Review of rainwater harvesting research by a bibliometric analysis

Gokhan Yildirim, Mohammad A. Alim, Ataur Rahman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

This study presents a review of recent rainwater harvesting (RWH) research by a bibliometric analysis (based on performance analysis and science mapping method). Following the inclusion/exclusion criteria, a total of 3226 publications were selected for this bibliometric analysis. From the selected publications, the top journals were identified according to number of publications and number of citations, as well as the authors with the highest number of publications. It has been found that publication rate on RWH has been increasing steadily since 2005. Water (MDPI) journal has published the highest number of publications (128). Based on the literature considered in this review, the top five authors are found as Ghisi, E., Han, M., Rahman, A., Butler, D. and Imteaz, M.A. in that order. With respect to research collaborations, the top performing countries are USA–China, USA–Australia, USA–UK, Australia–UK and Australia–China. Although, the most dominant keywords are found to be ‘rain’, ‘rainwater’, ‘water supply’ and ‘rainwater harvesting’, since 2016, a higher emphasis has been attributed to ‘floods’, ‘efficiency’, ‘climate change’, ‘performance assessment’ and ‘housing’. It is expected that RWH research will continue to rise in future following the current trends as it is regarded as a sustainable means of water cycle management.
Original languageEnglish
Article number3200
Number of pages22
JournalWater
Volume14
Issue number20
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2022

Open Access - Access Right Statement

© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Review of rainwater harvesting research by a bibliometric analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this