{"title":"Environmental Social Work as a Polycentric Praxis Field: A Bibliometric and Full-Text Topic Modeling Analysis (1966-2025).","authors":"Mel Gray, Emrah Akbas, Qian Meng","doi":"10.1080/26408066.2026.2678613","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study examined the long-term development of environmental social work as a field characterized by strong political-normative claims about what social work ought to do in relation to environmental crises, alongside a comparatively limited cumulative empirical evidence base concerning actual professional practice and impact.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Using a mixed bibliometric and full-text topic-modeling design, the study analyzed peer-reviewed ESW scholarship retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Bibliometric analyses covered 761 publications (1966-2025), while full-text topic modeling and lexical-semantic analyses were conducted on 716 extractable full-text articles (1972-2025) using Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA), Structural Topic Modeling (STM), and bibliometric science-mapping techniques implemented in R.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The findings suggest that environmental social work expanded additively rather than paradigmatically, with successive discourses and vocabularies accumulating without displacing earlier ones. This pattern produced wide thematic dispersion, conceptual plurality, and multiple centers of gravity without clear paradigmatic dominance.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Four dominant framing styles ‒ crisis-emergency, normative justice-advocacy, pedagogical-competency, and ecological-relational-spiritual ‒ coexisted across the literature but remained weakly integrated. Overall, the study argues that environmental social work is best understood as a polycentric, evolving political-normative praxis field rather than a coherent theoretical sub-discipline.</p>","PeriodicalId":73742,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evidence-based social work (2019)","volume":" ","pages":"1-30"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evidence-based social work (2019)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/26408066.2026.2678613","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: This study examined the long-term development of environmental social work as a field characterized by strong political-normative claims about what social work ought to do in relation to environmental crises, alongside a comparatively limited cumulative empirical evidence base concerning actual professional practice and impact.
Method: Using a mixed bibliometric and full-text topic-modeling design, the study analyzed peer-reviewed ESW scholarship retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Bibliometric analyses covered 761 publications (1966-2025), while full-text topic modeling and lexical-semantic analyses were conducted on 716 extractable full-text articles (1972-2025) using Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA), Structural Topic Modeling (STM), and bibliometric science-mapping techniques implemented in R.
Results: The findings suggest that environmental social work expanded additively rather than paradigmatically, with successive discourses and vocabularies accumulating without displacing earlier ones. This pattern produced wide thematic dispersion, conceptual plurality, and multiple centers of gravity without clear paradigmatic dominance.
Discussion: Four dominant framing styles ‒ crisis-emergency, normative justice-advocacy, pedagogical-competency, and ecological-relational-spiritual ‒ coexisted across the literature but remained weakly integrated. Overall, the study argues that environmental social work is best understood as a polycentric, evolving political-normative praxis field rather than a coherent theoretical sub-discipline.
目的:本研究考察了环境社会工作作为一个领域的长期发展,其特点是强烈的政治规范主张,即社会工作应该在环境危机中做些什么,以及有关实际专业实践和影响的相对有限的累积经验证据基础。方法:采用混合文献计量学和全文主题建模设计,研究分析了来自Web of Science Core Collection、Scopus和谷歌Scholar的同行评议ESW学术成果。文献计量学分析涵盖了761篇出版物(1966-2025),同时利用潜在狄利克雷分配(LDA)、结构主题建模(STM)和文献计量学科学映射技术对716篇可提取的全文文章(1972-2025)进行了全文主题建模和词汇语义分析。研究结果表明,环境社会工作的扩展是累加式的,而不是范式式的,连续的话语和词汇积累而不是取代先前的。这种模式产生了广泛的主题分散、概念多元化和多重重心,但没有明确的范式主导地位。讨论:四种主要的框架风格-危机-紧急,规范正义-倡导,教学-能力和生态-关系-精神-共存于文献中,但仍然弱整合。总的来说,该研究认为环境社会工作最好被理解为一个多中心的、不断发展的政治规范实践领域,而不是一个连贯的理论子学科。