4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      From consultation toward co-production in science and policy: A critical systematic review of participatory climate and energy initiatives

      ,
      Energy Research & Social Science
      Elsevier BV

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references103

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          A Ladder Of Citizen Participation

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses.

            The evolution of the electronic age has led to the development of numerous medical databases on the World Wide Web, offering search facilities on a particular subject and the ability to perform citation analysis. We compared the content coverage and practical utility of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. The official Web pages of the databases were used to extract information on the range of journals covered, search facilities and restrictions, and update frequency. We used the example of a keyword search to evaluate the usefulness of these databases in biomedical information retrieval and a specific published article to evaluate their utility in performing citation analysis. All databases were practical in use and offered numerous search facilities. PubMed and Google Scholar are accessed for free. The keyword search with PubMed offers optimal update frequency and includes online early articles; other databases can rate articles by number of citations, as an index of importance. For citation analysis, Scopus offers about 20% more coverage than Web of Science, whereas Google Scholar offers results of inconsistent accuracy. PubMed remains an optimal tool in biomedical electronic research. Scopus covers a wider journal range, of help both in keyword searching and citation analysis, but it is currently limited to recent articles (published after 1995) compared with Web of Science. Google Scholar, as for the Web in general, can help in the retrieval of even the most obscure information but its use is marred by inadequate, less often updated, citation information.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Energy Research & Social Science
                Energy Research & Social Science
                Elsevier BV
                22146296
                March 2021
                March 2021
                : 73
                : 101907
                Article
                10.1016/j.erss.2020.101907
                bc39063d-6d2a-4a46-aaee-f08439244f82
                © 2021

                https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-017

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-037

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-012

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-029

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-004

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article