safety. In this specific case, Gunnarsdóttir et al. [43] present studies carried out in Iceland, a country that has a legal obligation to implement a systematic preventive approach for the safety of drinking water and therefore protect public health. They called this study “hazard analysis and critical control points”. The results, according to the study, were reflected in the change of attitude of the staff and the culture of the company.
Within this investigation, we try to understand the relation to Latin American countries, where the author of [44] states that there are countries such as Ecuador and Bolivia that have included the rights of nature and the rights of water within the constitution (regulation of norms) or governance, and research in these countries today is focused on the processes of control and security in the supply of water, quality of life, and good living, as an index of progress and well-being. This highlights the worldview of the peoples to give importance to human beings, natural resources, and the common good in the systemic processes that allow people the proper use of natural resources without their permanent exploitation.

3.2.2. Trunk

Concerns flourish in research on the governance of water security, and every day the interest is greater in the public policies of countries, which have tried to understand the importance of the human factor and the great threat in the development of programs, progress, and growth. They are, therefore, populations with an unusual interest in studies of critical factors in water management.
However, in addition to Canada and other countries, the United States implements water safety programs with national legislation, though even with these practices they have periodic events of contamination, disease endemics, and outbreaks transmitted by water [45]. The above means that there is a degree of vulnerability to contamination and the proposal is to take a preventive approach to risk management, understand drinking-water management practices and safety plans in the United States, and thus achieve a better quality of human health.
Throughout this process, the world of climate change in relation to water is considered. For Vink et al. [46], climate change necessarily generates a change in the policy framework, and the authors analyze how the Netherlands has been forced to review a drop in attention to climate change. With climate change, floods stand out as the reason for concern in the Netherlands. Climate change has been reflected in the rise in sea level and extreme discharge from rivers, which in turn become a significant problem for flood safety policies. Among the changes proposed in this study, we must highlight the importance of climate change, the relevant time frame, and the appropriate governance mode.
It is clearly specified that the interest in governance policies on the security programs of many nations is increasingly evident. In a study carried out by Rijke et al. [47], we can observe that the budgets for security in this multilevel governance process case of the river basins of the Netherlands are significant figures, which shows achievements in plans and integrated designs.
In terms of governance and water, we see paradigm ruptures and constant changes in the management of public policies, actions that have been forced by climate change, the excessive growth of municipal and rural capitals, the inadequate management of water by some populations, and crop growth.
The next section explains the branches or subfields of water governance. Figure 6 shows the citation network with the clustering algorithm of the tree subfields [48].
  • Branch 1. Social Governance Structures and Capacities: An Integral View
Specific examples of collaborative governance are shown in a review [49] about flood safety cross-sector participation in the Netherlands, especially related to external factors that had shaped current planning actions. The paper demonstrated the importance of including an integral view of flood risk management starting with legal and normative frameworks, and considers how power relations and conflict situations are shaped in order to involve environmental protection and territory planning.
In order to protect and guarantee fresh water supply for the present and future populations against floods, Zevenbergen et al. [50] present a new Delta Program on Flood Risk Management and Fresh Water Supply (DP) as a result of a joint effort of different water public actors in the Netherlands. This program developed Adaptive Delta Management (ADM), which considers uncertainties in decision making. The DP principally involves stakeholders as legitimate actors, adopts a risk-based perspective, takes a flexible approach to possible strategies, and searches for investment possibilities. Meanwhile, Bangladesh has a similar Delta Plan that considers an integrative vision, an adaptation agenda, and a long-term investment plan. Both perspectives require structural and political changes and new institutional capacities.
Climate change adaptation is an urgent call for decision makers. As a strategy to face it, Van Buuren et al. [51] introduce Adaptive Flood Risk Management in England, New Zealand, and the Netherlands as an example of how this adaptive approach can change under different contexts and circumstances; however, successful application of this focus requires an administrative compromise given the possibility of improving or obstructing its enforcement. The article presents administrative actions in these countries and their impact on the application of adaptive management to compare positive and negative results. It is relevant to identify which administrative decisions are enablers or barriers of this adaptive perspective.
Wiering and Winnubst [52] refer to public interest in Dutch flood risk management. This water governance depends on different aspects such as environmental risks, political characteristics, and appropriate governance concepts, and relates to public interests; moreover, governance conception is changing because of climate change conditions that forced a continuous and dynamic risk management adaptation. The Dutch government must consider public and community-based interests, and for that reason it is important to include dialogue and collaboration in decision-making processes.
Another study is focused on analyzing regulatory frameworks in selected European countries regarding how this normative regulation governance is changing to face flood risk. It is more common to find documents about quality and supply matters. However, Goytia et al. [53] mention that these aspects are important to strengthening new infrastructure, and in an adequate strategy to face flood uncertainty, it is more complicated to adapt existing infrastructure. As a conclusion, regulatory frameworks should conduct a holistic evaluation of significant situations and the application of water laws.
  • Branch 2: Drinking Water Management
This branch represents countries’ effort to protect water sources (mostly from Canada) through decentralized political and innovative planning focusing in rural and periurban areas and considering their specific attributes [54]. A study by Bereskie et al. [55] investigated the different approaches of drinking water management systems (DWMSs) through a literature review. The authors found that citizens in remote provinces of Canada may be exposed to contaminated water, which need more tap water controls in order to ensure public health.
Therefore, Bereskie et al. [56] proposed a framework for water safety called plan-do-check-act (PDCA)-WSP based on the risk of remote provinces, especially considering small supply systems. However, Dunn et al. [57] highlighted the difficulties of applying it across provinces due to the urban–rural disparities that lead to low effectiveness results of analyzing regulations, policies, practices, and institutions with power in drinking water decision making.
One of the key aspects of improving water quality among remote communities in order to improve their life quality and welfare is infrastructure [58]. Another one is microbial risk assessment. This study suggests more and better institutional capacities and actors’ interdisciplinary work [59]. For example, Baird et al. [60] showed how collaborative practices, science implementation, and local knowledge can enhance source water management. Another issue in water governance is the separation from water management; thus, Plummer et al. [61] recommends integrating water management and land-use planning. In addition, it is important to keep in mind catastrophic events such as floods and earthquakes when implementing water governance policies [62].
  • Branch 3: Socio-Hydrogeology and Collaborative Governance
Socio-hydrogeology seeks to gather and exchange knowledge between end-users (non-experts) and professional and technical personnel. This process is carried out through a “bottom-up” study where the user experience is incorporated in the base of the analysis [63].
In the first study with this perspective, the authors expose the supply difficulty that some populations are experiencing in the Sub-Saharan region of Africa, since their great growth in a short period of time has limited access to drinking water. Therefore, this supply has been taking place with informal suppliers that provide water to the community. In this study, it was found that 100% of the drinking water in peri-urban settlements is supplied by small informal suppliers. Additionally, they found that the state supply infrastructure is in a deplorable state due to a lack of planning and professional guidance. Moreover, 64% of the communities highlighted the importance of informal providers, while 60% of public officials argue that their system continues to be a viable option [64].
On the other hand, collaborative governance plays a very important role in addressing complex public policy problems. Therefore, governments have adopted the practice of inducing voluntary action for policy formulation [65]. Regarding the perspective of water governance, the following studies are related.
Another study performs an empirical analysis of the institutional influence on change and stability based on the flood risk of the Netherlands, concluding that the management of flood risk depends on the development of alternative approaches, which allows adaptation to the particular challenges of the territories [66].

4. Conclusions

This study presents a literature review of water safety and water governance using two scientometric approaches. The first one presents a general overview of the scientific production, countries, journals, and author analysis. The second used the ToS metaphor to show the evolution of the field and the different subfields. This research is novel because it merges the two most popular scientific databases (Scopus and WoS). We also performed sophisticated data analysis and visualizations using text mining and web scraping from WoS and Scopus data.
The ToS algorithm presents three main subfields. The first one is associated with social governance structures and capacities to improve water safety, and it will create better water governance over the base of all the actors’ participation and territory planification. The second one is related to drinking water management, especially in Canada. This is one of the countries with the best decentralized water management practices, showing an increased preoccupation for small communities and experiences regarding technical, social, and institutional solutions to improve community quality of life. The third one, group socio-hydrogeology and collaborative governance factors, is an interesting topic which shows how to consider not only social characteristics but also territorial and environmental components.
Conceptual understanding of water governance is required, and this review showed us that this notion is more complex than first thought because water governance and the resulting water safety imply multiple perceptions, interests, and needs. Several options and approaches have been considered in different research around the world with the intention of maintaining adequate conditions to guarantee adequate water quality and quantity for supply systems and food production and to prevent and control environmental risks related to water and climate change.
Notwithstanding these limitations, the study presents an author collaboration network; however, we used the last names and first letters of the first names. This is a common practice in a literature review which results in the merging of different authors into one author’s name. Future research could repeat the author analysis with the ORCID of each author to obtain more accurate results.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, investigation, methodology, software, data curation, and formal analysis, writing—original draft preparation, K.A.A.; writing—review and editing, K.A.A. and D.P.C.; supervision, D.P.C.; funding acquisition K.A.A. and D.P.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research work was supported for the article processing charge by the National Open and Distance University, and the english improvement was supported by the Technological University of Pereira.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data in this work are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the Technological University of Pereira (UTP) for allowing the development of this research topic within the framework of the PhD thesis in Environmental Sciences titled “Sustainability of Small Water Supply Systems in the Provision of the Aqueduct Service”, which was supported by research grants of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MinCiencias) of Colombia. Likewise, the authors thank the National Open and Distance University (UNAD) for supporting the understanding of the methodology, the development of the research and review process.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Jiménez, A.; Saikia, P.; Giné, R.; Avello, P.; Leten, J.; Liss Lymer, B.; Schneider, K.; Ward, R. Unpacking Water Governance: A Framework for Practitioners. Water 2020, 12, 827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Wuijts, S.; Van Rijswick, H.F.M.W.; Driessen, P.P.J. Achieving European Water Quality Ambitions: Governance Conditions for More Effective Approaches at the Local-Regional Scale. Sustain. Sci. Pract. Policy 2021, 13, 681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Abbas, F.; Al-Naemi, S.; Farooque, A.A.; Phillips, M. A Review on the Water Dimensions, Security, and Governance for Two Distinct Regions. Water 2023, 15, 208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Ferrero, G.; Setty, K.; Rickert, B.; George, S.; Rinehold, A.; DeFrance, J.; Bartram, J. Capacity Building and Training Approaches for Water Safety Plans: A Comprehensive Literature Review. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2019, 222, 615–627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Fuente, D.; Bartram, J. Pro-Poor Governance in Water and Sanitation Service Delivery: Evidence from Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking Water Surveys. Perspect. Public Health 2018, 138, 261–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Hoekstra, A.Y.; Buurman, J.; van Ginkel, K.C.H. Urban Water Security: A Review. Environ. Res. Lett. 2018, 13, 053002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Moral-Muñoz, J.A.; Herrera-Viedma, E.; Santisteban-Espejo, A.; Cobo, M.J. Software Tools for Conducting Bibliometric Analysis in Science: An up-to-Date Review. EPI 2020, 29, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Aria, M.; Cuccurullo, C. Bibliometrix: An R-Tool for Comprehensive Science Mapping Analysis. J. Informetr. 2017, 11, 959–975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Grisales, A.M.A.; Robledo, S.; Zuluaga, M. Topic Modeling: Perspectives from a Literature Review. IEEE Access 2023, 11, 4066–4078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Robledo, S.; Duque, P.; Aguirre, A.M.G. Word of Mouth Marketing: A Scientometric Analysis. J. Sci. Res. 2023, 11, 436–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Mingers, J.; Leydesdorff, L. A Review of Theory and Practice in Scientometrics. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2015, 246, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Do Carmo, G.; Felizardo, L.F.; de Castro Alcântara, V.; da Silva, C.A.; do Prado, J.W. The Impact of Jürgen Habermas’s Scientific Production: A Scientometric Review. Scientometrics 2023, 128, 1853–1875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Hurtado-Marín, V.A.; Agudelo-Giraldo, J.D.; Robledo, S.; Restrepo-Parra, E. Analysis of Dynamic Networks Based on the Ising Model for the Case of Study of Co-Authorship of Scientific Articles. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 5721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Robledo, S.; Aguirre, A.M.G.; Hughes, M.; Eggers, F. “Hasta La Vista, Baby”—Will Machine Learning Terminate Human Literature Reviews in Entrepreneurship? J. Small Bus. Manag. 2021, 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Zuluaga, M.; Robledo, S.; Arbelaez-Echeverri, O.; Osorio-Zuluaga, G.A.; Duque-Méndez, N. Tree of Science—ToS: A Web-Based Tool for Scientific Literature Recommendation. Search Less, Research More! Issues Sci. Technol. Librariansh. 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Robledo, S.; Zuluaga, M.; Valencia, L.A.; Arbelaez-Echeverri, O.; Duque, P.; Alzate-Cardona, J.-D. Tree of Science with Scopus: A Shiny Application. Issues Sci. Technol. Librariansh. 2022, 100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Valencia-Hernandez, D.S.; Robledo, S.; Pinilla, R.; Duque-Méndez, N.D.; Olivar-Tost, G. SAP Algorithm for Citation Analysis: An Improvement to Tree of Science. Ing. Investig. 2020, 40, 45–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Torres, G.; Robledo, S.; Berrío, S.R. Orientación Al Mercado: Importancia, Evolución Y Enfoques Emergentes Usando Análisis Cienciométrico. Criteriolibre 2021, 19, 326–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Barrera Rubaceti, N.A.; Robledo Giraldo, S.; Zarela Sepulveda, M. Una Revisión Bibliográfica Del Fintech Y Sus Principales Subáreas de Estudio. Econ. CUC 2021, 43, 83–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Arango, P.Z.; Rincón, D.U.; Berrio, S.P.R. Relevancia, evolución y tendencias de la supervivencia empresarial. Una revisión de literatura en finanzas. RTend 2023, 24, 252–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Santoveña-Casal, S.; Gil-Quintana, J.; Javier, H.-R.J. Microteaching Networks in Higher Education. Interact. Technol. Smart Educ. 2023. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Gómez-Tabares, A.S. Asociación Entre Las Funciones Ejecutivas Y La Teoría de La Mente En Niños: Evidencia Empírica E Implicaciones Teóricas. Rev. Psicol. Clín. Niños Adolesc. 2022, 9, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Marín-Rodríguez, N.J.; González-Ruiz, J.D.; Botero, S. A Wavelet Analysis of the Dynamic Connectedness among Oil Prices, Green Bonds, and CO2 Emissions. Risks 2023, 11, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Eggers, F.; Risselada, H.; Niemand, T.; Robledo, S. Referral Campaigns for Software Startups: The Impact of Network Characteristics on Product Adoption. J. Bus. Res. 2022, 145, 309–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Sabel, C.F.; Zeitlin, J. Learning from Difference: The New Architecture of Experimentalist Governance in the EU. Eur. Law J. 2008, 14, 271–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Watts, N.; Neil Adger, W.; Agnolucci, P.; Blackstock, J.; Byass, P.; Cai, W.; Chaytor, S.; Colbourn, T.; Collins, M.; Cooper, A.; et al. Health and Climate Change: Policy Responses to Protect Public Health. Lancet 2015, 386, 1861–1914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Chen, T.-L.; Kim, H.; Pan, S.-Y.; Tseng, P.-C.; Lin, Y.-P.; Chiang, P.-C. Implementation of Green Chemistry Principles in Circular Economy System towards Sustainable Development Goals: Challenges and Perspectives. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 716, 136998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Whitmee, S.; Haines, A.; Beyrer, C.; Boltz, F.; Capon, A.G.; de Souza Dias, B.F.; Ezeh, A.; Frumkin, H.; Gong, P.; Head, P.; et al. Safeguarding Human Health in the Anthropocene Epoch: Report of The Rockefeller Foundation-Lancet Commission on Planetary Health. Lancet 2015, 386, 1973–2028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Paavola, J. Livelihoods, Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change in Morogoro, Tanzania. Environ. Sci. Policy 2008, 11, 642–654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Jetoo, S.; Grover, V.I.; Krantzberg, G. The Toledo Drinking Water Advisory: Suggested Application of the Water Safety Planning Approach. Sustain. Sci. Pract. Policy 2015, 7, 9787–9808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Wang, M.; Webber, M.; Finlayson, B.; Barnett, J. Rural Industries and Water Pollution in China. J. Environ. Manag. 2008, 86, 648–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Wang, Z.; Li, W.; Li, W.; Yang, W.; Jing, S. Effects of Microplastics on the Water Characteristic Curve of Soils with Different Textures. Chemosphere 2023, 317, 137762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Gao, Z.; Chen, Y.; Qin, Q.; Wang, R.; Dai, Z. Distribution Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Organochlorine Pesticides in Agricultural Soil from Xiamen City. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 1916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Ruíz Ordoñez, D.M.; Camacho De Angulo, Y.V.; Pencué Fierro, E.L.; Figueroa Casas, A. Mapping Ecosystem Services in an Andean Water Supply Basin. Sustain. Sci. Pract. Policy 2023, 15, 1793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Gong, J.; Shi, J.; Zhu, C.; Li, X.; Zhang, Z.; Zhang, W.; Li, Y.; Hu, Y. Accounting for Land Use in an Analysis of the Spatial and Temporal Characteristics of Ecosystem Services Supply and Demand in a Desert Steppe of Inner Mongolia, China. Ecol. Indic. 2022, 144, 109567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Zhang, Q.; Li, Y.P.; Huang, G.H.; Wang, H.; Li, Y.F.; Liu, Y.R.; Shen, Z.Y. A Novel Statistical Downscaling Approach for Analyzing Daily Precipitation and Extremes under the Impact of Climate Change: Application to an Arid Region. J. Hydrol. 2022, 615, 128730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Ru, J.; Wang, X.; Zhao, J.; Yang, J.; Zhou, Z.; Du, X.; Lu, X. Evaluation and Development of GO/UiO-67@PtNPs Nanohybrid-Based Electrochemical Sensor for Invisible Arsenic (III) in Water Samples. Microchem. J. 2022, 181, 107765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Koop, S.; Monteiro Gomes, F.; Schoot, L.; Dieperink, C.; Driessen, P.; Van Leeuwen, K. Assessing the Capacity to Govern Flood Risk in Cities and the Role of Contextual Factors. Sustain. Sci. Pract. Policy 2018, 10, 2869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Available online: http://lib.riskreductionafrica.org/bitstream/handle/123456789/1077/179.Global%20Water%20Supply%20and%20Sanitation%20Assessment%202000%20Report.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed on 21 January 2023).
  40. Neil Adger, W.; Arnell, N.W.; Tompkins, E.L. Successful Adaptation to Climate Change across Scales. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2005, 15, 77–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. van der Brugge, R.; Rotmans, J.; Loorbach, D. The Transition in Dutch Water Management. Regional Environ. Chang. 2005, 5, 164–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. World Health Organization; International Water Association. Water Safety Plan Manual: Step-by-Step Risk Management for Drinking-Water Suppliers; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2009; ISBN 9789241562638.
  43. Gunnarsdóttir, M.J.; Gardarsson, S.M.; Bartram, J. Icelandic Experience with Water Safety Plans. Water Sci. Technol. 2012, 65, 277–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Quiceno, G.R. Índice de Felicidad y Buen Vivir; Editores Kn-Traste: Madrid, Spain, 2013; ISBN 978-1-291-47865-5. [Google Scholar]
  45. Baum, R.; Amjad, U.; Luh, J.; Bartram, J. An Examination of the Potential Added Value of Water Safety Plans to the United States National Drinking Water Legislation. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2015, 218, 677–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Vink, M.J.; Boezeman, D.; Dewulf, A.; Termeer, C.J.A.M. Changing Climate, Changing Frames. Environ. Sci. Policy 2013, 30, 90–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Rijke, J.; van Herk, S.; Zevenbergen, C.; Ashley, R. Room for the River: Delivering Integrated River Basin Management in the Netherlands. Int. J. River Basin Manag. 2012, 10, 369–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Blondel, V.D.; Guillaume, J.-L.; Lambiotte, R.; Lefebvre, E. Fast Unfolding of Communities in Large Networks. J. Stat. Mech Theory Exp. 2008, 2008, P10008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Avoyan, E.; Meijerink, S. Cross-Sector Collaboration within Dutch Flood Risk Governance: Historical Analysis of External Triggers. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 2021, 37, 24–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Zevenbergen, C.; Khan, S.A.; van Alphen, J.; Terwisscha van Scheltinga, C.; Veerbeek, W. Adaptive Delta Management: A Comparison between the Netherlands and Bangladesh Delta Program. Int. J. River Basin Manag. 2018, 16, 299–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. van Buuren, A.; Lawrence, J.; Potter, K.; Warner, J.F. Introducing Adaptive Flood Risk Management in England, New Zealand, and the Netherlands: The Impact of Administrative Traditions. Rev. Policy Res. 2018, 35, 907–929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Wiering, M.; Winnubst, M. The Conception of Public Interest in Dutch Flood Risk Management: Untouchable or Transforming? Environ. Sci. Policy 2017, 73, 12–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Goytia, S.; Pettersson, M.; Schellenberger, T.; van Doorn-Hoekveld, W.J.; Priest, S. Dealing with Change and Uncertainty within the Regulatory Frameworks for Flood Defense Infrastructure in Selected European Countries. Ecol. Soc. 2016, 21, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Lardon, S.; Traversac, J.-B.; Wallet, F. The Territory Game as a Smart Development Tool for Food Governance in Rural and Peri-Urban Territories. In Smart Development for Rural Areas; Routledge: London, UK, 2020; pp. 91–108. [Google Scholar]
  55. Bereskie, T.; Delpla, I.; Rodriguez, M.J.; Sadiq, R. Drinking-Water Management in Canadian Provinces and Territories: A Review and Comparison of Management Approaches for Ensuring Safe Drinking Water. Water Policy 2018, 20, 565–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Bereskie, T.; Rodriguez, M.J.; Sadiq, R. Drinking Water Management and Governance in Canada: An Innovative Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) Framework for a Safe Drinking Water Supply. Environ. Manag. 2017, 60, 243–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Dunn, G.; Harris, L.; Bakker, K. Canadian Drinking Water Policy: Jurisdictional Variation in the Context of Decentralized Water Governance. In Water Policy and Governance in Canada; Springer International Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017; pp. 301–320. [Google Scholar]
  58. Arimah, B. Infrastructure as a Catalyst for the Prosperity of African Cities. Procedia Eng. 2017, 198, 245–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Dunn, G.; Harris, L.; Bakker, K. Microbial Risk Governance: Challenges and Opportunities in Fresh Water Management in Canada. Can. Water Resour. J. Rev. Can. Ressour. Hydrol. 2015, 40, 237–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Baird, J.; Plummer, R.; Morris, S.; Mitchell, S.; Rathwell, K. Enhancing Source Water Protection and Watershed Management: Lessons from the Case of the New Brunswick Water Classification Initiative. Can. Water Resour. J. Rev. Can. Ressour. Hydrol. 2014, 39, 49–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Plummer, R.; de Grosbois, D.; de Loë, R.; Velaniškis, J. Probing the Integration of Land Use and Watershed Planning in a Shifting Governance Regime. Water Resour. Res. 2011, 47, W09502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Plummer, R.; Velaniškis, J.; de Grosbois, D.; Kreutzwiser, R.D.; de Loë, R. The Development of New Environmental Policies and Processes in Response to a Crisis: The Case of the Multiple Barrier Approach for Safe Drinking Water. Environ. Sci. Policy 2010, 13, 535–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Hynds, P.; Regan, S.; Andrade, L.; Mooney, S.; O’Malley, K.; DiPelino, S.; O’Dwyer, J. Muddy Waters: Refining the Way Forward for the “sustainability Science” of Socio-Hydrogeology. Water 2018, 10, 1111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Mapunda, D.W.; Chen, S.S.; Yu, C. The Role of Informal Small-Scale Water Supply System in Resolving Drinking Water Shortages in Peri-Urban Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania. Appl. Geogr. 2018, 92, 112–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Hysing, E. Designing Collaborative Governance That Is Fit for Purpose: Theorising Policy Support and Voluntary Action for Road Safety in Sweden. J. Public Policy 2022, 42, 201–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Kaufmann, M. Limits to Change—Institutional Dynamics of Dutch Flood Risk Governance. J. Flood Risk Manag. 2018, 11, 250–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 15 07164 g001 550
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram.
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram.
Sustainability 15 07164 g001
Sustainability 15 07164 g002 550
Figure 2. Total production measurement vs. total citation trends.
Figure 2. Total production measurement vs. total citation trends.
Sustainability 15 07164 g002
Sustainability 15 07164 g003 550
Figure 3. Country collaboration network.
Figure 3. Country collaboration network.
Sustainability 15 07164 g003
Sustainability 15 07164 g004 550
Figure 4. Water safety and water governance journals citation network.
Figure 4. Water safety and water governance journals citation network.
Sustainability 15 07164 g004
Sustainability 15 07164 g005 550
Figure 5. Academic personal social network of the top ten authors.
Figure 5. Academic personal social network of the top ten authors.
Sustainability 15 07164 g005
Sustainability 15 07164 g006 550
Figure 6. Citation network.
Figure 6. Citation network.
Sustainability 15 07164 g006
Table
Table 1. Search parameters used in both databases.
Table 1. Search parameters used in both databases.
ParameterWeb of ScienceScopus
Range2000–2022
Date19 January 2023
Document TypePaper, book, chapter, conference proceedings
WordsWater safety, water governance
Results197334
Total (WoS + Scopus) 402
Table
Table 2. Production, impact, and quality.
Table 2. Production, impact, and quality.
CountryProductionCitationsQ1Q2Q3Q4
China66(16.67%)483(6.14%)1710129
USA59(14.9%)2355(29.92%)27841
The Netherlands39(9.85%)759(9.64%)22540
United Kingdom32(8.08%)1362(17.31%)18530
Canada27(6.82%)384(4.88%)9720
Australia17(4.29%)461(5.86%)7302
India16(4.04%)80(1.02%)0213
Portugal11(2.78%)116(1.47%)4110
Brazil9(2.27%)23(0.29%)3210
France7(1.77%)8(0.1%)1012
Table
Table 3. Top ten journals about water safety and water governance.
Table 3. Top ten journals about water safety and water governance.
JournalWoSScopusImpact FactorH IndexQuartile
International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health		380.81138Q1
Sustainability (Switzerland)090.66109Q2
Water (Switzerland)080.7269Q1
Science of the Total Environment551.81275Q1
Environmental Science and Policy061.68126Q1
Canadian Water Resources Journal430.5138Q2
E3s Web of Conferences050.2428-
Ecology and Society501.35152Q1
Marine Policy441.17104Q1
Water Policy400.43 61Q2
According to the Scimago Journal Ranking.
Table
Table 4. Top authors by production.
Table 4. Top authors by production.
No.ResearcherTotal Articles *Scopus H-IndexAffiliation
1Li Ying717Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China
2Hao Wang545Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China
3Xuemei Wang525Northwest Normal University China,
Lanzhou, China
4Peter J. J. Driessen440Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht, Netherlands
5Ferrero Giuliana416WASH consulting, Delft, Netherlands
6Liu Yong48Nanjing Hydraulic Research Institute, Nanjing, China
7Wang Jinliang413Yunnan Normal University, Kunming, China
8Zhang Yanhui411Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing, China
9Bartram, Jamie K.348University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
10Chen Qiuwen336Yangtze Institute for Conservation and Green Development, Nanjing, China
* Total articles: WoS + Scopus.
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

Aguirre, K.A.; Paredes Cuervo, D. Water Safety and Water Governance: A Scientometric Review. Sustainability 2023, 15, 7164. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097164

AMA Style

Aguirre KA, Paredes Cuervo D. Water Safety and Water Governance: A Scientometric Review. Sustainability. 2023; 15(9):7164. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097164

Chicago/Turabian Style

Aguirre, Kelly Andrea, and Diego Paredes Cuervo. 2023. "Water Safety and Water Governance: A Scientometric Review" Sustainability 15, no. 9: 7164. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097164

APA Style

Aguirre, K. A., & Paredes Cuervo, D. (2023). Water Safety and Water Governance: A Scientometric Review. Sustainability, 15(9), 7164. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097164

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