SOSYO-EKONOMİK EŞİTSİZLİK ARAŞTIRMALARINDA DİN VE TEMATİK DİNAMİKLER: BİBLİYOMETRİK BİR DEĞERLENDİRME

Öz

Son yıllarda sosyo-ekonomik eşitsizlikler üzerine yapılan araştırmalar, disiplinler arası yaklaşımların artması ve sosyal kategorilerin eşitsizliklerle nasıl kesiştiğine dair yeni anlayışlar geliştirilmesiyle önemli bir dönüşüm geçirmiştir. Ancak bu literatürde, dinin eşitsizlikler üzerindeki rolünü ele alan çalışmalar sınırlı kalmıştır. Bu çalışma, sosyo-ekonomik eşitsizliklere odaklanan akademik araştırmaların din ve dindarlık temasıyla nasıl kesiştiğini analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Web of Science (WoS) veri tabanından elde edilen 2922 akademik çalışma, belirlenen kriterlere uygun olarak seçilmiş ve Bibliometrix yazılımı kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Araştırma, din ve eşitsizlikler üzerine yapılan çalışmaların tematik eğilimlerini, bölgesel dağılımlarını ve bilimsel iş birliklerini incelemektedir. Elde edilen bulgular, bu alanın literatürde yeterince ele alınmadığını ve dinin eşitsizlik dinamikleri üzerindeki etkisine dair daha fazla araştırmaya ihtiyaç duyulduğunu göstermektedir. Bu yönüyle çalışma, literatürdeki önemli bir boşluğu doldurmayı hedeflemektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sosyo-ekonomik eşitsizlik
• Bibliometrik analiz
• Tematik eğilimler
• Eşitsizlik araştırmaları
• Din

Religion and Thematic Dynamics in Socio-Economic Inequality Research: A Bibliometric Assessment

Öz

In recent years, research on socio-economic inequalities has undergone a significant transformation with the rise of interdisciplinary approaches and the development of new perspectives on how social categories intersect with inequalities. However, studies examining the role of religion in socio-economic inequalities remain limited. This study aims to analyze academic research focusing on socio-economic inequalities in connection with religion and religiosity. A total of 2,922 academic works were identified from the Web of Science (WoS) database based on predefined criteria and analyzed using the Bibliometrix software. The study investigates thematic trends, regional distributions, and scientific collaborations in research on religion and inequalities. The findings reveal that this area remains underexplored in the literature, highlighting the need for further investigation into the impact of religion on inequality dynamics. This study aims to fill a critical gap in the existing literature.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Socio-economic inequality
• Bibliometric analysis
• Thematic trends
• Inequality research
• Religion

Kaynakça

1. Ahmed, F., Ahmed, N., Pissarides, C., & Stiglitz, J. (2020). Why inequality could spread COVID-19. The Lancet Public Health, 5(5), e240. doi:10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30088-4
2. Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
3. Atkinson, A. B. (2015). Inequality: What can be done? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
4. Atkinson, A. B., & Piketty, T. (Eds.). (2007). Top incomes over the twentieth century: A contrast between continental European and English-speaking countries. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from http://site.ebrary.com/lib/academiccompletetitles/home.action
5. Barro, R. J., & McCleary, R. M. (2003). Religion and economic growth across countries. American Sociological Review, 68(5), 760–781. doi:10.2307/1519761
6. Bircan, T., & Salah, A. A. (2022). Statistical and computational methods in social sciences: A review. Journal of Computational Social Science, 5(1), 1–23. doi:10.1007/s42001-022-00173-9
7. Brenner, N. (2018). Debating planetary urbanization: For an engaged pluralism. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 36(3), 570–590. doi:10.1177/0263775818757510
8. Bunnell, T. (2019). Beyond epistemology: Locating Southeast Asian urban theory. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 43(6), 1116–1135. doi:10.1111/1468-2427.12773

9. Blundell, R., Costa Dias, M., Joyce, R., & Xu, X. (2020). COVID-19 and inequalities. Fiscal Studies, 41(2), 291–319. doi:10.1111/1475-5890.12188
10. Collins, P. H. (2015). Intersectionality's definitional dilemmas. Annual Review of Sociology, 41, 1–20. doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-073014-112142
11. Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), 139–167. Retrieved from http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8
12. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
13. Galbraith, J. K. (2016). Inequality: What everyone needs to know. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
14. Glänzel, W. (2012). Bibliometric methods for detecting and analysing emerging research topics. El Profesional de la Información, 21(2), 194–201. doi:10.3145/epi.2012.mar.11
15. Garrigós-Simón, F. J., Palacios-Marqués, D., & Narangajavana, Y. (2021). Social network analysis and bibliometric networks: An application to innovation and knowledge diffusion. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 6(1), 34–41. doi:10.1016/j.jik.2020.09.005
16. Glover, R. E., van Schalkwyk, M. C., Akl, E. A., Kristjannson, E., Lotfi, T., Petkovic, J., & Tugwell, P. (2020). A framework for identifying and mitigating the equity harms of COVID-19 policy interventions. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 128, 35–48. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.08.016
17. Guo, S., Zhang, G., Wang, C., & Li, G. (2019). Global research trends in library and information science: A bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 120(3), 1203–1231. doi:10.1007/s11192-019-03163-1
18. Jakobsen, K. L., Kühn, S., & Becker, R. (2023). Identifying research gaps through bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 128(1), 1–20. doi:10.1007/s11192-022-04563-x
19. Kuznets, S. (1955). Economic growth and income inequality. The American Economic Review, 45(1), 1–28. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/1818907
20. Lakner, C., & Milanovic, B. (2016). Global income distribution: From the fall of the Berlin Wall to the Great Recession. The World Bank Economic Review, 30(2), 203–232. doi:10.1093/wber/lhv039
21. Milanovic, B. (2015). Global inequality of opportunity: How much of our income is determined by where we live. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 97(2), 452–460. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/43556185
22. Milanovic, B. (2016). Global inequality: A new approach for the age of globalization. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23. Moran, T. P. (2005). Kuznets’s inverted U-curve hypothesis: The rise, demise, and continued relevance of a socioeconomic law. Sociological Forum, 20(2), 209–244. doi:10.1007/s11206-005-4098-y
24. Niu, J., Tang, W., Xu, F., Zhou, X., & Song, Y. (2016). Global research on artificial intelligence from 1990–2014: Spatially-explicit bibliometric analysis. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 5(5), 66. doi:10.3390/ijgi5050066
25. Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
26. Piketty, T., & Zucman, G. (2014). Capital is back: Wealth–income ratios in rich countries, 1700–2010. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129(3), 1255–1310. doi:10.1093/qje/qju018
27. Rashid, M. A., Rehman, M. U., & Asghar, M. Z. (2021). Exploring research trends in social justice: A bibliometric review. Journal of Social Justice Research, 34(2), 1–20. doi:10.1007/s11211-020-00357-1
28. Roser, M. (2017). The history of global economic inequality. OurWorldInData.org. Retrieved from https://ourworldindata.org/history-of-global-economic-inequality
29. Roy, A. (2016). What is urban about critical urban theory? Urban Studies, 53(6), 1061–1072. doi:10.1177/0042098014563029
30. Saez, E., & Zucman, G. (2016). Wealth inequality in the United States since 1913: Evidence from capitalized income tax data. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131(2), 519–578. doi:10.1093/qje/qjw004
31. Sharifi, A., Khavarian-Garmsir, A. R., Allam, Z., & Asadzadeh, A. (2023). Progress and prospects in planning: A bibliometric review of literature in urban studies and regional and urban planning 1956–2022. Progress in Planning, 173, 100740. doi:10.1016/j.progress.2023.100740
32. Sheppard, E., Leitner, H., & Maringanti, A. (2013). Provincializing global urbanism: A manifesto. Urban Geography, 34(7), 919–937. doi:10.1080/02723638.2013.820500
33. Shorrocks, A., Davies, J., & Lluberas, R. (2018). Global Wealth Report 2018. Zurich, Switzerland: CREDIT SUISSE AG Research Institute.
34. Stiglitz, J. (2012). The price of inequality. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
35. Van Meeteren, M., Derudder, B., & Witlox, F. (2016). How to identify world cities? A theoretical discussion and methodological reflections on GaWC city classification. Urban Studies, 53(12), 2396–2416. doi:10.1177/0042098015586537
36. Weber, M. (1905). The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism (T. Parsons, Trans.). New York, NY: Scribner's Sons.