MAPPING PIVOTAL ISSUES of COLLECTIVE ACTION RESEARCH: SCIENTOMETRICS ANALYSIS of PUBLICATIONS

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 13 Sayı: 1, 183 - 193, 31.01.2023

Al Fauzi Rahmat

Öz

This paper aims to analyze the terms related to collective action research and to identify their evolution and change in the decades from 1992, when the first publication appeared in the Scopus database, to the present. Past scholars have examined collective action in several fields of research, but the breakthrough paper using scientometrics has not been found. Therefore, this paper is an original to clarify the work within terms based on selected keywords from collective action research, and it yielded 1150 articles. To demonstrate, we used a scientometrics approach of the VOSViewer tool for data visualization. The findings indicate that the concern of collective action has attracted experts to generate various points of view for research, and we forecast that this study will become increasingly noticeable in the coming few years since it was explored. Importantly, we recorded co-authorship and network collaboration, citation by some point of view, as well as annual current issues of collective action. Moreover, we exhibited terms that scholars used to conduct collective action research, such as leadership, legitimacy, solidarity, resilience, capacity-building, advocacy, regulation, accountability, power, and trust.

Anahtar Kelimeler

collective action, power, trust, mapping, scientometrics

Teşekkür

I fully thanks to everyone who supports me to complete this paper. Also, I would like to say thanks for editorial and Blind reviewers who provide constructive comment for this manuscript.

Toplu Eylem Araştırmasının Önemli Konularının Haritalanması: Yayınların Bilimsel Analizi

Öz

Bu makale, toplu eylem araştırması ile ilgili terimleri analiz etmeyi ve Scopus veri tabanında ilk yayının ortaya çıktığı 1992 yılından günümüze kadar geçen on yıllar içinde evrimini ve değişimini belirlemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Geçmişteki bilim insanları, çeşitli araştırma alanlarında kolektif eylemi incelemişlerdir, ancak scientometrics kullanan çığır açan makale bulunamamıştır. Bu nedenle, bu makale, toplu eylem araştırmalarından seçilen anahtar kelimelere dayalı olarak çalışmayı terimler içinde netleştirmek için özgün bir makaledir ve 1150 makaleye ulaşılmıştır. Elde edilen verileri tanımlayıp açıklamak adına, verileri görselleştirmek için VOSViewer aracının scientometrics yaklaşımını kullandık. Bulgular, kolektif eylem endişesinin, araştırma için çeşitli bakış açıları oluşturmak için önceki uzmanları cezbettiğini gösteriyor ve bu çalışmanın, keşfedildikten sonraki birkaç yıl içinde giderek daha fazla dikkat çekeceğini tahmin ediyoruz. Daha da önemlisi, ortak yazarlık ve ağ iş birliğini, bazı bakış açılarına göre alıntıları ve ayrıca yıllık güncel toplu eylem konularını kaydettik. Ayrıca, liderlik, meşruiyet, dayanışma, dayanıklılık, kapasite geliştirme, savunuculuk, düzenleme, hesap verebilirlik, güç ve güven gibi geçmiş bilim insanlarının kolektif eylem araştırması yapmak için kullandıkları terimleri sergiledik.

Anahtar Kelimeler

toplu eylem, güç, güven, dayanıklılık, haritalama, scientometrics

Kaynakça

• Baldwin, E., Rountree, V., & Jock, J. (2018). Distributed resources and distributed governance: Stakeholder participation in demand side management governance. Energy Research and Social Science, 39, 37–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.10.013
• Begeny, C. T., van Breen, J., Leach, C. W., van Zomeren, M., & Iyer, A. (2022). The power of the Ingroup for promoting collective action: How distinctive treatment from fellow minority members motivates collective action. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2022.104346
• Behrens, L. L., & Naylor, M. D. (2020). “We are Alone in This Battle”: A Framework for a Coordinated Response to COVID-19 in Nursing Homes. Journal of Aging and Social Policy, 32(4–5), 316–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959420.2020.1773190
• Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information Communication and Society, 15(5), 739–768. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.670661
• Berkowitz, H., Crowder, L. B., & Brooks, C. M. (2020). Organizational perspectives on sustainable ocean governance: A multi-stakeholder, meta-organization model of collective action. Marine Policy, 118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104026
• Bernroider, E. W. N., Harindranath, G., & Kamel, S. (2022). From connective actions in social movements to offline collective actions: an individual level perspective. Information Technology and People, 35(8), 205–230. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-08-2020-0556
• Boda, C. S., O’Byrne, D., Harnesk, D., Faran, T., & Isgren, E. (2022). A collective alternative to the Inward Turn in environmental sustainability research. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 12(2), 291–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-021-00738-6
• Carmona-Moya, B., Calvo-Salguero, A., & Aguilar-Luzón, M.-C. (2021). Eimeca: A proposal for a model of environmental collective action. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13115935
• Choma, B. L., Hodson, G., Sumantry, D., Hanoch, Y., & Gummerum, M. (2021). Ideological and psychological predictors of covid-19-related collective action, opinions, and health compliance across three nations. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 9(1), 123–143. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.5585
• Cody, K. C., Smith, S. M., Cox, M., & Andersson, K. (2015). Emergence of Collective Action in a Groundwater Commons: Irrigators in the San Luis Valley of Colorado. Society and Natural Resources, 28(4), 405–422. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2014.970736
• Colding, J., Barthel, S., Ljung, R., Eriksson, F., & Sjöberg, S. (2022). Urban Commons and Collective Action to Address Climate Change. Social Inclusion, 10(1), 103–114. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v10i1.4862
• Duque Franco, I., Ortiz, C., Samper, J., & Millan, G. (2020). Mapping repertoires of collective action facing the COVID-19 pandemic in informal settlements in Latin American cities. Environment and Urbanization, 32(2), 523–546. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956247820944823
• Fang, X., Freyer, T., Ho, C.-Y., Chen, Z., & Goette, L. (2022). Prosociality predicts individual behavior and collective outcomes in the COVID-19 pandemic. Social Science and Medicine, 308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115192
• Feiock, R. C. (2013). The institutional collective action framework. Policy Studies Journal, 41(3), 397–425. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12023
• Fischer, E., & Qaim, M. (2012). Linking Smallholders to Markets: Determinants and Impacts of Farmer Collective Action in Kenya. World Development, 40(6), 1255–1268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2011.11.018
• Gilbert, M. (2006). Rationality in collective action. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 36(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0048393105284167
• Hotte, N., Kozak, R., & Wyatt, S. (2019). How institutions shape trust during collective action: A case study of forest governance on Haida Gwaii. Forest Policy and Economics, 107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.05.007
• Iemmi, V. (2021). Global collective action in mental health financing: Allocation of development assistance for mental health in 142 countries, 2000–2015. Social Science and Medicine, 287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114354
• Jagers, S. C., Harring, N., Löfgren, Å., Sjöstedt, M., Alpizar, F., Brülde, B., … Steffen, W. (2020). On the preconditions for large-scale collective action. Ambio, 49(7), 1282–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-019-01284-w
• Larson, A. M., Sarmiento Barletti, J. P., & Heise Vigil, N. (2022). A place at the table is not enough: Accountability for Indigenous Peoples and local communities in multi-stakeholder platforms. World Development, 155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.105907
• Levitt, P., & Lamba-Nieves, D. (2011). Social remittances revisited. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 37(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2011.521361
• Luo, A., Zuberi, M., Liu, J., Perrone, M., Schnepf, S., & Leipold, S. (2021). Why common interests and collective action are not enough for environmental cooperation – Lessons from the China-EU cooperation discourse on circular economy. Global Environmental Change, 71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102389
• Maruyama, T., Kageyama, A., & Kunieda, N. (2022). Region-wide initiative to expand girls’ enrollment in primary education in Niger: A case of collective impact for educational development. International Journal of Educational Development, 91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2022.102580
• Meilasari-Sugiana, A. (2012). Collective action and ecological sensibility for sustainable mangrove governance in Indonesia: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Political Ecology, 19(1), 184–201. https://doi.org/10.2458/v19i1.21726
• Meinzen-Dick, R., Raju, K. V, & Gulati, A. (2002). What affects organization and collective action for managing resources? Evidence from canal irrigation systems in India. World Development, 30(4), 649–666. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(01)00130-9
• Nowlin, M. C. (2022). Who should “do more” about climate change? Cultural theory, polycentricity, and public support for climate change actions across actors and governments. Review of Policy Research, 39(4), 468–485. https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12468
• Pizzi, A., & Brunet, I. (2012). Collective action, self-management, and the social economy. The recovered companies of Argentina . Revista de Estudios Sociales, 42, 57–70. https://doi.org/10.7440/res42.2012.06
• Pugel, K., Javernick-Will, A., Koschmann, M., Peabody, S., & Linden, K. (2020). Adapting collaborative approaches for service provision to low-income countries: Expert panel results. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072612
• Salvador Casara, B. G., Suitner, C., & Jetten, J. (2022). The impact of economic inequality on conspiracy beliefs. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104245
• Sandler, T. (2015). Collective action: fifty years later. Public Choice, 164(3–4), 195–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-015-0252-0
• Scott, C. A., & Silva-Ochoa, P. (2002). Collective action for water harvesting irrigation in the Lerma-Chapala Basin, Mexico. Water Policy, 3(6), 555–572. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1366-7017(02)00017-X
• Shortall, R., Mengolini, A., & Gangale, F. (2022). Citizen Engagement in EU Collective Action Energy Projects. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/su14105949
• Smith, E. M., González, R., & Frigolett, C. (2021). Understanding Change in Social-Movement Participation: The Roles of Social Norms and Group Efficacy. Political Psychology, 42(6), 1037–1051. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12733
• Sposito, M. P. (2010). Transversalities in the study on young people in Brazil: Education, collective action, and culture. Educacao e Pesquisa, 36(SUPPL. 1), 95–106. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1517-97022010000400008
• Steiner, J. J., & Spear, A. M. (2020). Multilevel responses to sexual violence in schools in west Africa. IDS Bulletin, 51(2), 81–96. https://doi.org/10.19088/1968-2020.131
• Tembata, K., & Takeuchi, K. (2018). Collective decision making under drought: An empirical study of water resource management in Japan. Water Resources and Economics, 22, 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wre.2017.11.001
• Turiansky, A. (2021). Collective action in games as in life: Experimental evidence from canal cleaning in Haiti. Journal of Development Economics, 153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2021.102722
• Twine, E. E., Rao, E. J. O., Baltenweck, I., & Omore, A. O. (2019). Are Technology Adoption and Collective Action Important in Accessing Credit? Evidence from Milk Producers in Tanzania. European Journal of Development Research, 31(3), 388–412. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-018-0158-z
• van Ryneveld, M., Whyle, E., & Brady, L. (2022). What Is COVID-19 Teaching Us About Community Health Systems? A Reflection From a Rapid Community-Led Mutual Aid Response in Cape Town, South Africa. International Journal of Health Policy and Management, 11(Special Issue), 5–8. https://doi.org/10.34172/IJHPM.2020.167
• Wlodarczyk, A., Basabe, N., Páez, D., & Zumeta, L. (2017). Hope and anger as mediators between collective action frames and participation in collective mobilization: The case of 15-M. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 5(1), 200–223. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v5i1.471