Next Article in Journal
Long-Term Effects of Nitrogen Sources on Yields, Nitrogen Use Efficiencies, and Soil of Tilled and Irrigated Corn
Previous Article in Journal
The Impact of Grafting with Different Rootstocks on Eggplant (Solanum melongena L.) Growth and Its Rhizosphere Soil Microecology
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agronomy
Volume 14
Issue 11
10.3390/agronomy14112617
agronomy-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

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

Trends in Global Agricultural Carbon Emission Research: A Bibliometric Analysis

by
Jinhao Hu
1,†,
Jianhua Dong
1,†,
Dan Xu
1,2,*,
Qiliang Yang
1,3,4,5,*,
Jiaping Liang
1,3,4,5,
Na Li
1,3,4,5 and
Haipeng Wang
1
1
Faculty of Modern Agricultural Engineering, Kunming University of Science and Technology, Kunming 650500, China
2
International Cooperation Joint Laboratory of Health in Cold Region Black Soil Habitat of the Ministry of Education, Harbin 150000, China
3
Seasonal Arid Region, Water-Soil-Crop System Observation and Research Station of Yunnan Province, Kunming University of Science and Technology, Kunming 650500, China
4
Yunnan Provincial Key Laboratory of High-Efficiency Water Use and Green Production of Characteristic Crops in Universities, Kunming University of Science and Technology, Kunming 650500, China
5
Yunnan Technology Innovation Center of Phosphorus Resource, Kunming 650500, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Agronomy 2024, 14(11), 2617; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14112617
Submission received: 7 October 2024 / Revised: 31 October 2024 / Accepted: 4 November 2024 / Published: 6 November 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Agroecology Innovation: Achieving System Resilience)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
As climate change intensifies and countries actively pursue carbon peaking and carbon neutrality targets, agriculture has emerged as a significant source of carbon emissions. A comprehensive analysis of global agricultural carbon emission research can enhance the agricultural environment and achieve a mutually beneficial outcome for environmental protection and economic development. Despite the evolution of research domains and methodologies, the global context remains closely connected to the current state of the discipline. Drawing on the Web of Science core collection, this paper develops a knowledge network framework, examines the current status and hotspots of agricultural carbon emissions, forecasts future development trends, and analyzes the findings using CiteSpace visualization software. The findings indicate that the number of papers on agricultural carbon emissions has been increasing annually, with minor fluctuations; time series analysis and sustainable development have emerged as the current focal points, and relevant institutions are collaborating increasingly closely. However, cooperation among scholars requires further enhancement. Countries such as China, the United States, and Germany are the primary nations for paper publication. The hotspot analysis reveals a high frequency of keywords such as greenhouse gas emissions and climate change, indicating that research on agricultural carbon emissions has matured and the emphasis has shifted from accounting to management. This paper develops a domain knowledge framework to assist readers in understanding agricultural carbon emission patterns and provide resources for further research. Follow-up studies should enhance both comprehensiveness and breadth, promote interdisciplinary cooperation, provide a scientific foundation for policymakers, and outline future research directions.

1. Introduction

Carbon emissions significantly affect the global economy and the Earth’s system. Therefore, it is highly valuable to systematically analyze the current status and trends of research on agricultural carbon emissions, and identify research hotspots and frontiers to foster in-depth research and inform policy formulation in this field. First, carbon emissions are the primary greenhouse gas influencing the increase in global temperatures and contributing to climate change. The adverse effects of these changes, including extreme weather events, sea-level rise, and glacier melting, pose serious threats to ecosystems, agriculture, and water resources [1,2]. These climate-related disasters not only damage infrastructure and property, but also escalate government budget costs [3]. Second, climate change driven by carbon emissions disrupts the balance of ecosystems, resulting in species extinction and ecosystem collapse [4]. This jeopardizes the sustainability of fisheries, forestry, and other natural resources while impacting numerous biodiversity hotspots [5]. In recent years, global warming has emerged as a significant global challenge, with carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions continuing to rise, resulting in a rapid increase in global temperatures [6]. The primary cause of climate change is the excessive emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O) into the atmosphere due to human activities [7]. These sources of greenhouse gas emissions encompass agricultural soils, livestock digestion processes, the decomposition of crop residues, and agricultural machinery. With the escalating issue of global climate change, reducing greenhouse gas emissions has become a consensus among the international community. With the escalating issue of global climate change, reducing greenhouse gas emissions has become a consensus among the international community [8,9]. The international community must also establish a global climate change agreement to mitigate and adapt to climate change [10,11]. This has far-reaching implications for, among other areas, international trade, technology transfer, and development assistance, necessitating countries to collaborate in building a more sustainable and adaptive future [12]. In this context, understanding the current state of agricultural carbon emissions, the influencing factors, and their emission reduction pathways is crucial for formulating effective emission reduction policies and achieving sustainable agricultural development.
Agriculture, recognized as the world’s second-largest source of emissions, is responsible for 60% and 40% of global greenhouse gas emissions of CH4 and N2O, respectively, from agricultural production activities, while agricultural emissions of CO2 account for approximately 20–30% of total agricultural greenhouse gas emissions [13]. According to the existing literature on agricultural carbon emissions, numerous studies have been conducted, and the relevant literature is broadly categorized into five main categories. The first category emphasizes the factors influencing agricultural carbon emissions. Some researchers have employed mathematical models to analyze the factors affecting agricultural carbon emissions. Zhu et al. [14,15] pointed out that agricultural carbon emissions are affected by production efficiency factors, as determined by the SBM model. Furthermore, Xu et al. [16,17] used the system GMM and the mediated effect model to demonstrate that digitalization, farmers’ willingness to engage in low-carbon production, and the labor force are significant factors contributing to the reduction in agricultural carbon emissions. The second category pertains to carbon reduction measures. Concerning CO2 reduction measures, O’Neill et al. [18] and Armolaitis et al. [19] demonstrated that forest regeneration in European sheep pastures can enhance carbon adsorption potential through afforestation and the conservation of arable land alongside non-CO2 reduction measures. Utilizing panel data from 31 provinces in China spanning the years 2000 to 2019, Guo and Zhang [20] indicated that agricultural carbon emissions can be reduced through the implementation of green production techniques in agriculture, the installation of water-saving irrigation facilities, and a reduction in the use of pesticides, fertilizers, and other chemicals. The third category pertains to the application of remote sensing techniques and model simulations, which facilitate a more accurate monitoring and assessment of agricultural carbon emissions [21]. The second International Symposium on LAPAN-IPB Satellite (LISAT) for Food Security and Environmental Monitoring (LISAT-FSEM) in Indonesia focused on utilizing remote sensing to estimate carbon stocks in support of the Low Carbon Emission Program. The fourth category pertains to the popularization and application of new technologies, such as biochar and conservation tillage, which offer innovative approaches to reducing agricultural carbon emissions. Nyambo et al. [22] concluded that all three methods could effectively reduce CO2 fluxes in a short period through three split–split–plot design studies utilizing biochar, conservation tillage, and rotational cropping on experimental cropland in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa. The fifth category pertains to the policy effects of primary food-producing areas. Balogh [23], using panel regression modeling to assess subsidies’ impact on reducing agricultural greenhouse gases under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in the European Union’s primary food-producing regions, demonstrated that the policy significantly increases food production while reducing agricultural carbon emissions. Tang et al. [24] argue that the establishment of main production zones has increased farmers’ business income while reducing agricultural carbon emissions, thereby lowering the cost of greenhouse gas mitigation and enhancing food production.
Previous studies have strongly indicated that the factors influencing agricultural carbon emissions are highly complex, involving not only the efficiency of agricultural production and structure, but also elements such as the level of agricultural economic development and the size of the agricultural population. In recent years, the scope and methodologies of global agricultural carbon emission research have exhibited a diversified development trend. Regarding research content, it has evolved from the initial identification of carbon emission sources and estimation of emissions to include the analysis of factors affecting carbon emissions, the study of carbon emission reduction technologies and measures, and the formulation of carbon emission policies and management strategies. In terms of research methodology, alongside traditional field surveys and experimental studies, advanced methods such as remote sensing technology and model simulation have been extensively utilized, offering robust support for the quantitative assessment of agricultural carbon emissions. However, very little research has been conducted to organize and assess the long-range sequences of worldwide agricultural carbon emissions. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the direction and scope of research on global agricultural carbon emissions, systematically evaluate the state of the field and its development trends, and identify research hotspots and emerging challenges. Furthermore, we need some reasonable tools to summarize and visualize the direction of research on agricultural carbon emissions to provide a clear research direction for future researchers. Recently, bibliometric analysis has gained popularity as a method for examining published articles in specific fields, facilitating the assessment of research activity trends over time [25,26]. This study aimed to systematically evaluate research on global agricultural carbon emissions from 1991 to 2023 using CiteSpace (version 6.2.R4) visual bibliographic analysis software, employing statistical and mathematical methods in bibliometric analysis to identify research trends and hotspots, assess academic impact, and construct research networks. It not only offers a high-quality evaluation of research results and facilitates the exchange of interdisciplinary research, but also delivers valuable insights for researchers, institutions, and policymakers, promoting the sustainable development and innovation of scientific research. The research objectives of this paper were as follows: (1) to comprehend the historical development trajectory and current research trends in agricultural carbon emission research, as well as identify research hotspots and key areas through the statistical analysis of the number of literature works, authors, journals, etc.; (2) to evaluate the scholars, research institutions, and countries that have significantly influenced agricultural carbon emission research through the analyses of authors, institutions, and countries, and understand the composition of academic cooperation networks, research teams, and international collaborations; (3) to identify research hotspots and future research directions in agricultural carbon emissions through keyword co-occurrence analysis and thematic evolution analysis.

2. Methods and Materials

2.1. Research Methods

Bibliometric analysis has matured significantly and serves as a crucial method for quickly understanding research directions in relevant academic fields and exploring past hotspots [27]. Information visualization techniques and methods can be intuitively analyzed to explore their development history, research status, hotspots, and trends. Today, the most widely used literature visualization and analysis software includes CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and Histcite. Still, CiteSpace is more operational and exploitable, and plays a unique role in bibliometrics. It can analyze the big data metrics of a given field to clarify its evolution and identify key literature, journals, author institutions, and more to explore research frontiers and development trends. In this paper, we will use the CiteSpace methodology to analyze the English literature on global agricultural carbon emissions through conventional parameter statistics and research hotspots, enabling a more in-depth exploration of this research area. In the knowledge mapping derived by CiteSpace, the keyword frequency represents the number of times the node appears in all the literature. In various types of literature, it is often concluded that high frequency indicates a research hotspot. CiteSpace uses a time- and graph-based visualization method. This approach has great advantages in analyzing the patterns of topics in the graphs over time. In graph-based visualization mapping, elements can be freely repositioned, allowing for the demonstration of structural features between clusters. The authors will conduct an advantage analysis using CiteSpace to provide more details about the status and hotspots of agricultural carbon emission research.

2.2. Data Processing

All of the data in this work were sourced from the Web of Science (WOS)—international research data from the WOS Core Collection database of the WOS Data Platform—in order to ensure the data’s correctness, comprehensiveness, and trustworthiness. We established precise criteria while gathering the target literature in order to exclude unnecessary material, minimize data duplication, increase analytic precision, and prevent irrelevant literature from influencing study findings. The following are the precise steps. (1) The database search was refined using the following selection criteria: (TS = (agricultural carbon emissions OR agricultural carbon footprint OR carbon emission efficiency in agricultural) AND (agricultural economy) AND (sustainable agricultural development) AND (agro-ecological environment) AND (green agricultural)). In this study, TS refers to the topic of published articles. The “Advanced Search” strategies could be obtained from the “Web of Science All Databases Help”, or http://images.webofknowledge.com//WOKRS535R111/help/WOK/hp_advanced_search.html, accessed on 23 August 2024. (2) To ensure the academic rigor of the research, the language setting was English. (3) The refinement process was carried out by selecting “article” as the document type. (4) The search period was chosen to be from 1 January 1991 to 31 December 2023. (5) The exclusion of the literature not related to the topic and duplicates ensured the high quality and relevance of the final dataset. By configuring these parameters and completing the retrieval steps, a refined subset of academic articles was produced.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Publishing Trends

The number of publications in the literature is a crucial indicator of the development of a research field. Interestingly, 6309 documents collected by WOS from 1991–2023 were counted in terms of the time of publication and initial analysis using Origin and R programming languages. The distribution of all literature by year of publication, H-Index, Social Total Cite (SOTC), and annual literature distribution by the top three countries in order of number of publications is shown in Figure 1. The H-Index and SOTC can be utilized to compare the quality of research results in the field across different years and serve as evaluation indicators to assess the importance and reputation of the field. Wu et al. [28] conducted a bibliometric analysis of publication trends in carbon emission research within agricultural ecosystems, with a primary focus on annual publication quantity. In contrast, this paper will offer a comprehensive analysis by integrating the annual publication quantity with the global policy direction at each stage. As shown in Figure 1, the number of yearly publications of English literature on agricultural carbon emissions exhibits an overall upward trend, although fluctuations occurred in certain years. Research on agricultural carbon emissions can be divided into three phases based on variations in the number of annual publications. In the first phase, from 1991 to 2009, research on agricultural carbon emissions was in its infancy. During this period, The Kyoto Protocol was signed in 1997 after arduous negotiations, establishing mandatory greenhouse gas emission limits with a legal effect for the first time. However, some developed countries argue that ‘the problem lies not in the scarcity of resources, but in the uneven distribution’, which makes the protocol exist in name only, resulting in the research on agricultural carbon emissions being halted. At this stage, the annual average of articles on agricultural carbon emissions is approximately 35. In the second phase, from 2010 to 2020, following the signing of The Paris Agreement at the Paris Climate Conference, the issue of reducing carbon emissions was concretely addressed, prompting various fields to research energy-saving and emission-reduction methods, including agricultural carbon emissions. The annual publications on agricultural carbon emissions during this phase have increased compared to the previous phase, showing a clear and significant growth trend of approximately 100 publications at three-year intervals. The third stage is from 2021 to the present. China, as a representative of emission reduction, independently submits emission reduction commitments to the United Nations, and China promises the world that it will reach a carbon peak around 2030 and carbon neutrality in 2050, which makes the concern of agricultural carbon emissions further increase, and the overall development of the country is at a high level of rapid growth. In addition, international research on agricultural carbon emissions has entered a new phase, transitioning from The Kyoto Protocol to The Paris Agreement, and ultimately to China’s commitment to exemplify carbon peaking and carbon neutrality. In this context, research on agricultural carbon emissions has gained greater attention; in 2022 and 2023, publications totaling 890 and 887 reached the highest levels recorded in the past 30 years. The literature first presented relevant studies in 1991, with 2022 marking the peak of annual publications.

3.2. Institutions

A collaborative network analysis of research institutions in the English agricultural carbon emission literature was conducted using CiteSpace visual analytics software (as CiteSpace can only analyze literature from the past 30 years, the study focused on the period from 1994 to 2023). The results are shown in Figure 2. The knowledge mapping consists of 297 nodes and 1926 cooperation links. The Chinese Academy of Science (CAS, 303 articles) is the core institution in the field of agricultural carbon emission research. It has the highest intermediary centrality of 0.11 among research institutions, underscoring its significant influence in professional scientific research. Then come the Chinese Agricultural University (CAU, 149 articles), the University of California System (UC System, 158 articles), the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA, 214 articles), the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR, 143 articles), etc.
Cheng et al. [29], in their bibliometric analysis of the relationship between food security and carbon emissions, briefly mentioned the total number of publications and the rankings of institutional cooperation. This paper specifically analyzes the areas in which institutional cooperation has been researched, as well as the specific research findings. Regarding institutional cooperation, the knowledge mapping reveals more connecting lines between institutions, indicating closer collaboration among research institutions in the English literature. The CAS and USDA are the core of the study, and all other issuing organizations have some cooperation with them. For example, the Chinese Academy of Science and Northwest A&F University, for the soil in northern Germany during the growing season, based on principal component analysis and systematic cluster analysis, concluded that CO2 emissions affects the most soil respiration, the physical state, nutrient supply, and microorganisms. When the University of California System collaborated with the United States Department of Energy, they concluded that the subsoil contains a larger pool of total soil carbon than the topsoil due to its large volume. They found that although the subsoil is highly heterogeneous, it is often more suitable for long-term carbon sequestration than topsoil. Therefore, appropriate soil carbon sequestration strategies and policies should be developed to address global climate change and the declining soil quality.
Mutual cooperation between scientific research institutions enables them to share equipment, data, and human resources, improving research efficiency and reducing costs. Additionally, through collaboration, research teams gain broader perspectives and feedback, enhancing the quality and reliability of their research. Collaborating to study agricultural carbon emissions provides researchers with more opportunities to learn and grow, helping cultivate a new generation of scientific researchers and advancing scientific research and technological innovation. Overall, the English-language literature on agricultural carbon emissions is based on teamwork, with a sizeable network of institutional collaborations.

3.3. Country

Figure 3 comprises 155 nodes and 1719 cooperation lines, showing the academic collaboration in agricultural carbon research in different countries. China, the United States of America (USA), Germany, England, and Italy appear to be the top five countries with the greatest nodes in terms of size, indicating that these nations hold a prominent collaborative position in agricultural carbon emission research. Yu et al. [30] also conducted country analyses in bibliometrics in their study on the structure and modeling of rural carbon emissions, but they primarily focused on the research content aspects. In contrast, this paper will specifically analyze the policy orientation and financial support of the five core countries regarding their agricultural carbon emissions. These five countries have not only published a large number of papers, but also invested heavily in policies and funding. The Chinese government emphasizes green agriculture and sustainable development in the 14th Five-Year Plan. The initiative aims to reduce agricultural carbon emissions and supports related research through various channels, including the National Natural Science Foundation of China and special funds from the Ministry of Agriculture. It encourages research institutes and universities to pursue related topics, promotes the application and dissemination of low-carbon agricultural technologies through demonstration and pilot projects, and facilitates the application of agricultural technologies and the transformation of scientific research results. Promoting agricultural technologies through demonstration and pilot projects facilitates the application and dissemination of these technologies while also enhancing the transformation of scientific research results. Agencies like the USDA and the National Science Foundation (NSF) provide financial support for agricultural sustainability and climate change research. Agencies such as the United States Agricultural Research Service (ARS) actively engage in research on carbon emissions from agriculture. Additionally, many private-sector companies and non-profit organizations in the United States are investing in carbon emission reduction in agriculture while promoting innovation and technology development. The German government has developed a clear strategy for climate protection and sustainable agriculture, emphasizing the need to reduce carbon emissions from agriculture. The German Research Foundation (DFG) and the Federal Ministry of Agriculture have provided financial support to encourage universities and research institutes to conduct relevant research. Germany has actively engaged in international scientific research cooperation projects to advance global research on carbon emissions from agriculture. The UK government has established targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the Climate Change Bill, particularly within the agricultural sector. Support is provided through organizations such as the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC), which emphasize agricultural sustainability and carbon emission research. The Italian government has prioritized the sustainable development of agriculture in its national climate plan, establishing targets to reduce carbon emissions. Research related to agricultural carbon emissions has been promoted through financial support from institutions such as the Italian National Research Council (CNR). All five countries have demonstrated strong policy orientation and financial support in agricultural carbon emissions. China focuses on policy guidance and demonstration projects, the United States emphasizes federal funding and private-sector participation, Germany focuses on national strategies and international cooperation, and the United Kingdom and Italy actively promote sustainable agricultural development and carbon research in terms of government policy and research funding. The results of scientific research papers, policy orientation, and financial support reflect the dominant position of these five countries in the field of agricultural carbon emissions. The United States, Germany, England, and Italy are examples of developed nations; on the other hand, China is a huge country with a sizable population and an agricultural economy. Its agricultural production is relatively developed, so it usually emits more CO2 and other greenhouse gases. China must implement specific countermeasures to reduce carbon emissions, including increasing research on agricultural carbon emissions, enhancing international cooperation, accelerating research efforts, and striving to achieve harmonious coexistence between environmental preservation and agricultural economic growth.
Furthermore, as illustrated by the figure’s intricate and thick connecting lines, agricultural carbon emissions have become a central area of study for governance and global engagement. Currently, governments have been collaborating in this field more and more regularly, indicating their will to collaborate on research projects to address the problem of carbon emissions from agriculture and safeguard the planet’s ecosystems.
The top 15 countries with the highest number of research collaborations on agricultural carbon emissions are listed according to the number and centrality of publications in Table 1. China leads the world in publications, having published 1640 papers. Despite this, China leads the world in collaborative research on agricultural carbon emissions; nonetheless, the influence of China’s efforts on other nations is rather small, as seen by the low centrality rating (0.01). The USA follows this (1454 articles with a centrality of 0.14), along with Germany (493 articles with a centrality of 0.16), England (458 articles with a centrality of 0.14), and Italy (405 articles with a centrality of 0.10).
In comparison to the USA, China has more publications but fewer collaborations with other countries, likely due to its status as a developing country where institutions and researchers encounter significant economic and work pressures. Therefore, China should enhance its policy and funding support for carbon emission research to foster global scientific research collaboration. As a developed nation, the USA possesses early foresight in agricultural carbon emission research, boasts numerous high-level research institutions and researchers, and holds significant academic influence globally. When considered in conjunction with the study mentioned above, it becomes evident that agricultural carbon emissions are now a topic of international collaboration and research engagement. Furthermore, these findings could make it easier for academics to see which nations are more proactive in starting cooperative research projects. This would support them in aggressively pursuing chances for cross-border cooperation in this field.

3.4. Authors

Figure 4 shows the collaboration of different authors in agricultural carbon emissions. The figure indicates that compared to the networks of organizations and nations, the writers’ collaborative networks have fewer densely connected networks, indicating a decrease in the frequency and closeness of author collaboration. As shown in Figure 4, several research groups work more closely together, such as Smith’s subject group, Lal’s subject group, Pan’s subject group, Aguilera’s subject group, and Cheng’s subject group. The largest group, led by Smith, has published numerous works employing a life-cycle strategy to enhance soil carbon sequestration rates in Mediterranean biomes and livestock production systems particularly vulnerable to climate change, and mitigate its effects. [31,32]. The collaboration between the research groups led by Lal and Smith emphasizes the study of the soil carbon cycle and explores the potential of straw, biochar, and integrated biomass pyrolysis as strategies for climate change mitigation [33,34]. Furthermore, numerous solitary researchers exhibit low publication counts, indicating that they may struggle to establish or maintain strong connections with other academics. These findings further underscore that collaboration remains essential for advancing agricultural carbon emission research, and relying solely on the efforts of a single individual may be impractical.
According to the number of publications and centrality, Table 2 presents the top 15 authors who have collaborated on the most research on agricultural carbon emissions. Since 1994, Smith has published 41 papers that evaluate the potential for soil carbon sequestration and sink strength via a life cycle approach, biogeochemical modeling, and strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions to facilitate climate change adaptation [35,36,37,38]. This was followed by Rattan Lal (26), Genxing Pan (12), Eduardo Aguilera (11), and Kun Cheng (10).
From this figure, it is clear that the level of cooperation among global authors in the area of agricultural carbon emissions needs further work and strengthening. Scientific collaboration between authors often involves researchers from different disciplines, which helps promote interdisciplinary research and solve complex scientific problems; researchers from different disciplines can exchange their professional knowledge and experience through collaboration, which facilitates innovation and the generation of new ideas; and through collaboration between authors, young researchers can learn from experienced authors and enhance their scientific abilities and skills. Future researchers are likely to depend on subject matter specialists collaborating to advance global sustainable development; these results may also serve as a reference for other academics.

3.5. Co-Citation Analysis

3.5.1. Authors

The results presented in this section will identify the authors whose articles are cited most frequently. In agricultural carbon research, an author’s influence increases with the number of citations. Figure 5 displays the citation network graph of writers who have contributed to the growth of the field of agricultural carbon emissions. The size of the node represents the number of citations that the author’s publication has received. There are 1667 cooperation links and 268 nodes in the cited network. The following study subjects are of particular interest to key authors in the field of agricultural carbon emissions: “soil organic carbon”, “life cycle assessment”, “carbon footprint”, “economic growth”, and “financial support efficient”. These co-cited authors can be grouped into five clusters based on their disparate research interests. Furthermore, the nodes of the “soil organic carbon”, “life cycle assessment”, and “carbon footprint” clusters are significantly larger, indicating that these three clusters have more cited authors and that there is a greater focus on these three areas of research. This result likely arises from the fact that soil is a critical component in regulating biogeochemistry and agricultural production, playing a decisive role in achieving sustainability [39,40,41]. Incorporating soil organic carbon considerations is essential in conducting a life cycle assessment of agriculture’s carbon footprint. A significant node in the “life cycle assessment” cluster is the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), suggesting that several organizations have become quite reputable and well-known in this area.
Based on citation count and centrality, Table 3 displays the top 15 writers who are most frequently cited. Lal R, Smith P, Tilman D, Paustain K, and Davidson EA are the top five non-organized authors in terms of frequency of citations. Lal R has the highest citation frequency, with their article cited 1022 times. Smith P [42] is the most cited author in research focusing on reducing carbon emissions from agriculture. This prominence indicates a current research emphasis on mitigating greenhouse gas emissions through enhanced farm and pasture management, cultivation of organic soils, and the use of alternative raw materials to reduce fossil fuel reliance in agricultural production. By comparing the essential differences between biofuels and fossil fuels, Tilman D [43] formulated the theory that biofuels are a potential low-carbon energy source with minimal or no carbon debt. Concurrently, several scholars focused their research on clean, renewable biofuels during this period. More than 190 co-citations of the works by these eminent academics attest to their collective contributions advancing agricultural carbon emission research. Although their research interests and trajectories may vary, their findings have considerably advanced the field. This further emphasizes the necessity for research to integrate across various domains and content, thereby facilitating the collaborative advancement of pertinent studies.
Figure 6 displays Lal R’s co-citation trend over the last many years. As can be seen, this author’s publications were cited for the first time in 2000. The lowest reported citation frequency occurred in 2006 (4). The frequency of citations has increased significantly over the last decade (2013–2023) and peaked in 2022 (113). Lal R’s articles on factors affecting soil organic carbon sequestration in agro-ecosystems and the development of policies to reduce agricultural carbon emissions to ensure food security and mitigate climate change have been cited by scholars more frequently, and Lal R’s [44,45,46] articles provide new ideas and methods for related researchers. The growing number of scholars citing this author’s work on agricultural carbon emissions research indicates that he has made a significant contribution to the field.

3.5.2. Journals

The statistics and analysis of the sources of 6309 documents based on the WOS core ensemble of Web of Science revealed the characteristics of the distribution of literature published in the agricultural carbon emission research field. The Journal of Cleaner Production, Science of the Total Environment, Sustainability, Environmental Science and Pollution Research, and Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment had the highest number of articles with 442, 276, 243, 227, and 188, respectively. They correspond to these five journals with impact factors of 11.072, 10.754, 3.900, 5.800, and 6.576 in 2023, respectively.
The impact factor is a relative metric that reflects not only the utility and visibility of a journal but also serves as a crucial indicator of its academic standing and the quality of its published articles. However, the impact factor cannot truly reflect the educational level of the papers, and it even elevates the level of low-level papers and lowers the level of high-level papers. We only look at the value of the impact factor. The Journal of Cleaner Production has the highest impact factor. The first aspect pertains to the number of articles published, which plays a crucial role in ensuring the quality of research on carbon emissions in agriculture. The top five journals contribute approximately 21.8% of the total literature, primarily focusing on green sustainable development and agro-environment, serving as core sources in the English-language literature concerning agricultural carbon emissions.

3.6. Co-Occurrence Analysis

3.6.1. Keywords

The study topic and research direction of a publication are effectively communicated through keywords, which serve as precise and refined summaries of the literature’s subject. Utilizing CiteSpace software, we can employ charts to identify the latest research hotspots in the field and conduct a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of keyword frequency in the literature. Figure 7 shows the keyword co-occurrence network knowledge graph comprising 280 nodes and 2963 cooperation links.
It is clear that for the last 30 years, “greenhouse gas emissions”, “climate change”, “carbon footprint”, “life cycle assessment”, and “carbon sequestration” have been the primary buzzwords in the field of agricultural carbon emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural production contribute to climate change, subsequently impacting ecosystems and significantly threatening food production [47]. Scholars worldwide depend on advanced mathematical models to assess the carbon footprint of specific crops, farms, or food-producing regions, integrating life-cycle assessment into their research to minimize uncertainty [48,49,50]. Researchers linking agricultural carbon emissions to economic growth have found that government intervention through taxes or subsidies can be effective, and that reducing emissions or sequestering CO2 may mitigate the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and the associated increase in temperature [51]. Due to the tight interaction between the keywords, which highlights the complexity of their links and effects, scholars have better understood how agricultural carbon emissions are changing.
Table 4 lists the top 15 keywords with the highest co-occurrences by frequency and centrality. The most frequent keywords are “greenhouse gas emissions” (1080 times, centrality 0.08), “climate change” (905 times, centrality 0.11), “agricultural” (901 times, centrality 0.09), “emissions” (901 times, centrality 0.09), and “management” (708 times, centrality 0.05). Specifically, “greenhouse gas emissions”, “agricultural”, and “emissions” appear more frequently because these three keywords often appear together as the same concept in the context of agricultural carbon emissions. The term “climate change” is an important object in the study of agricultural carbon emissions and refers to an important aspect of the study of agricultural carbon emissions in the context of the process of climate change, which affects climate change, followed by the process of climate change affecting agricultural production. The term “management” is an important aspect in the study of agricultural carbon emissions, for land management, management of agricultural machinery use, fertilizer and pesticide management, and irrigation management, all of which affect agricultural carbon emissions. Furthermore, various co-occurring keywords emerged during different periods. Analyzing these high-frequency keywords enables us to effectively identify research hotspots across eras and trace the evolution of agricultural carbon emission research. This material can serve as a reference for future research.

3.6.2. Hotspots

The cluster analysis of keyword timelines can effectively illustrate the interconnections and influences among classes, and reveal the historical scope of related literature within those classes. The frontier of the study field can be effectively represented through keyword combination and clustering, enabling the identification of primary research areas.
A keyword clustering analysis of English literature on agricultural carbon emissions from 1994 to 2023 was conducted to create a timeline view of keywords, as illustrated in Figure 8. When generating a keyword timeline view with nine important keyword clustering tags, “#0 nitrous oxide” is the research focus in this area. The research hotspots for the period 1994–2000 include “carbon dioxide”, “climate change”, and “land use”. This suggests the early research emphasis centered on the relationship between carbon emissions, climate change, and land use impact. “Agriculture”, “carbon sequestration”, and “conservation tillage” are among the hotspots for the years 2000–2012, suggesting that research during this time concentrated on carbon sequestration in agriculture and conservation tillage. The notions of “carbon footprint” and “life cycle assessment” are research hotspots for 2012–2023, indicating that this time frame is being examined from two angles: assessing agricultural carbon emissions and analyzing the agricultural carbon footprint through the life-cycle assessment method.
According to the findings of the previous study, theoretical research and practical applications of agricultural carbon emissions have advanced over the past three decades. Additionally, research hotspots within each cluster have evolved over time, indicating the emergence of new concepts and methodologies in agricultural carbon emission research, leading to significant methodological, theoretical, and practical advancements.

3.6.3. Keyword Citation Bursts

A research hotspot is the core content of keywords in a certain field, representing a group of research themes that appear more frequently and are closely related in the literature. It illustrates the temporal and geographical distribution of keywords, and their responsiveness to changes, and accurately depicts the evolving trends of hotspots in the research area, while also quickly reacting to spikes in specific citations within defined time frames. Additionally, keyword burst detection facilitates the identification of academically significant keywords that may not meet frequency criteria, allowing for a more thorough exploration of the frontiers and hotspots in agricultural carbon emissions research. An increased burst intensity indicates that the research problem is receiving greater attention, resulting in more research being conducted within a specific timeframe. The following section examines the growth rate of word frequency for keywords related to agricultural carbon emissions to identify key emergent terms and understand the research hotspots and trends in this field.
Between 1994 and 2023, the English literature on agricultural carbon emissions underwent analysis for keyword citation bursts. The results are shown in Figure 9, illustrating the evolution of the research frontiers on agricultural carbon emissions from 1994 to 2023. “Biofuels” had the highest outbreak intensity of 24.77, with a life cycle of 8 years (2005–2012). The emergent term “carbon dioxide” also has a high intensity of emergence but has the longest life-cycle of any keyword in the English literature, at 17 years (1994–2011). “Carbon dioxide” is an important component of greenhouse gases and a major cause of climate change. Agricultural carbon emissions affect agricultural production and economic growth and are related to ecosystems [52,53]. The life-cycle of “scenarios” is very short, only one year, and further analysis shows that the emergence of this keyword is related to the impact of relevant policies or major events at that time. In addition, new emergent words with a high citation frequency in recent years include “intensification”, “time series”, “sustainable development”, “renewable energy”, “cointegration”, “agricultural production”, and “field”. Recent research in agricultural carbon emissions explores the use of time series analysis to predict crop yield growth within the constraints of carbon emissions, examines the cointegration between agricultural production and the economy, and addresses sustainable agricultural development [54,55]. The most recent research hotspots, which have drawn much attention from academics, are represented by these terms with the strongest citation bursts. These keywords can provide valuable academic insights into future development trends and research directions. These keywords also indicate that to achieve a comprehensive understanding of the field, researchers should keep looking into and analyzing research trends in agricultural carbon emissions.

3.7. Knowledge Framework

Building on our comprehensive analysis of agricultural carbon emission research, we observe various research dimensions, orientations, and hotspots that are dynamically evolving, with new ideas and methodologies proposed regularly. Therefore, a comprehensive theoretical foundation in agricultural carbon emissions is essential to offer a broad perspective and a reference point for further research.
This study presents a comprehensive theoretical foundation for agricultural carbon emissions (Figure 10). Utilizing this framework allows scholars to grasp the essential overview of research on agricultural carbon emissions, outlining research trends and illustrating the evolution of collaborative, co-citation, and co-occurrence networks.
We can conclude from the framework the following:
(1) In agricultural carbon emission research, “greenhouse gas emissions”, “climate change”, “agricultural”, “emission”, “management”, and “carbon” are the six most often occurring keywords.
(2) In the collaborative analysis section, Smith Pete, Lal Rattan, and Pan Genxing are the most collaborative scholars, and the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the University of California system are the most collaborative institutions. The countries with the highest level of cooperation are China, the United States, and Germany.
(3) The most cited journals in the co-citation analysis section were the Journal of Cleaner Production, Science of the Total Environment, and Sustainability. Lal R, Smith P, and Tilman D were the writers with the most co-citations.
(4) The keywords “carbon dioxide”, “atmosphere”, and “soil organic footprint” had the longest citation bursts in the co-occurrence study. The latest citation explosion keywords are “time series”, “sustainable development”, and “renewable energy”. The clusters with the most frequent co-occurring keywords were nitrous oxide, carbon, and carbon footprint.

4. Conclusions

This paper employed a bibliometric approach to offer a thorough quantitative assessment of the focus and evolution of global research on agricultural carbon emissions. The “Web of Science Advanced Search” based on the Web of Science Core Collection database screened 6309 articles. The collaboration, co-citation, and co-occurrence among journals, countries, institutions, authors, and keywords in global agricultural carbon emission research were analyzed using CiteSpace software. This provided insights into the field’s current state, future directions, and research hotspots. The main conclusions are as follows:
(1) From 1991 to 2023, research publications on agricultural carbon emissions have exhibited a consistent upward trend, with the growth rate from 2021 to 2023 reaching its peak, suggesting a promising future for this field of research.
(2) The main research areas of global agricultural carbon emissions are summarized as follows: the influencing factors of emissions, reduction measures (categorized into CO2 and non-CO2 reduction strategies), and the effects of key grain production areas.
(3) In terms of contributions from various countries, institutions, and individuals to agricultural carbon emissions research, China’s number of publications has consistently remained high from 1991 to 2023. The US Department of Agriculture, the Chinese Agricultural University, and the University of California System serve as the primary foundations of inter-institutional collaboration. Their research characteristics and directions are different. Personally, Lal R. and Smith P. are the most influential and competitive authors on agricultural carbon emissions.
(4) Research hotspots in global agricultural carbon emissions have evolved, resulting in numerous theoretical and technological innovations. Future research hotspots may focus on high-precision calculations and simulations of agricultural carbon emissions using time series models and life-cycle assessment methods to promote sustainable agricultural development. Additionally, renewable energy sources and biofuels are expected to be significant hotspots for future research on agricultural carbon emissions. Scholars can enhance their research on agricultural carbon emissions by closely monitoring significant changes in the field, allowing them to set research priorities, analyze emerging issues, and improve academic outcomes.
Based on the CiteSpace bibliometric analysis, this paper proposes the aspects that should be emphasized in future research on global agricultural carbon emissions through the study and current status of the English literature on agricultural carbon emissions:
(1) It is enhancing the depth of research concerning agricultural carbon emissions. Current theoretical models of agricultural carbon emissions primarily concentrate on measuring carbon footprint across various spatial and temporal scales. In the future, theoretical research on agricultural carbon emissions should be enhanced within the framework of ecological conservation and sustainable development policies.
(2) It is expanding the breadth of research on agricultural carbon emissions. Future research should concentrate on calculating and comparing agricultural carbon emissions across regions of varying scales, enhancing studies on their impacts, and developing innovative calculation models and methodologies.
(3) Encourage a diverse range of research topics on agricultural carbon emissions and foster interdisciplinary collaboration. Research on agricultural carbon emissions must encompass both environmental protection and socio-economic development. Future research continues to strengthen the intersection of agronomy, geography, ecology, economics, and other disciplines to realize the value of applying agricultural carbon emissions in the context of global mitigation research.
Carbon emissions from agriculture represent critical data and are essential for ensuring sustainable economic and social development. This study is mainly based on the Web of Science database, and some relevant literature may not have been included, resulting in some bias in the analysis results. Meanwhile, bibliometric analysis primarily depends on the quantity and co-occurrence relationships within the literature, neglecting a thorough analysis of its content. Future research should integrate qualitative analysis to delve into the content and influencing factors of agricultural carbon emission research, yielding more comprehensive and systematic results. It also expanded the range of data sources to include more academic databases and gray literature to ensure the comprehensiveness and representativeness of the findings. Given the limitations of existing bibliometric tools and the study’s scope, future research could utilize a comparative analysis of various bibliometric methods to gain deeper insights into the current status and emerging trends in the field, offering valuable references for researchers. In conclusion, this study provides a systematic assessment of the current status and trends in agricultural carbon emission research through bibliometric analysis, highlighting research hotspots and future directions. This study aimed to provide a valuable reference for further research and a solid foundation for policymakers to advance agricultural carbon emission reduction and sustainable development.

Author Contributions

J.H.: Data curation, Visualization, Writing—original draft. J.D.: Data curation, Visualization, Writing—original draft. D.X.: Writing—review and editing. Q.Y.: Writing—review & editing. J.L.: Supervision, Validation. N.L.: Supervision, Validation. H.W.: Supervision, Validation. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Natural Science Research Foundation of Kunming University of Science and Technology (KKZ3202423162), Funding for the Opening Project of International Cooperation Joint Laboratory of Health in Cold Region Black Soil Habitat of the Ministry of Education (HCRBSH202311-07), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (no. 52209055, 523799041), Yunnan Science and Technology Talent and Platform Program grant (no. 202305AM070006), Yunnan Fundamental Research Projects (no. 202301AU070061), Yunnan Province Fundamental Research Key Projects (202201AS070034), and the Yunnan Technology Innovation Center of Phosphorus Resource (no. 202305AK340002). We especially thank all research subjects for their participation in this study.

Data Availability Statement

The data used are described in the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References

  1. Awhari, D.P.; Bin Jamal, M.H.; Muhammad, M.K.I.; Shahid, S. Bibliometric analysis of global climate change and agricultural production: Trends, gaps and future directions. Irrig. Drain. 2024, 73, 1615–1632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Kundzewicz, Z.W.; Piniewski, M.; Mezghani, A.; Okruszko, T.; Pinskwar, I.; Kardel, I.; Hov, O.; Szczesniak, M.; Szwed, M.; Benestad, R.E.; et al. Assessment of climate change and associated impact on selected sectors in Poland. Acta Geophys. 2018, 66, 1509–1523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Leckebusch, G.C.; Ulbrich, U.; Fröhlich, L.; Pinto, J.G. Property loss potentials for European midlatitude storms in a changing climate. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2007, 34, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Pandit, J.; Sharma, A.K. A comprehensive review of climate change’s imprint on ecosystems. J. Water Clim. Chang. 2023, 14, 4273–4284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Bryan, B.A.; Nolan, M.; Harwood, T.D.; Connor, J.D.; Navarro-Garcia, J.; King, D.; Summers, D.M.; Newth, D.; Cai, Y.; Grigg, N.; et al. Supply of carbon sequestration and biodiversity services from Australia’s agricultural land under global change. Glob. Environ. Chang.-Hum. Policy Dimens. 2014, 28, 166–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Sow, S.; Ranjan, S.; Behera, B.; Ghosh, M.; Kumar, S.; Dutta, S.K. Maintaining agricultural sustainability through carbon footprint management. Curr. Sci. 2023, 125, 939–944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Tagwi, A. The Impacts of Climate Change, Carbon Dioxide Emissions (CO2) and Renewable Energy Consumption on Agricultural Economic Growth in South Africa: ARDL Approach. Sustainability 2022, 14, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Jha, P.; Chinngaihlian, S.; Upreti, P.; Handa, A. A machine learning approach to assess implications of Climate Risk Factors on Agriculture: The Indian case. Clim. Risk Manag. 2023, 41, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Stetter, C.; Sauer, J. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Eco-Performance at Farm Level: A Parametric Approach. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2022, 81, 617–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Shu, Q.; Su, Y.; Li, H.; Li, F.; Zhao, Y.J.; Du, C. Study on the Spatial Structure and Drivers of Agricultural Carbon Emission Efficiency in Belt and Road Initiative Countries. Sustainability 2023, 15, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Nijnik, M.; Bizikova, L. Responding to the Kyoto Protocol through forestry: A comparison of opportunities for several countries in Europe. For. Policy Econ. 2008, 10, 257–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Habib-ur-Rahman, M.; Ahmad, A.; Raza, A.; Hasnain, M.U.; Alharby, H.F.; Alzahrani, Y.M.; Bamagoos, A.A.; Hakeem, K.R.; Ahmad, S.; Nasim, W.; et al. Impact of climate change on agricultural production; Issues, challenges, and opportunities in Asia. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Zukowska, G.; Myszura, M.; Baran, S.; Wesolowska, S.; Pawlowska, M.; Dobrowolski, L. Agriculture vs. Alleviating the Climate Change. Probl. Ekorozw. 2016, 11, 67–74. [Google Scholar]
  14. Zhu, Y.; Huo, C.J. The Impact of Agricultural Production Efficiency on Agricultural Carbon Emissions in China. Energies 2022, 15, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Zhu, Y.; Wang, X.Y.; Zheng, G. Blessing or Curse? The Impact of Digital Technologies on Carbon Efficiency in the Agricultural Sector of China. Sustainability 2023, 15, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Xu, Y.B.; Li, C.X.; Wang, J. How does agricultural global value chain affect ecological footprint? The moderating role of environmental regulation. Sustain. Dev. 2023, 31, 2416–2427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Xu, Y.B.; Li, C.X.; Wang, X.Y.; Wang, J.J. Digitalization, resource misallocation and low-carbon agricultural production: Evidence from China. Front. Environ. Sci. 2023, 11, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. O’Neill, C.; Lim, F.K.S.; Edwards, D.P.; Osborne, C.P. Forest regeneration on European sheep pasture is an economically viable climate change mitigation strategy. Environ. Res. Lett. 2020, 15, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Armolaitis, K.; Aleinikoviene, J.; Lubyte, J.; Zekaite, V.; Garbaravicius, P. Stability of soil organic carbon in agro and forest ecosystems on Arenosol. Zemdirbyste 2013, 100, 227–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Guo, Z.D.; Zhang, X.N. Carbon reduction effect of agricultural green production technology: A new evidence from China. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 874, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lavista, L.; Prasetyo, L.B.; Hermawan, R. Dynamics change of the above carbon stocks in Bogor Agricultural University, Darmaga campus. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on LAPAN-IPB Satellite (LISAT) for Food Security and Environmental Monitoring (LISAT-FSEM), Bogor, Indonesia, 17–18 November 2015; pp. 305–316. [Google Scholar]
  22. Nyambo, P.; Cornelius, C.; Araya, T. Carbon Dioxide Fluxes and Carbon Stocks under Conservation Agricultural Practices in South Africa. Agriculture 2020, 10, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Balogh, J.M. The impacts of agricultural subsidies of Common Agricultural Policy on agricultural emissions: The case of the European Union. Agric. Econ. 2023, 69, 140–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Tang, K.; Hailu, A.; Kragt, M.E.; Ma, C.B. Marginal abatement costs of greenhouse gas emissions: Broadacre farming in the Great Southern Region of Western Australia. Aust. J. Agr. Resour. Econ. 2016, 60, 459–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Aria, M.; Cuccurullo, C. bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J. Informetr. 2017, 11, 959–975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Guler, A.T.; Waaijer, C.J.F.; Palmblad, M. Scientific workflows for bibliometrics. Scientometrics 2016, 107, 385–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Chen, Q.-Q.; Huo, Y.; Zhang, J.-B. A study on research hot-spots and frontiers of agricultural science and technology innovation—Visualization analysis based on the Citespace III. Agric. Econ. 2016, 62, 429–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Wu, L.J.; Miao, H.Y.; Liu, T.Z. Development in Agricultural Ecosystems’ Carbon Emissions Research: A Visual Analysis Using CiteSpace. Agronomy 2024, 14, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Cheng, P.; Tang, H.T.; Lin, F.F.; Kong, X.S. Bibliometrics of the nexus between food security and carbon emissions: Hotspots and trends. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2023, 30, 25981–25998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Yu, Z.J.; Wang, Y.; Zhao, B.; Li, Z.X.; Hao, Q.L. Research on Carbon Emission Structure and Model in Low-Carbon Rural Areas: Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability 2023, 15, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Aguilera, E.; Reyes-Palomo, C.; Díaz-Gaona, C.; Sanz-Cobena, A.; Smith, P.; García-Laureano, R.; Rodríguez-Estévez, V. Greenhouse gas emissions from Mediterranean agriculture: Evidence of unbalanced research efforts and knowledge gaps. Glob. Environ. Chang.-Hum. Policy Dimens. 2021, 69, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Vicente-Vicente, J.L.; García-Ruiz, R.; Francaviglia, R.; Aguilera, E.; Smith, P. Soil carbon sequestration rates under Mediterranean woody crops using recommended management practices: A meta-analysis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2016, 235, 204–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Lal, R.; Monger, C.; Nave, L.; Smith, P. The role of soil in regulation of climate. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B-Biol. Sci. 2021, 376, 20210084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Xia, L.L.; Cao, L.; Yang, Y.; Ti, C.P.; Liu, Y.Z.; Smith, P.; van Groenigen, K.J.; Lehmann, J.; Lal, R.; Butterbach-Bahl, K.; et al. Integrated biochar solutions can achieve carbon-neutral staple crop production. Nat. Food 2023, 4, 236–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Lefebvre, D.; Goglio, P.; Williams, A.; Manning, D.A.C.; de Azevedo, A.C.; Bergmann, M.; Meersmans, J.; Smith, P. Assessing the potential of soil carbonation and enhanced weathering through Life Cycle Assessment: A case study for Sao Paulo State, Brazil. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 233, 468–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Nayak, D.; Saetnan, E.; Cheng, K.; Wang, W.; Koslowski, F.; Cheng, Y.F.; Zhu, W.Y.; Wang, J.K.; Liu, J.X.; Moran, D.; et al. Management opportunities to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions from Chinese agriculture. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2015, 209, 108–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Ogle, S.M.; Olander, L.; Wollenberg, L.; Rosenstock, T.; Tubiello, F.; Paustian, K.; Buendia, L.; Nihart, A.; Smith, P. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions and adapting agricultural management for climate change in developing countries: Providing the basis for action. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2014, 20, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Sándor, R.; Ehrhardt, F.; Brilli, L.; Carozzi, M.; Recous, S.; Smith, P.; Snow, V.; Soussana, J.F.; Dorich, C.D.; Fuchs, K.; et al. The use of biogeochemical models to evaluate mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions from managed grasslands. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 642, 292–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Abbas, F.; Hammad, H.M.; Ishaq, W.; Farooque, A.A.; Bakhat, H.F.; Zia, Z.; Fahad, S.; Farhad, W.; Cerdà, A. A review of soil carbon dynamics resulting from agricultural practices. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 268, 110319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Galati, A.; Crescimanno, M.; Gristina, L.; Keesstra, S.; Novara, A. Actual provision as an alternative criterion to improve the efficiency of payments for ecosystem services for C sequestration in semiarid vineyards. Agric. Syst. 2016, 144, 58–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Rodrigo-Comino, J.; Senciales, J.M.; Cerdà, A.; Brevik, E.C. The multidisciplinary origin of soil geography: A review. Earth-Sci. Rev. 2018, 177, 114–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Smith, P.; Martino, D.; Cai, Z.; Gwary, D.; Janzen, H.; Kumar, P.; McCarl, B.; Ogle, S.; O’Mara, F.; Rice, C.; et al. Greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B-Biol. Sci. 2008, 363, 789–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Fargione, J.; Hill, J.; Tilman, D.; Polasky, S.; Hawthorne, P. Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt. Science 2008, 319, 1235–1238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Lal, R. Digging deeper: A holistic perspective of factors affecting soil organic carbon sequestration in agroecosystems. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2018, 24, 3285–3301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Sá, J.C.D.; Lal, R.; Cerri, C.C.; Lorenz, K.; Hungria, M.; Carvalho, P.C.D. Low-carbon agriculture in South America to mitigate global climate change and advance food security. Environ. Int. 2017, 98, 102–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Soussana, J.F.; Lutfalla, S.; Ehrhardt, F.; Rosenstock, T.; Lamanna, C.; Havlík, P.; Richards, M.; Wollenberg, E.; Chotte, J.L.; Torquebiau, E.; et al. Matching policy and science: Rationale for the ‘4 per 1000-soils for food security and climate’ initiative. Soil Tillage Res. 2019, 188, 3–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Simionescu, M.; Bilan, Y.; Gedek, S.; Streimikiene, D. The Effects of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on Cereal Production in the European Union. Sustainability 2019, 11, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Deurer, M.; Clothier, B.; Huh, K.Y.; Jun, G.I.; Kim, I.; Kim, D. Trends and Interpretation of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for Carbon Footprinting of Fruit Products: Focused on Kiwifruits in Gyeongnam Region. Korean J. Hortic. Sci. Technol. 2011, 29, 389–406. [Google Scholar]
  49. Liu, J.Y.; Gui, F.; Zhou, Q.; Cai, H.W.; Xu, K.D.; Zhao, S. Carbon Footprint of a Large Yellow Croaker Mariculture Models Based on Life-Cycle Assessment. Sustainability 2023, 15, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Wang, H.N.; Yang, Y.S.; Zhang, X.Y.; Tian, G.D. Carbon Footprint Analysis for Mechanization of Maize Production Based on Life Cycle Assessment: A Case Study in Jilin Province, China. Sustainability 2015, 7, 15772–15784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Elbakidze, L.; McCarl, B.A. Sequestration offsets versus direct emission reductions: Consideration of environmental co-effects. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 60, 564–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Ali, S.; Li, G.; Ying, L.; Ishaq, M.; Shah, T. The Relationship between Carbon Dioxide Emissions, Economic Growth and Agricultural Production in Pakistan: An Autoregressive Distributed Lag Analysis. Energies 2019, 12, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Asumadu-Sarkodie, S.; Owusu, P.A. The causal nexus between carbon dioxide emissions and agricultural ecosystem-an econometric approach. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2017, 24, 1608–1618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Baek, J.; Koo, W.W. Identifying macroeconomic linkages to US agricultural trade balance. Can. J. Agric. Econ.-Rev. Can. Agroecon. 2008, 56, 63–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Koondhar, M.A.; Aziz, N.; Tan, Z.X.; Yang, S.X.; Abbasi, K.R.; Kong, R. Green growth of cereal food production under the constraints of agricultural carbon emissions: A new insights from ARDL and VECM models. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2021, 47, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Agronomy 14 02617 g001
Figure 1. Distribution of literature publication years (1991–2023).
Figure 1. Distribution of literature publication years (1991–2023).
Agronomy 14 02617 g001
Agronomy 14 02617 g002
Figure 2. Knowledge mapping of research institution networks in the English literature on agricultural carbon emissions (1994–2023).
Figure 2. Knowledge mapping of research institution networks in the English literature on agricultural carbon emissions (1994–2023).
Agronomy 14 02617 g002
Agronomy 14 02617 g003
Figure 3. Knowledge mapping of geographical collaborative networks in English literature studies on agricultural carbon emissions (1994–2023).
Figure 3. Knowledge mapping of geographical collaborative networks in English literature studies on agricultural carbon emissions (1994–2023).
Agronomy 14 02617 g003
Agronomy 14 02617 g004
Figure 4. Knowledge mapping of author collaboration networks for agricultural carbon emissions in English literature (1994–2023).
Figure 4. Knowledge mapping of author collaboration networks for agricultural carbon emissions in English literature (1994–2023).
Agronomy 14 02617 g004
Agronomy 14 02617 g005
Figure 5. Author co-citation knowledge map of agricultural carbon emissions in English (1994–2023).
Figure 5. Author co-citation knowledge map of agricultural carbon emissions in English (1994–2023).
Agronomy 14 02617 g005
Agronomy 14 02617 g006
Figure 6. Literature citations for Lal R (1994–2023).
Figure 6. Literature citations for Lal R (1994–2023).
Agronomy 14 02617 g006
Agronomy 14 02617 g007
Figure 7. Knowledge mapping of keywords in the English literature on agricultural carbon emissions (1994–2023).
Figure 7. Knowledge mapping of keywords in the English literature on agricultural carbon emissions (1994–2023).
Agronomy 14 02617 g007
Agronomy 14 02617 g008
Figure 8. Agricultural carbon emission English literature keywords timeline view (1994–2023).
Figure 8. Agricultural carbon emission English literature keywords timeline view (1994–2023).
Agronomy 14 02617 g008
Agronomy 14 02617 g009
Figure 9. Top 25 keywords with the strongest citation bursts in the English literature on agricultural carbon emissions (1994–2023).
Figure 9. Top 25 keywords with the strongest citation bursts in the English literature on agricultural carbon emissions (1994–2023).
Agronomy 14 02617 g009
Agronomy 14 02617 g010
Figure 10. Knowledge framework for research on carbon emissions from agriculture.
Figure 10. Knowledge framework for research on carbon emissions from agriculture.
Agronomy 14 02617 g010
Table 1. Top 15 countries with the most collaborative research on agricultural carbon emissions.
Table 1. Top 15 countries with the most collaborative research on agricultural carbon emissions.
RankingCountCentralityCountry
116400.01China
214540.14USA
34930.16Germany
44580.14England
54050.10Italy
63970.07Australia
73620.03India
83160.03Canada
92810.01Brazil
102700.09Span
112600.04The Netherlands
122330.11France
131880.02Scotland
141690.04Pakistan
151550.03Denmark
Table 2. Top 15 co-authors of research on agricultural carbon emissions.
Table 2. Top 15 co-authors of research on agricultural carbon emissions.
RankingCountAuthor
141Smith, Pete
226Lal, Rattan
312Pan, Genxing
411Aguilera, Eduardo
510Cheng, Kun
610Chen, Xinping
79Chandio, Abbas Ali
89Chen, Fu
99Popp, Alexander
109Lotze-campen, Hermann
118Bernoux, Martial
128Rehman, Abdul
138Zhang, Peng
148Buerkert, Andreas
158Robertson, G Philip
Table 3. Top 15 most cited authors in agricultural carbon emission research.
Table 3. Top 15 most cited authors in agricultural carbon emission research.
RankingCountCentralityAuthor
110220.11Lal R
29310.15Smith P
34190.04Tilman D
43180.02Paustain K
52780.02Davidson EA
62600.02Six J
72440.02Robertson GP
82430.06Bouwman AF
92200.01Eggleston HS
102190.03Houghton RA
112060.04Pesaran MH
122010.02Powlson DS
132000.03Zhang Y
141930.00Field CB
151920.02Foley JA
Table 4. Top 15 keywords co-presented in agricultural carbon emission research.
Table 4. Top 15 keywords co-presented in agricultural carbon emission research.
RankingCountCentralityKeywords
110800.08Greenhouse gas emissions
29050.11Climate change
39010.09Agricultural
48110.05Emission
57080.05Management
66790.04Carbon
76740.03Carbon footprint
85430.02Life cycle assessment
95050.11CO2 emissions
104750.05Carbon sequestration
114470.05Land use
124270.03Systems
134150.04Sequestration
144110.06Impact
154010.03Nitrous oxide
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

Hu, J.; Dong, J.; Xu, D.; Yang, Q.; Liang, J.; Li, N.; Wang, H. Trends in Global Agricultural Carbon Emission Research: A Bibliometric Analysis. Agronomy 2024, 14, 2617. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14112617

AMA Style

Hu J, Dong J, Xu D, Yang Q, Liang J, Li N, Wang H. Trends in Global Agricultural Carbon Emission Research: A Bibliometric Analysis. Agronomy. 2024; 14(11):2617. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14112617

Chicago/Turabian Style

Hu, Jinhao, Jianhua Dong, Dan Xu, Qiliang Yang, Jiaping Liang, Na Li, and Haipeng Wang. 2024. "Trends in Global Agricultural Carbon Emission Research: A Bibliometric Analysis" Agronomy 14, no. 11: 2617. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14112617

APA Style

Hu, J., Dong, J., Xu, D., Yang, Q., Liang, J., Li, N., & Wang, H. (2024). Trends in Global Agricultural Carbon Emission Research: A Bibliometric Analysis. Agronomy, 14(11), 2617. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14112617

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