A Bibliometric Review of Urban Liveability and Social Exclusion

A Bibliometric Review of Urban Liveability and Social Exclusion

Adewale Yemi Yekeen, Siti Hajar Misnan

Urban and Regional Planning, Faculty of Built Environment and Surveying, UTM, Malaysia 

DOI: https://doi.org/10.51584/IJRIAS.2025.10020046

Received: 10 February 2025; Accepted: 13 February 2025; Published: 19 March 2025

ABSTRACT

The growing need for urbanisation has continue to spur the need for the exploration of urban liveability and social exclusion. However, issues on social inclusivity are a matter of concern as people migrate to urban cities. This study is a bibliometric analysis highlighting the need for a comprehensive understanding of urban dynamics by revealing a growing body of research on the complex relationship between social exclusion and urban liveability. Scopus and Web of Science were the databases deployed for this review.  The review offers insights into the changing conversation surrounding urban surroundings by identifying popular subjects and research approaches. While the analysis identified the advancements in the discipline, it also highlights understudied areas that need more research. These deficiencies include the requirement for interdisciplinary approaches, a wider range of viewpoints, more scholarly works in African countries, and thorough research to address the complexity present in urban environments. The results highlight the significance of inclusive urban development and contribute to existing knowledge by showcasing the potential problems related to social exclusion and urban liveability. This review concludes by synthesizing the body of knowledge, pointing out areas of research interest, and recommending further research into the field of urban studies.

Keywords: Urban Liveability, Social Exclusion, Urban Studies, Environments, Bibliometric Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Urban liveability and social exclusion have become increasingly critical areas of study in an era characterized by rapid urbanization and growing socio-economic complexities (Lowe et al., 2020). As urban areas expand and diversify, understanding the intricate relationships between elements like affordable housing programs, efficient public transportation, and green spaces that foster a high quality of life and those that marginalize certain societal groups is imperative (Anciaes & Jones, 2020). Urban liveability encompasses a multifaceted framework, including housing, infrastructure, employment opportunities, environmental sustainability, social inclusion, accessibility, and cultural amenities, all of which directly impact the well-being and satisfaction of urban residents (Lloyd et al., 2016). Conversely, social exclusion manifests as systemic marginalization, limiting individuals or groups from fully participating in socio-economic, political, and cultural dimensions of life. This phenomenon extends beyond financial hardship to include barriers to social connections, opportunities, and community engagement (van Gent et al., 2018).

As cities globally face increased urbanisation, understanding the intricacies of urban liveability becomes vital for politicians, urban planners, and scholars. Urban liveability is a dynamic term that develops as society and technology advance and priorities change. For those working to build economically dynamic, socially inclusive, environmentally sustainable, and aesthetically pleasing cities, it provides a framework of guidance for urban planners, legislators, and communities. Among the essential elements of urban liveability are housing and shelter, infrastructure and services, employment and economic opportunities, social and cultural amenities, environmental sustainability, safety and security, social inclusion, accessibility, and mobility.

The importance of Urban liveability cannot be over emphasized. It  is important because it has a significant effect on people who live in urban areas in terms of their general well-being, level of contentment, and quality of life. With the world’s population moving more and more into cities, sustainable urban development must comprehend and improve urban liveability. Other key areas which Urban liveability is important include quality of life, health and well-being, economic prosperity, social cohesion, environmental sustainability, attractiveness for residents and talent, resilience to challenges, urban planning and policy, innovation, and creativity.  Summarily, the importance of urban liveability encompasses larger societal, economic, and environmental aspects in addition to the human experience. Prioritising liveability can help cities become more resilient and sustainable by attracting and keeping residents, promoting economic growth, and improving the general well-being of their citizens.

The systematic process by which people or groups are marginalised, disadvantaged, or prohibited from fully participating in different elements of social, economic, political, and cultural life within a particular society is known as social exclusion. In contrast to poverty, which is typically quantified in terms of money, social exclusion refers to more comprehensive types of marginalisation and discrimination that goes beyond financial hardship to include social connections, opportunities, and involvement in community life (van Gent et al., 2018). For instance, a low-income individual may have access to financial aid but still face social exclusion due to racial discrimination or lack of transport access. In addition to meeting immediate material needs, overcoming social exclusion entails tearing down structural obstacles and advocating for laws and procedures that uphold equality, inclusivity, and social cohesiveness. It calls for a thorough comprehension of the underlying causes and mechanisms of exclusionary processes in addition to a dedication to building a society that is more just and equal.  Understanding the complex interactions between many elements that lead to the marginalisation of people or groups in metropolitan environments is necessary to contextualise social exclusion in these contexts. Urban landscapes provide a unique backdrop for the emergence of social exclusion due to their richness and complexity. Crucial factors to consider while placing social exclusion in urban settings are diversity of populations, spatial inequality, economic disparities, access to services, discrimination and prejudice, gentrification and urban development, social networks and community bonds, policy and governance, cultural and recreational opportunities (Alderton et al., 2019).

Social exclusion in urban environments is a problem that needs to be addressed because cities can unintentionally contribute to inequality and marginalisation. In summary, a thorough analysis of the socioeconomic, cultural, and spatial dynamics at work is necessary to comprehend and solve social exclusion in urban environments. To establish targeted interventions, policies, and programmes that promote social inclusion and create more equitable and integrated urban settings, it is imperative to acknowledge the contextual elements that contribute to exclusion.

This bibliometric review aims to systematically explore the literature on urban liveability and social exclusion, identifying trends, gaps, and methodological approaches that have shaped the discourse. By utilizing advanced bibliometric techniques, the study evaluates the evolution of research, key contributions, and geographical focus areas, providing a robust understanding of the intersection between these critical urban issues. It provides a thorough knowledge of the relationship between urban liveability and social exclusion using bibliometric analysis (Soh et al., 2023). It is paramount to use bibliometric analysis to examine urban liveability and social exclusion to obtain a comprehensive understanding of the research environment, trends, and approaches in these fields (Darko et al., 2019). The following are some of the main arguments in favour of using bibliometrics in the study of social exclusion and urban liveability: quantitative assessment of research trends, mapping research networks and collaborations, identification of key journals and publications, quantifying citation impact, comparative analysis of methodologies, identification of research gaps, tracking global and regional perspectives, evidence-based policy, and planning. In conclusion, the rigour and depth of research in the areas of urban liveability and social exclusion are improved using bibliometrics in these studies. Ultimately, the study offers actionable insights for policymakers, urban planners, and researchers, contributing to the development of inclusive, sustainable, and resilient urban environments.

DATA AND METHODS

Data Collection

The data for this study were collected from the Scopus database, a widely recognized repository for scholarly literature across multiple disciplines. Among the most comprehensive, effective, and impartial databases for literature searches are Scopus and Web of Science, with Scopus having a broader coverage with more current publications (Odubela et al., 2023; Aghaei Chadegani et al., 2013). These two databases’ visibility and citation counts place journals according to their importance, prominence, and influence. Sciencedirect.com was used to search literature on the study’s topics after choosing the database.The search query, “urban liveability and social exclusion,” was designed to capture a broad spectrum of studies related to the subject. This query yielded 753 publications spanning the period from 1972 to 2025, reflecting the temporal evolution of research in this field. The dataset included journal articles, book chapters, and review papers, which were selected for their relevance and contribution to the discourse. The groups and connections between scientists, articles, and organisations were examined using science mapping. The data obtained from researchers and search terms paint a detailed picture of the most current developments in an intellectual investigation of the issue (Xu et al., 2018).

Data cleaning and refinement processes were undertaken to eliminate duplicates and irrelevant entries. Bibliographic metadata such as author names, affiliations, publication years, and keywords were extracted and organized for further analysis. These refined data formed the basis for the bibliometric analysis, ensuring the accuracy and reliability of the study’s findings

Data Analysis and Synthesis

This study employed a bibliometric analysis to systematically review published research on urban liveability and social exclusion. Bibliometric analysis provides a quantitative and statistical approach to examining academic literature, enabling the identification of trends, key contributors, and research gaps (Soh et al., 2023). These techniques enable a more thorough and in-depth examination of the knowledge gathered through time (Odubela et al., 2023). The methodological framework consisted of three key phases: data selection, bibliometric mapping, and network analysis.

In the data selection phase, articles were sourced from the Scopus database, known for its comprehensive and multidisciplinary coverage. The search terms “urban liveability” and “social exclusion” were used to extract relevant studies, resulting in a dataset of 753 publications. The bibliographic data were refined to include only peer-reviewed articles, book chapters, and reviews to ensure the quality and relevance of the analysis.

The second phase involved bibliometric mapping using VOSviewer software. This tool was utilized to construct and visualize bibliometric networks, including keyword co-occurrence, author collaborations, and country affiliations. VOSviewer’s ability to analyze relationships between terms, authors, and institutions enabled a detailed exploration of thematic clusters and research trends. Finally, network analysis was conducted to evaluate connections between research entities, revealing collaborative patterns and influential contributors. The analysis also examined citation impact, document types, and funding sources to provide a comprehensive understanding of the research landscape in this domain.

Choosing articles from representative database storage, focusing on them, and enhancing the bibliographic data are the main phases in employing the bibliometric technique. Choosing the programmes and determining how to examine the data are also part of the phase. One of the stages in database knowledge discovery (KDD) is data mining. Data mining’s primary goal is to identify patterns such as clusters, rules for association, and outliers through automatic and semi-automatic processing of enormous datasets. A rapidly expanding multidisciplinary area called scientific mapping has its roots in information science and technology (Papi, 2018). The development and application of computer technologies for the full visualisation, analysis, and modelling of a broad range of scientific and technological activity is known as science mapping. This interdisciplinary field has roots in computer science’s knowledge discovery, data mining, information visualisation disciplines, and traditional library information science’s scientometrics and citation analysis domains. Numerous data maps and tools are being used by analysts, academicians, and researchers from various fields (Maier et al., 2020; Chen et al., 2014).

VOS viewer was used to construct, visualise, and explore maps based on any sort of network data, even though it is primarily designed for the investigation of bibliometric networks. It was used to assess how connected the words are by looking at how far the objects are from one another on the map made by VOS viewer. The more closely connected two terms are to one another, the further apart they are from one another. The cluster analysis provides another illustration of the diversity of the knowledge base’s content analysis. If two articles are in the same cluster, it suggests that they are closely related based on the cost and differences between them. This suggests that a cluster influences a research stream based on commonalities.

RESULTS

The bibliometric analysis revealed several key trends and insights into the research landscape of urban liveability and social exclusion.The findings are discussed in relation to the results of the Scopus analyser and VOS viewer, which were used to evaluate the information acquired from the database.

Current/Status of Studies on Urban Liveability and Social Exclusion

Figure 1 illustrates the development of research on these topics from 1972 to 2025. During the initial period from 1972 to 1992, there was little to no research on urban liveability and social exclusion. This limited academic focus may be attributed to a global population that was relatively balanced with available resources, fluctuating between 3.84 billion and 5.47 billion people (Worldometer, 2023).From 1997 onward, there was significant growth in research on these topics, driven by increased urbanization and heightened awareness of socio-economic disparities. Despite this progress, a sharp decline in research output was observed in 2022, possibly reflecting disruptions in academic activity or shifts in research priorities.

Figure 1: Annual publication trends of documents (1972–2025)

Keywords Analysis

The keyword matrix provides a clear image of a knowledge area by revealing the subjects covered and how they are conceptually related and ordered (Xiao et al., 2019; Ghansah et al., 2022). The 191 words with ten (10) or more occurrences were chosen from the total keywords. Keyword analysis identified “social exclusion” and “urban areas” as the most frequently occurring terms, highlighting their centrality in the discourse. The visualization of keyword clusters revealed four thematic areas: socio-economic disparities, urban policy and governance, environmental sustainability, and community inclusion. These clusters underscored the multidimensional nature of urban liveability and its intersections with social exclusion. Figure 2 lists terms that were extracted from the database and displays their occurrences in various studies as well as clusters, links, and total link strength. It has 191 items, 4 clusters, 7452 links, with a total link strength of 20,165. A list of keywords were taken from the database and their occurrences in various research, as well as clusters, links, and total link strength. These clusters were grouped after deleting keywords that are present in multiple clusters. Figure 2 shows the many clusters of terms, each of which is depicted by a distinct colourwhich demonstrate the connections between the keywords. According to the analysis, the keyword with the most occurrences overall was social exclusion, which had 425 occurrences. The Urban area came in second with 145 instances.  This is because of the study topic and these words are closely related.

Figure 2: Keywords Visualisation

Authors

The authors influence on the subject is as shown (Figure 3). The Figure 3 lists the top 10 authors and the quantity of their documents.As shown the author with the  greatest number of documents is Philipson C., making him the most prolific contributor.

Figure 3: Authors per Documents

Countries/Nations

The analysis of document types showed that journal articles dominated the dataset, comprising 76.3% of the publications, followed by book chapters and reviews. Urban Studies and Cities were the most prominent sources, reflecting their focus on urban and social issues. Affiliation analysis revealed that University College London was the leading institution in terms of research output, further emphasizing the dominance of developed countries in this field. The United Kingdom emerged as the leading country in terms of publications and citations (Figure 4 and Table 1). Despite the global relevance of the topic, research contributions from African countries were disproportionately low, indicating a critical gap in the geographical representation of studies.

The network of nations that cooperate in science makes it easier to determine which countries are involved in a given field of study (Darko et al., 2019). Using VOS viewer, a network was built to track down nations, and the affiliations they had with one another. Table 1 illustrates the number of documents, citations, average citations, and total link strength of different countries. The Scopus analyser also showed the total number of documents produced by the top 10 countries, as seen in Figure 4. The linkages between studies from different countries are shown in Figure 5, demonstrating that there is some degree of collaboration between academics and research institutes from the numerous nations included in the visualisation.

Table 1: Countries

Figure 4: Interrelationship between studies from different countries

Figure 5: Country by documents

Document Types

Figure 6 displays the various types of documents included in the analysis that were taken from the Scopus database. Journal articles made up 76.3% of the documents analysed, while conference papers came in at 2.6%, book chapters at 10.1%, reviews at 5.6%, conference reviews at 0.1%, erratum at 0.1%, letter at 0.1%, other at 0.1% and notes at 0.4%.

Figure 6:  Document by Types

Document Sources

Figure 7 shows the sources of the documents that were investigated. Urban studies and Cities served as the key sources of information for this research topic between 1994 and 2023.  Nevertheless, a few journals started to publish in the region, and as time went on, newer journals started to displace older ones. The most read publication on urban liveability and social exclusion is “Urban Studies.” While it continued to develop, other journals’ publication growth varied, as can be seen in the identical Figure.

Figure 7: Document Sources

Affiliations

The document by affiliation is depicted in Figure 8. The affiliation with the most documents was found to be University College London, while fewest records were found to be University of Sheffield. Also, it was found that all these affiliations were from European countries, with very few from North or South America while non was found for Africa.

Figure 8: Document by Affiliation

Funding Sponsors

The financing sponsor’s document is depicted in Figure 9. It was noted that the European Regional Development Council funded the fewest documents, while the Economic and Social Research Council supported the most. Additionally, it was found that all these sponsors were from European countries, with few from North and South America, but none from Africa. This information will help the prospective researchers seeking grants or funding from top sponsors in the subject area.

Figure 9: Document by Funding Sponsor

Subject Areas

Social Science dominated the subject area with 48%, followed by Environmental Science (10%), Art and Humanities (8.2%), Medicine (8%), Earth and Planet (4.2%), Engineering (4.1%), Business Management (3.4%), Economics (3.3%), Psychology (2.3%), Energy (1.6%) and other (6.3%) as shown in Figure 10. This suggests that the study of urban liveability and social exclusion is more of Social and Environmental sciences than any other subject area.Not withstanding,there is need to promote more collaboration with other disciplines to foster interdisciplanry research in the area of urban liveability and social inclusion. Some recent studies from Scopus database on Urban liveability have been summarised as shown in Table 2.

Figure: Document by Subject Area

Table 2 An Overview of Some Studies from the Scopus Database

DISCUSSIONS

The dynamic relationship between social exclusion and urban liveability highlights a significant tension in the planning and development of contemporary urban environments. Social exclusion, which is defined by systemic marginalization and restricted access to essential resources, services, and opportunities, has a profound impact on urban liveability. In contexts where spatial inequality remains entrenched, individuals or groups frequently encounter obstacles to securing housing, education, healthcare, and economic engagement. This exclusion engenders areas of deprivation within urban settings, thereby undermining initiatives aimed at cultivating livable and equitable urban environments. The outcomes of this investigation underscore the imperative for integrative methodologies that confront the fundamental causes of exclusion, including economic inequalities, discriminatory policies, and insufficient infrastructure, while simultaneously promoting inclusivity in urban design and governance.

Moreover, urban liveability incorporates aspects such as accessibility, mobility, safety, environmental sustainability, and cultural vibrancy. Nevertheless, in scenarios where social exclusion prevails, the distribution of these elements becomes markedly uneven. For example, gentrification and urban renewal initiatives, despite their intentions to enhance liveability, frequently result in the displacement of vulnerable populations, thereby intensifying exclusion. Addressing these challenges necessitates a paradigmatic shift towards participatory urban planning that incorporates diverse perspectives, ensuring that policies and designs advocate for both liveability and inclusiveness.

The research further elucidates the crucial function of policymaking and governance in reconciling the disparity between social exclusion and urban liveability. Policies that emphasize social inclusion, encompassing affordable housing initiatives, equitable access to public services, and anti-discrimination legislation, can alleviate exclusionary practices. Furthermore, the cultivation of community networks and the reinforcement of social cohesion are vital strategies for improving the quality of life for marginalized groups.

In summary, addressing social exclusion is intrinsically linked to the realization of urban liveability. Urban centers must strike a balance between growth and development while prioritizing equity and inclusion to foster environments wherein all individuals can prosper. This dual objective demands urban planning, public health, environmental science, and social policy inquiry, innovative policy frameworks, and cross-sector collaboration to ensure that urban spaces are both inclusive and conducive to liveability.

Gap Identification

The review identifies several deficiencies within the extant literature concerning social exclusion and urban liveability. Firstly, there exists a dearth of interdisciplinary research that comprehensively explores the interconnectedness of social, economic, environmental, and infrastructural aspects of urban liveability. Predominantly, current studies concentrate on discrete factors rather than the systemic interactions that sustain exclusion. Secondly, geographical imbalances in scholarly attention are apparent, with insufficient focus on developing regions where social exclusion issues are most pronounced. Thirdly, there is a scarcity of longitudinal research that monitors the impacts of urban policies on exclusion and liveability over time. Lastly, the absence of community-centered investigations that integrate the lived experiences of marginalized populations impedes the formulation of practical, context-sensitive interventions.

Highlights of Findings

Trends and Key Topics: The bibliometric analysis elucidates “social exclusion” and “urban areas” as the most prevalent keywords, thereby accentuating the escalating academic interest in the confluence of exclusionary practices and urban dynamics.

Geographical Distribution: Scholarly investigation is predominantly concentrated within developed nations, with the United Kingdom emerging as the foremost contributor in terms of publications and citations. The limited scholarly contributions from African countries underscore the exigent need for contextually relevant studies within these regions.

Document Sources and Affiliations: The journals Urban Studies and Cities are preeminent in this field, while University College London has established itself as a significant center for research endeavors.

Research Gaps: This analysis elucidates the imperative for interdisciplinary methodologies, varied geographical perspectives, and community-oriented approaches to effectively address the multifaceted nature of urban liveability and exclusion.

Limitations

The analysis of the study is only applicable to works published in English while the possibility of the exluision of pertinent studies written in different languagescould have impaired the results from this study. Also, because bibliometric analysis is based on published works, publication bias may have an impact as those with significant results are more likely to be published, while those with negative or null results might not. This bias may impact how the literature on social exclusion and urban liveability is presented generally. Similarly, the fact that this analysis is restricted to the Scopus database could have an impact since there are other databases not considered.

CONCLUSION

This study integrates existing scholarship on social exclusion and urban liveability, providing critical insights into prevailing research trends, identified gaps, and methodological frameworks. The findings highlight the dire need to confront exclusionary practices in order to improve urban liveability, particularly in developing regions where disparities are markedly evident. To cultivate socially inclusive urban environments, there is a requisite for cohesive, evidence-based policies that prioritize equity in conjunction with urban development initiatives. Future research endeavors should prioritize interdisciplinary partnerships, community-centric investigations, and longitudinal studies to cultivate a holistic understanding of how urban settings can simultaneously promote inclusivity and liveability.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declared that they have no connections or financial stakes in the research presented in this publication.

Data Availability Statement

The data supporting this study’s findings are available in the manuscript.

REFERENCES

1. Aghaei Chadegani, A., Salehi, H., Md Yunus, M. M., Farhadi, H., Fooladi, M., Farhadi, M., & Ale Ebrahim, N. (2013). A Comparison Between Two Main Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases. Asian Social Science, 9(5), 18–26. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n5p18
2. Alderton, A., Davern, M., Nitvimol, K., Butterworth, I., Higgs, C., Ryan, E., & Badland, H. (2019). What is the Meaning of Urban Liveability for a City in a Low-to-Middle-Income Country? Contextualising liveability for Bangkok, Thailand. Globalization and Health, 15(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-019-0484-8
3. Allam, Z., & Jones, D. S. (2019). Attracting investment by introducing the city as a special economic zone: a perspective from Mauritius. Urban Research and Practice, 12(2), 201–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2019.1607017
4. Anciaes, P., & Jones, P. (2020). Transport Policy for Liveability – Valuing The Impacts on Movement, Place, and Society. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 132(November 2019), 157–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.11.009
5. Badland, H., Foster, S., Bentley, R., Higgs, C., Roberts, R., Pettit, C., & Giles-Corti, B. (2017). Examining associations between area-level spatial measures of housing with selected health and wellbeing behaviours and outcomes in an urban context. Health and Place, 43(November 2016), 17–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2016.11.003
6. Bhalla, A., & Lapeyre, F. (1997). Social Exclusion: Towards An Analytical and Operational Framework. Development and Change, 28(3), 413–433. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-7660.00049
7. Bolleter, J. (2016). Background noise: a review of the effects of background infill on urban liveability in Perth. Australian Planner, 53(4), 265–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/07293682.2016.1245201
8. Bush, J. (2020). The role of local government greening policies in the transition towards nature-based cities. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 35(January), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2020.01.015
9. Chen, C., Dubin, R., & Schultz, T. (2014). Science Mapping. 4171–4184. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-14666-5888-2.ch410
10. Darko, A., Chan, A. P. C., Huo, X., & Owusu-Manu, D. G. (2019). A Scientometric Analysis and Visualization of Global Green Building Research. Building and Environment, 149(December 2018), 501–511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.12.059
11. Evans, P., Bynner, J., Klasen, S., & Magrab, P. (1999). Social Exclusion and Children – Creating Identity Capital: Some Conceptual Issues and Practical Solutions. 1–21.
12. Ghansah, F. A., Owusu-Manu, D. G., Ayarkwa, J., Darko, A., & Edwards, D. J. (2022). Underlying Indicators for Measuring Smartness of Buildings in The Construction Industry. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, 11(1), 126–142. https://doi.org/10.1108/SASBE-05-2020-0061 Lloyd, K., Fullagar, S., & Reid, S. (2016). Where is the ‘Social’ in Constructions of ‘Liveability’?
13. Exploring Community, Social Interaction and Social Cohesion in Changing Urban Environments. Urban Policy and Research, 34(4), 343–355. https://doi.org/10.1080/08111146.2015.1118374
14. Lowe, M., Arundel, J., Hooper, P., Rozek, J., Higgs, C., Roberts, R., & Giles-Corti, B. (2020). Liveability Aspirations and Realities: Implementation of Urban Policies Designed to Create Healthy Cities in Australia. Social Science and Medicine, 245(November 2019), 112713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112713
15. Maher, J. (2020). Better Urban Drainage for Liveable Cities – Creating blue green infrastructure through science translation, collaboration and multi-stakeholder governance. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 588(5). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/588/5/052005
16. Maier, D., Maier, A., Aşchilean, I., Anastasiu, L., & Gavriş, O. (2020). The Relationship Between Innovation and Sustainability: A Bibliometric Review of The Literature. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12104083
17. Mayer, K. B. (1958). Report on the World Social Situation. American Sociological Review, 23(2), 238. https://doi.org/10.2307/2089039
18. McGreevy, M., Harris, P., Delany-Crowe, T., Fisher, M., Sainsbury, P., & Baum, F. (2019). Can health and health equity be advanced by urban planning strategies designed to advance global competitiveness?
19. Lessons from two Australian case studies. Social Science and Medicine, 242(March), 112594. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112594
20. Odubela, C. A., Yaacob, H., Warid, M. N. B. M., Karim, K. J. B. A., & Zakka, W. P. (2023). A Bibliometric Analysis of Rejuvenators in Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(11), 28575–28596. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-25265-5 Papi, A. (2018). Big Data and Data Science : A Scientometrics Approach. May, 233–240.
21. Paynter, M. (2004). Social and Economic Inclusion an International Bibliography Compiled by. August, 1–87.
22. Soh, A. N., Puah, C. H., & Arip, M. A. (2023). A Bibliometric Analysis on Tourism Sustainable Competitiveness Research. Sustainability (Switzerland), 15(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021035
23. Sun, S., Wang, C., Zhang, Y., Li, D., & Wei, C. (2022). Housing and portfolio choice: Evidence from urban China. Cities, 131(January), 104035. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.104035
24. van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2013). VOSviwer Manual. Leiden: Univeristeit Leiden, January. http://www.vosviewer.com/documentation/Manual_VOSviewer_1.6.1.pdf
25. van Gent, W., Hochstenbach, C., & Uitermark, J. (2018). Exclusion as urban policy: The Dutch ‘Act on Extraordinary Measures for Urban Problems.’ Urban Studies, 55(11), 2337–2353. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098017717214
26. Xiao, X., Skitmore, M., Li, H., & Xia, B. (2019). Mapping Knowledge in The Economic Areas of Green
27. Building Using Scientometric Analysis. Energies, 14(15). https://doi.org/10.3390/en12153011 Xu, G., Zhong, J., & Shi, X. (2018). Influence of Graphene 0xide in a Chemically Activated Fly Ash. Fuel, 226(April), 644–657. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.04.033
28. World Health Organisation (2016)
29. Worldometer (2023)