Jss 2022051214415767
Jss 2022051214415767
Jss 2022051214415767
net/publication/360544857
CITATIONS READS
2 244
1 author:
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Alexander Baez Hernández on 18 May 2022.
Keywords
Public Administration, Literature Review, Research Trends Scopus, Web of
Science
1. Introduction
Is it possible to formulate a scientific problem without a literature review? In the
Knowledge Society, with the explosion of information and publications in an in-
terconnected world, the inability to acquire useful knowledge is more latent. The
accumulation of icebergs of information with technical language, but with very
In compliance with the first stage, the following question was raised: What is
being investigated with prevalence in the Public Administration? (research niches)
and is based on the assumption of inference that the focus of research on specific
niches is correlational with the publications that address it and the network of
citations and authors that is generated in their environment and constitute areas
of research interest for the scientific community that represents it and, in turn,
visualizes incipient research areas that have not been treated in depth and that
constitute a source for the development of new research niches.
Based on the above, the following objectives are established: to carry out a
bibliometric analysis1 of the research published in the field of public administra-
tion, to determine the seminal articles and classic books, the collaborative net-
works and the main areas of research interest. In addition, for the author it
means the first phase of the configuration process of the doctoral thesis, biblio-
graphic inquiry prior to the definition of the scientific problem to be dealt with,
which must be carried out in every doctoral process. In order to fulfill the pre-
vious objectives, the following work methodology was drawn up.
2. Methodology
The session analyzes Scopus, Web of Science, SicenceDirect, and Google Scholar
as a source of information and in the case of the first two as instruments for bib-
liometric analysis. The potential of VOSviewer as specialized software in the
construction of bibliometric maps of science is exposed and the session closes
with a graphic description of the research process and the format of the article.
Scopus is a multidisciplinary database of abstracts and citations, created in
2004 by the publisher Elsevier. It is currently the largest database in the world
and is updated daily. It contains more than 69 million references, mostly post-1969,
belonging to 21,950 peer-reviewed journals, including 3600 open access journals.
In turn, Scopus includes more than 39 million patents from 5 different agencies,
more than 8 million conference proceedings, 562 book series and more than
150,000 books (Lucas-Domínguez, Sixto-Costoya, Castelló Cogollos, González
de Dios, & Aleixandre-Benavent, 2018: p. 90). It emerged as a European alterna-
tive to the monopoly exercised for more than 40 years by the databases of the
former Institute for Scientific Information (ISI - now Thomson Reuters) in the
area of citation studies in the international scientific context, and since then it
has raised great interest among researchers and academics, both for its docu-
mentary coverage and for its friendly interface and its multiple features (Anda-
lia, Labrada, & Castells, 2010: p. 271). The volume of high-quality scientific in-
formation, the powerful analysis tool Bibliometric, its friendly interface and the
preference of the scientific community place the Scopus academic directory “top”
to carry out the bibliographic review.
Following in the footsteps of the large directories, information from Scopus’
competitive rival, Web of Science (formerly known as Web of Knowledge); de-
scribed in the following terms: Clarivate Analytics Web of Science (WoS) is the
man in their article visualized, a decade earlier, the capacity of the software:
VOSviewer pays special attention to the graphical representation of bibliometric
maps. The VOSviewer functionality is especially useful for displaying large bib-
liometric maps in an easy to interpret way (Jan van Eck & Waltman, 2010: p.
536).
The investigative process started with searches under the phrases: “public ad-
ministration”, “public Administration” in the title and keywords of the investi-
gations in English and Spanish. Bibliometric studies of the “not open access”
databases and the Referential research in search engines. The Scopus database
was exported in RIS format to VOSviewer and the bibliometric maps were made.
The respective analyzes were carried out and those considered relevant accord-
ing to the research question were presented. See Figure 1.
“Unlike what happens with original articles, there is no established organiza-
tion for the review. Consequently, each author will have to elaborate their own”
(Vera Carrasco, 2009: p. 67). On the previous premise and the study of the for-
mats of the ten most relevant review articles exposed as a result of the work, we
opted for a format with some similarity to IMRAD2 under the suggestions of the
editorial note of González & Mattar (2010: p. 1) for its clarity and precision, with
the peculiarity that the results are presented and valued within the same object
of discussion.
Figure 2. Number of publications per year (Source: Bibliometric analysis tools in Sco-
pus).
The global economic powers see public administration as an effective and effi-
cient tool in the economic and administrative management of their nations. The
United States is the leading country in research related to public administration;
his contributions represent about 70% more than his closest follower, Italy. See
Figure 3. This graph was obtained by analyzing the existing information in Sco-
pus, using the criteria and search conditions previously declared.
The academic research institutions that exhibit a higher result in this area of
knowledge are highlighted in Figure 4, obtained in Scopus under the search
conditions previously declared. The Erasmus University of Rotterdam leads the
socialization of the investigations in Public Administration. It is interesting that
the aforementioned University has seven faculties and is focused on four lines of
research: Health, Economy, Government and Culture. Note in emphasis in the
investigation on the operation of the government.
The research areas with the greatest connectivity with the Public Administra-
tion in scientific production are: social sciences, followed by studies in business
and management. And in a third place, studies in computer science. It is valid to
highlight that computer science is finding many research niches in the study of
public administration due to the use of artificial intelligence tools such as Fuzzy
Logic and others, in decision-making. Figure 5 offers percentage values of the
distribution of the contributions detected by lines of research, considering the
criteria and search conditions highlighted previously. The multidisciplinary na-
ture of the specialty is observable and the postulate presented in the doctoral
classes is validated: “The study of public administration seems to have to cover
the executive branch of government, commonly called public, civil or civic ser-
vice, including all subjects of implication within it, all the matters that impact on
him and all the topics on which he impacts”.
The journals registered within the Scopus academic research directory, which
most socialize public administration research are:
1) Public Administration Review
2) International Review of Administrative Sciences
3) Administration and Society
4) International journal of Public Administration
5) Public Administration
These five journals in their order of appearance are the journals that offer the
highest representation of public administration research at an international lev-
el. Figure 6 shows the performance of these magazines in the last 18 years. To
Figure 6. Number of researches published per year, in each of the five most cited reviews
(Source: Bibliometric analysis tools in Scopus).
generate this graph, the contributions from 2000 to 2018 were considered. In to-
tal 3017 documents.
The most prolific author in terms of research in the area of public administra-
tion, in the present century is Ph.D Konstantinos Tarabanis A. From the Uni-
versity of Macedonia in Thessaloníki, Greece, specifically in the Department of
Business Administration. This author has 14 publications of high academic pro-
file in Scopus and more than 1831 citations. Figure 7 illustrates the number of
publications of the most cited authors in this century.
A review of the publication volume on the Web of Science revealed the fol-
lowing: there are 6126 investigations that in their title have the exact phrase:
“Public Administration”. The predominant area is “Government Law” with 3362
scientific contributions. When conducting the same review in ScienceDirect un-
der the same sentences, the following was found: 5077 with a predominance of
Figure 7. Number of publications by each of the most prolific authors on the subject
(Source: Bibliometric analysis tools in Scopus).
Figure 8. Data mining on research titles, and detection of the most recurrent terms and
their networks (Source: Bibliometric Analysis and Data Mining Tool, VOSviewer).
Figure 9. Text mining on keywords, their co-occurrence and networks (Source: Bibli-
ometric Analysis and Data Mining Tool, VOSviewer).
This is because the indexing keywords are established by the editors and/or re-
viewers of the articles published in the different journals.
The information on the authors, extracted from the aforementioned database,
was processed in the VOSviewer software, performing text mining on the afore-
mentioned criterion (author). In this way, Figure 10 illustrates the relationship
of the authors in the density of citations, defined by the size of the spheres. It is
prudent to emphasize that the authors illustrated in this figure do not have to
coincide with the authors shown in Figure 6; since Figure 6, as evidenced, es-
tablishes the hierarchy by number of articles, while Figure 9 establishes it by
number of citations of the literati.
Figure 10. Text mining on author groups (Source: Bibliometric Analysis and Data Min-
ing Tool, VOSviewer).
No. of
Title Authors Year Reference
citations
From responsiveness to
collaboration:
Governance, citizens, Vigoda, E. 2002 317 (Vigoda, 2002)
and the next generation of
public administration
Toward a public
administration theory of Vandenabeele, (Vandenabeele,
2007 217
public service motivation: W. 2007)
An institutional approach
No. of
Title Reference
citations
turbulent first decade of the 21st century, three intellectual themes stood out:
evaluations of new public management, connections between professionals and
academics, and responsiveness to immediate social, economic, and political
challenges. Given the constant demand for usable knowledge, scholars seem to
have neglected attention to the historical context and epistemological founda-
tions of the study.
The publication (Bekkers & Zouridis, 1999: p. 183) states that: Contemporary
Dutch public administration increasingly uses new information and communi-
cation technologies (ICT) to support the provision of its services. As in many
other European countries, Dutch municipalities experiment with one-stop
shops. The national government has also started new experiments. For example,
student loans. Students can use traditional paper forms to communicate with the
agency, but they can also use their smart cards or the Internet. This scientific
contribution studies the use of ICT for the provision of public services. We also
explore the democratic implications of electronic service delivery. While the
quality of public services can be improved with ICTs, their use can also lead to a
departure from traditional constitutional democratic relations between the state
and its citizens. This development may threaten some fundamental legal and
democratic guarantees, which are rarely taken into account by the main political
coalitions.
The study (Corley & Sabharwal, 2010: p. 627) sustains that: previous studies
have confirmed the interdisciplinary nature of the field of public administration
and encouraged the exploration of an important indicator of interdisciplinarity:
research collaboration. One way to explore patterns of collaboration is through
the study of co-authorship among faculty members (Smart & Bayer 1986; Katz
& Martin, 1997). In the field of public administration, studies on academic
co-authorship and productivity are scarce. In this article, we use bibliometric
data to explore patterns of collaboration in relation to productivity levels and the
quality of publications in the field of public administration. Our study finds that
the most productive academics, as well as those with the greatest impact, are less
likely to collaborate than their colleagues. Our results also indicate that there are
gender differences in patterns of collaboration and productivity within the field
of public administration.
The article (Fitzpatrick et al., 2011: p. 821) highlights that intensified globali-
zation, especially the need to learn more about how administrative reforms work
effectively in different cultural contexts, requires public administration research
to adopt perspectives comparative. How well is the field moving in that direc-
tion? The authors of this contribution present the results of a content analysis of
151 scientific publications of comparative study of the public administration
from 2000 to 2009. The results indicate that the comparative research is based on
theory and empirical research, making use of samples intentional and using a
mixture of causality, description and exploration. Methodologically the subject
varies widely, but most of the research focuses on European, Asian and North
American countries. Comparative research is primarily qualitative, making ex-
tensive use of existing data. The authors recommend a better application of
mixed methods, a greater use of culture as a key concept, and the integration of a
wide range of social sciences to encourage more students, professionals, and
academics to think and work comparatively. Three senior comparative scholars
respond, sparking a fascinating and insightful dialogue on this seminal topic in
public administration.
Madison’s managers:
Bertelli, A. M. Johns Hopkins (Bertelli &
Public administration and 2006
Lynn Jr, L. E. University Press Lynn Jr, 2006)
the constitution
Understanding
Routledge Taylor
e-government: Information (Homburg,
Homburg, V. and Francis 2008
systems in public 2008)
Group
administration
change public administration (Painter & Peters, 2010). The text contains 274
pages.
The text of the authors Bertelli, A. M. and Lynn Jr, L. E. entitled “Madison’s
managers: Public administration and the constitution” published in 2006 by the
Johns Hopkins University Press; Combining ideas from traditional thought and
practice and contemporary political analysis, Madison managers present a con-
stitutional theory of public administration in the United States. Anthony Mi-
chael Bertelli and Laurence E. Lynn Jr. argue that managerial responsibility in
the US government depends on official respect for the separation of powers and
a commitment to judgment, balance, rationality, and responsibility in manageri-
Figure 11. The languages that socialize research in Public Administration (Source: Pre-
pared by the author, using the information from all the aforementioned databases and
academic directories).
with a high margin of separation compared to Italy and the United Kingdom.
The Erasmus University of Rotterdam leads the socialization of research in Pub-
lic Administration with a line of research dedicated to the government the re-
search areas with the greatest connectivity in scientific production with the Pub-
lic Administration are: social sciences, business studies and management, and
computer science research. The journals registered within the Scopus academic
research directory, that most socialize public administration research are: Public
Administration Review, International Review of Administrative Sciences, Ad-
ministration and Society, International journal of Public Administration, Public
Administration.
4. Conclusion
The bibliometric analysis from the VOSviewer contributed the following: in the
network of indexing keywords (keyword index), the density of the terms is ob-
served in the publications with a broad predominance of “public administra-
tion”, followed by “management”, “human” and “administrative reform” that
make up four “clusters” with a high degree of connectivity with “comparative
study”, “local government”, “public health administration”, “information tech-
nology” and “information management”. The relationship of the specialty with
the different branches of knowledge is expressed. The dispersion and volume of
the yellow dots is notorious in preprinter publications, which implies relatively
recent research niches (summary of the map, Figure 8). In current research, the
most co-occurring keywords that are used more frequently in the most recent
research are “public administration research”, “tool”, “health”, “principle”. It is
also observed the thematic evolution in the last 20 years (summary Figure 9). In
the specialty the most productive author is Rosembloom, there are other classics
such as: Cristesen, Brewer, Walker and Lodge. Dickinson’s preprinter volume is
remarkable, which makes him a very productive author in it that is also observed
the collaborative networks of these authors (summary Figure 10).
The detection and subsequent analysis of seminal articles, specialty articles
and bibliographic review articles, the most relevant books grouped in descend-
ing order by number of citations, and the bibliometric study allowed us to an-
swer the question: What is investigated in Public Administration? Four areas of
research interest were visualized: the social projection of Public Administration
practices, study and implementation of contemporary techniques and technolo-
gies in the strategies of conception of the public administration process, the im-
provement of the effectiveness of the public administration, the complexity of
the processes within the framework of the networks of action and interests.
Emerging niches are the relationships between social phenomena rooted in
the human being and their effect on public administration, such as fraud ex-
plained through current tools, globalized phenomena of public administration,
such as the influence of models from one country to another, and instability.
That characterizes current performances from the perspective of generational
change and the new society. As a general rule, these incipient investigative nich-
es penetrate other branches that impact or are related to the Public Administra-
tion in both directions.
Conflicts of Interest
The author declares no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this pa-
per.
References
Andalia, R. C., Labrada, R. R., & Castells, M. M. (2010). Scopus: La mayor base de datos
de literatura científica arbitrada al alcance de los países subdesarrollados. Revista
Cubana de Información en Ciencias de la Salud, 21, 270-282.
Bekkers, V. J. J. M., & Zouridis, S. (1999). Electronic Service Delivery in Public Adminis-
tration: Some Trends and Issues. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 65,
183-195. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852399652004
Bernardo Peña, L. (2010). Proyecto de indagación. La revisión bibliográfica.
https://www.javeriana.edu.co/prin/sites/default/files/La_revision_bibliografica.mayo_.2
010.pdf
Bertelli, A. M., & Lynn Jr, L. E. (2006). Madison’s Managers: Public Administration and
the Constitution. Johns Hopkins University Press.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84898101026&partnerID=40&
md5=52a004dbe7d715830218a339b350fe76
Bourgon, J. (2011). A New Synthesis of Public Administration: Serving in the 21st Cen-
tury. McGill-Queen’s University Press.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84898266564&partnerID=40&
md5=b13844406c171cfadaa5671b1481593b
Corley, E. A., & Sabharwal, M. (2010). Scholarly Collaboration and Productivity Patterns
in Public Administration: Analysing Recent Trends. Public Administration, 88, 627-648.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2010.01830.x
Cuccurullo, C., Aria, M., & Sarto, F. (2016). Foundations and Trends in Performance
Management. A Twenty-Five Years Bibliometric Analysis in Business and Public Ad-
ministration Domains. Scientometrics, 108, 595-611.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1948-8
Dragoş, D. C., & Neamţu, B. (2007). Reforming Local Public Administration in Romania:
Trends and Obstacles. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 73, 629-648.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852307083464
Dunleavy, P., & Hood, C. (1994). From Old Public Administration to New Public Man-
agement. Public Money and Management, 14, 9-16.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09540969409387823
Fitzpatrick, J., Goggin, M., Heikkila, T., Klingner, D., Machado, J., & Martell, C. (2011). A
New Look at Comparative Public Administration: Trends in Research and an Agenda
for the Future. Public Administration Review, 71, 821-830.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02432.x
Fuhrmann, C. (2011). Policing the Roman Empire: Soldiers, Administration, and Public
Order. Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199737840.001.0001
Gaus, J. M. (2006). Reflections on Public Administration. University of Alabama Press.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84898191147&partnerID=40&
md5=52d5c3151bda43392827eb2bd10c2eca
Gómez-Luna, E., Fernando-Navas, D., Guillermo, A.-M., & Betancourt-Buitrago, L. A.
(2014). Metodología para la revisión bibliográfica y la gestión de información de temas
científicos, a través de su estructuración y sistematización. DYNA, 81, 158-163.
https://doi.org/10.15446/dyna.v81n184.37066
González T, M., & Mattar V, S. (2010). IMRaD or IMRyD Format for Scientific Articles?
Revista MVZ Córdoba, 15, 1895-1896.
Goris, G., & Adolf, S. J. (2015). Utilidad y tipos de revisión de literatura. Ene, 9, No. 2.
https://doi.org/10.4321/S1988-348X2015000200002
Gusenbauer, M. (2019). Google Scholar to Overshadow Them All? Comparing the Sizes
of 12 Academic Search Engines and Bibliographic Databases. Scientometrics, 118,
177-214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2958-5
Henman, P. (2010). Governing Electronically: E-Government and the Reconfiguration of
Public Administration, Policy and Power. Palgrave Macmillan.
https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230248496
Homburg, V. (2008). Understanding E-Government: Information Systems in Public Ad-
ministration. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203885642
Hoseth, A. (2011). Google Scholar. The Charleston Company, 12, 36-39.
https://doi.org/10.5260/chara.12.3.36
Jan van Eck, N., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software Survey: VOSviewer, a Computer Pro-
gramfor Bibliometric Mapping. Scientometrics, 84, 523-538.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
Joshi, A. (2016). Comparison between Scopus & ISI Web of Science. Journal Global Val-
ues, 7, 1-11.
Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. (1997). What Is Research Collaboration? Research Policy, 26,
1-18.
King, C. S., Feltey, K. M., & Susel, B. O. (1998). The Question of Participation: Toward
Authentic Public Participation in Public Administration. Public Administration Re-
view, 58, 317-326. https://doi.org/10.2307/977561
Lane, J. E. (2005). Public Administration and Public Management: The Principal-Agent
Perspective. Routledge.
Li, K., Rollins, J., & Yan, E. (2018). Web of Science Use in Published Research and Review
Papers 1997-2017: A Selective, Dynamic, Cross-Domain, Content-Based Analysis.
Scientometrics, 115, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2622-5
Lucas-Domínguez, R., Sixto-Costoya, A., Castelló Cogollos, L., González de Dios, J., &
Aleixandre-Benavent, R. (2018). Bibliometría e indicadores de actividad científica (IX).
Indicadores cienciométricos en Scopus. Análisis de las publicaciones sobre pediatría.
Función “analyze search results” y “citation overview”. Pediatrics, Perinatology and
Child Health. Acta Pediatrica Espanola, 76, 90-96.
Merino-Trujillo, A. (2011). Como escribir documentos científicos (Parte 3). Artículo de-
revisión. Salud en Tabasco, 17, 36-40.
O’Toole Jr., L. J. (1997). Treating Networks Seriously: Practical and Research-Based
Agendas in Public Administration. Public Administration Review, 57, 45-52.
https://doi.org/10.2307/976691
Painter, M., & Peters, B. G. (2010). Tradition and Public Administration. Palgrave Mac-
millan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230289635
Puppim de Oliveira, J. A., Jing, Y., & Collins, P. (2015). Public Administration for Devel-
opment: Trends and the Way Forward. Public Administration and Development, 35,
65-72. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1716
Raadschelders, J. C. N. (2011). Public Administration: The Interdisciplinary Study of Gov-
ernment. Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199693894.001.0001
Raadschelders, J. C. N., & Lee, K. H. (2011). Trends in the Study of Public Administra-
tion: Empirical and Qualitative Observations from Public Administration Review,
2000-2009. Public Administration Review, 71, 19-33.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02303.x
Riggs, F. W. (1962). Trends in the Comparative Study of Public Administration. Interna-
tional Review of Administrative Sciences, 28, 9-15.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002085236202800102
ScientDirect. (2018).
https://www.elsevier.com/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/53528/0597-ScienceDirect-Facts
heet-v4-HI-no-ticks.pdf
Smart, J. C., & Bayer, A. E. (1986). Author Collaboration and Impact: A Note on Citation
Rates of Single and Multiple Authored Articles. Scientometrics, 10, 297-305.
Spicer, M. W. (2010). In Defense of Politics in Public Administration: A Value Pluralist
Perspective. University of Alabama Press.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84896148301&partnerID=40&
md5=7c6c86f81a4208f4a9d3ecc8cff4c4ec
Toro, A. G. (2002). Revisión bibliográfica: Usos y utilidades. Matronas profesión, 3,
25-31.
Vandenabeele, W. (2007). Toward a Public Administration Theory of Public Service Mo-
tivation: An Institutional Approach. Public Management Review, 9, 545-556.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030701726697
Vera Carrasco, O. (2009). Cómo Escribir Artículos de Revisión. Revista Médica La Paz, 15,
63-69.
Vigoda, E. (2002). From Responsiveness to Collaboration: Governance, Citizens, and the
Next Generation of Public Administration. Public Administration Review, 62, 527-540.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6210.00235
Vilanova, J. C. (2012). Revisión bibliográfica del tema de estudio de un proyecto de
investigación. Radilogía, 54, 108-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rx.2011.05.015