EAAE – ARCC INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE

June, 10-13,2020 | Valencia

Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4995/EAAE-ARCC-IC-2020.2020.XXXX

What do we talk about when we research the

city? Academic publishing in urban studies
Débora Domingo-Calabuig1

1
Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia, Spain

ABSTRACT: When we talk about urban studies, we focus on the physical environment that gives support
to social, political and economic relationships, and therefore the approach is usually transdisciplinary and
diverse. Research projects are broadly communicated to the scientific community through academic
publications, and particularly through journals. Therefore, these periodicals on urban studies have
concentrated on specialized scopes and have been included in indexes and databases according to their
relevance. The academia has agreed to trust journals for measuring the research impact, but the question
is raised about its general visibility in terms of real knowledge transfer.
This paper maps the scientific production about the city through the periodicals of recent years: we census
a total of 682 journals related to urban studies on the Web of Science, Scopus, ERIH PLUS and the DOAJ
platforms. We aim to know which journals support what kind of works, how different areas of knowledge
intersect in them, which countries produce one or another type of research, and what study methods are
used in research about the city. In addition to the quantitative results, the objective is to make a critical
reading about the impact of what is published. In this regard, a final comparison is also made by putting
in parallel the articles included in the most relevant journals and the research projects about the city and
its particular problems that have been encouraged by the last Framework Program of the European Union.
The results show a clear fragmentation of the urban studies subject area and a traditional framing of the
topics, with little presence of emerging issues. Besides, the research funds percentage is lower than in
other knowledge areas. Finally, this study reveals a very limited open access to research that undoubtedly
determines its visibility.

KEYWORDS: urban studies; research journals; architectural research; research impact.

INTRODUCTION: TALKING, RESEARCHING, PUBLISHING ABOUT THE CITY

The ability to select a good topic is something that researchers strive for their entire academic
career. Whether it is for the opportunity to belong to a reputable laboratory or to receive a PhD grant, the
thematic fields are essentially in reach, according to our knowledge on the subject. In the urban studies,
different disciplines intersect that reflects the diversity and complexity of urban problems and solutions.
Such as the themes outlined in this conference, the city has many sides: experiential, participative,
narrative, history, technical, etc. These perspectives interact in a research proposal and contribute to
improving our cities, but: what do we want to research about the city and why? How is this research
generated and communicated? To answer these questions, this work follows research on urban studies
through academic publications and maps, although in a biased way, what we talk about when we research
the city.
Research results are transmitted in several ways in the academic world. Any policy paper from any
institution establishes the difference between written output (articles, books, conference proceedings) and
non-written production (patents, exhibitions, documentaries) (ACSA, 2017; ACSA, 2019). However, and
because of their immediacy in the processes and their impact on the university community, the articles
published in scientific journals reach a growing relevance. In terms of research quality evaluation, and
regardless of our position in this regard, the journals are classified in indexes with impact factors while
other contributions meet less regulated criteria. High-impact journals are the priority spaces when

2020, Universitat Politècnica de València

 EAAE – ARCC INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
June, 10-13,2020 | Valencia
Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4995/EAAE-ARCC-IC-2020.2020.XXXX

choosing how to communicate a project’s results, among other things, because they have an impact on
the careers’ promotion (Clemens et al. 1995; Rawat and Meena 2014).
We shall admit that this study is not without limitations due to the range of the questions asked and their
restricted answers, but we aim to offer at least some information that can foster new reflections.

1.0 THE STUDY SAMPLE: JOURNALS ON URBAN STUDIES

Within the vast panorama of urban studies journals, we select the indexes generally best valued in terms
of research results, those published on the Web of Science (WoS) platforms (by Clarivate Analytics) and
Scopus (by Elsevier). These scientific information services elaborate specific databases (Science Citation
Index Expanded, SCIE; Social Science Citation Index, SSCI; Arts & Humanities Citation Index, A&HCI;
Emerging Sources Citation Index, ESCI; Scopus) and journals’ lists (Journal Citation Report, JCR;
SCImago Journal Rank, SJR), whose quality contributions are commonly accepted thanks to the review
process and openly communicated editorial policies. In this specific case, and given the direction that we
want to go in with this study, we add to the display the data of the European Reference Index for the
Humanities and Social Sciences (ERIH PLUS) and the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). For
each of the information sources, we take as a base of this study the available data according to its
mediums: web pages, reports, and databases.
Thus, this study includes the articles published in the journals whose categorization corresponds to Urban
Studies of the WoS, Scopus, ERIH PLUS and DOAJ platforms: we census a total of 682 journals. We
establish a temporary boundary between 2013 and today: these six years exceed the usual 5- and 3-year
periods in impact calculations and “h” indices, and include the entire H2020 framework program with which
we will try to contrast the results. The sample is not limited to geography (according to the publisher’s
location or according to the author’s affiliation) so as not rule out possible intercontinental collaborations.
The working method is of a statistical type, although bibliometric indicators are alternated with qualitative
analysis of representative cases. The data interpretation should be understood within the margins of error
produced by the sample and its analysis. Also, not all databases provide the same indicators, so certain
readings are made only with specific information sources. Consequently, the analyses and interpretations
are more from the perspective of the urban and architectural researcher than from experts in library
science.

2.0. WHERE DO WE TALK ABOUT THE CITY?

When locating the publications for this study, we must point out that each of the databases used has a
different cataloguing of knowledge areas. In the case of the Master Journal List of the WoS, the two
categories “Urban Studies” and “Regional & Urban Planning” belong to the Social Sciences area. Scopus
associates the code 3322 to ‘Urban Studies’ that is included in the “Social Sciences & Humanities” subject
area. The ERIH PLUS has recently implemented the Field of Research (FOR) system from the Australian
and New Zealand Standard Research Classification (ANZSRC) but uses a 2-level structure for 2 and 4-
digit codes: “1205 - Urban & Regional Planning” is included in “12 - Built Environment & Design”. Finally,
the DOAJ follows the categorization of the Library of Congress: the contributions are equally distributed
among “Cities. Urban geography” (in the “Geography, Anthropology, Recreation” section), and “Urban
groups. The city urban sociology” (in the “Social Sciences” section).
A first observation is related to the scarce presence of these journals in the global publications’ landscape
since they do not exceed 0.5% of the total periodicals, except in the case of ERIH PLUS where it barely
reached 4.5% despite being an archive of social sciences and humanities publications. Furthermore,
Urban Studies journals are published primarily in Britain and the United States, although this data varies
significantly according to indexes: WoS and Scopus reflect an Anglo-Saxon domain pattern, while in ERIH
PLUS and DOAJ they are strongly positioned in Continental Europe and South America (Fig. 1). The
countries that publish the most on urban studies are the United Kingdom with 104 journals and the United
States of America with 67, followed by Brazil, Spain and Poland, with 62, 57 and 41 periodicals
respectively.

2020, Universitat Politècnica de València

 EAAE – ARCC INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
June, 10-13,2020 | Valencia
Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4995/EAAE-ARCC-IC-2020.2020.XXXX

Figure 1: Geographical distribution of the journals related to Urban Studies. Sources: WoS, Scopus, ERIH PLUS,
DOAJ. Online data, January 2020.

3.0. WHAT DO WE TALK ABOUT WHEN REFERRING TO THE CITY?

In the same way that we talk about the city under multiple disciplinary approaches, journals are not
classified exclusively into categories similar to urban studies but instead, belong simultaneously to other
thematic areas. Visualizing these areas overlapping (according to each database classification) allows us
to demonstrate a first nature of research on the city (Fig. 2).

Figure 2: Disciplinary intersects of journals on Urban Studies: simultaneity with other thematic categories in a) WoS;
b) Scopus; c) ERIH PLUS. Sources: WoS, Scopus, ERIH PLUS. Online data, January 2020.

2020, Universitat Politècnica de València

 EAAE – ARCC INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
June, 10-13,2020 | Valencia
Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4995/EAAE-ARCC-IC-2020.2020.XXXX

The diagram for the 107 journals in the WoS sample indicates a prevailing number of publications in the
category “Social Sciences, General” and in “Environmental Studies, Geography & Development”. Also, it
is especially significant that only 3 of the 157 journals are included in the Arts & Humanities Citation Index
of the WoS. In the case of the 154 Scopus journals, the largest number of publications has to do with the
category “Geography Planning & Development”, followed by “Architecture”. The map of disciplines that
are extracted from the 353 ERIH PLUS journals is especially detailed since they are all devoted to the
humanities, as corresponds to the index itself.i
The journals of the study sample have published a great volume of texts in the last six years, but only the
contributions considered as research articles are here under study. In that respect is an upward trend in
the number of items in the last six years (from 6500 to 9000 in the case of the WOS) and the dominance
of the WoS and Scopus products that offer 6 more times articles per year than ERIH PLUS and DOAJ.
We analyse some bibliometric indicators of the most representative journals to get a general idea of the
research topics. We are interested in which journals publish more articles and what they focus on (Fig. 3).
A keywords analysis is carried out in the highest impact journals, though admitting that the Impact Factor
(WoS), or the SJR and the SNIP (SCImago Journal Rank and Source-Normalized Impact Paper, Scopus)
are related to the research visibility in the academic community (Garfield 1999; Colledge 2010). The
journals that publish the greatest number of articles per year are coincident in WoS and Scopus, but if we
look for the most productive journals in ERIH PLUS, the publications are completely different.ii The DOAJ
does not offer this data.

Figure 3: Journals with the greatest number of articles published and their most frequent keywords from 2013 to 2019.
Sources: WoS, Scopus, ERIH PLUS. Online data, January 2020.

A sub-sample of the WoS and Scopus is carried out so we can attempt a visualization of the articles
published in high-impact journals.iii By combining the “Urban Studies” and the “Regional and Urban
Planning” categories in the WoS, we get 109 indexed journals; in Scopus 154 journals are included in the
category “Urban Studies” of SJR. If we cross both data, the resulting amount is 216 journals, 45 of which
are simultaneously in both indices, and 26 of them are in the first quartile of one or both of the two rankings
(JCR and SJR).
The keywords of the 10,888 published articles between 2013 and 2019 in these 26 journals of greater
impact show research mainly based on planning –its development, its policies, its economic factors–, an
important presence of residential issues, and a relevant number of studies located in China, the United
States and the United Kingdom (Fig. 4).

2020, Universitat Politècnica de València

 EAAE – ARCC INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
June, 10-13,2020 | Valencia
Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4995/EAAE-ARCC-IC-2020.2020.XXXX

Figure 4: Most frequent keywords in articles published in high-impact journals related to Urban Studies from 2013 to
2019. Sources: WoS, Scopus. Online data, January 2020.

4.0. WHO RESEARCHES THE CITY?

From the previous samples, we extract two additional data related to the authorship or the promotion of
the research projects on urban studies. It is relevant to know who is researching the previously indicated
subjects and who is financing them (Fig. 5).

Figure 5: Authors’ affiliation (left) and funding sponsors (right) in the 10,888 articles published in the 26 highest-impact
journals on Urban Studies from 2013 to 2019. Left higher values: United States 36%, China 16%, United Kingdom
13%, Australia 10%. Right higher values: China 10%, United States 7%, United Kingdom 4%, Australia 1,6%. Sources:
WoS, Scopus. Online data, January 2020.

It is surprising to discover that only 30.4% of the contributions acknowledge a funding source, especially
if we relate these articles to research projects awarded in open calls. The funded projects are selected
based on, among other things, their expected impact in solving real problems. This fact would show that
approximately 70% of research in urban studies is dedicated to topics “not driven” by administrative

2020, Universitat Politècnica de València

 EAAE – ARCC INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
June, 10-13,2020 | Valencia
Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4995/EAAE-ARCC-IC-2020.2020.XXXX

interests. However, this same data of not-funded research decreases to values lower than 30% in areas
of knowledge such as Chemical Engineering.
When the articles of our sample were analysed, some of the keywords –those in blue in Figure 6– referred
to research methodologies. We list here these methods by identifying them with their source titles (Fig.
6):

Figure 6: Frequency of keywords related to research methods in the 10,888 articles published in the 26 highest-impact
journals on Urban Studies from 2013 to 2019. Sources: Scopus. Online data, January 2020.

5.0. HOW DO WE RESEARCH THE CITY?

As an addition to the parameters observed so far, this work explores some of the articles in these journals
to analyse how research is done and how it is shown. The differences between some journals are not
significant: these are works based on empirical analyses that attempt to quantify the results to build
general frameworks for debate. The manuscripts are fundamentally written with little graphic material.
Last but not least, we also make visible the vast quantity of research published through “paying walls”.
The figures for open access publications in Urban Studies are neither better nor worse than the rest of
the disciplines, but they do not seem to account, for example, for the Open Access mandate in H2020
(European Commission 2017), or similar policies that exist in many European countries. In our sample,
the open access articles only represent 7.67%, and if we extend the analysis to all the journals included
in the WoS, the result rises to 20.37%. We can now understand why the DOAJ only included 677 articles
on urban studies in 2019 compared to the 9,065 ones indexed by the WoS.

6.0. WHAT IMPACT DOES RESEARCH ON THE CITY GENERATE?

Research impact is a thoughtful and complex topic. The open calls for project proposals generally ask
researchers to specifically state their expected results and what their impact will be. We understand the
academic impact as the proof of new knowledge within the scientific community; we mean by “social
impact” or “knowledge transfer to society” what has been improved in social problems thanks to an
investigation.
In the first case, the academic impact is measured through citations. This parameter is not always realistic
since only the citations in indexed journals are counted. Alternatively, it can be more inclusive when any
mention of media work is computed, as it happens with Google Scholar.
The scientific impact of our sample’s articles is obviously among the highest level since the journals are
located in the first quartile of the JCR (WoS) and SJR (Scopus) lists. The data show how some articles
have had up to 289 citations in the last 180 days (and 1793 citations since 2013), and this highlights the
thematic link between one contribution and another, that is, the construction of knowledge in a consistent
research path.
It is not easy to track the impact of research, because the transfer of knowledge can be done in very
diverse ways. However, we can outline a possible approach by glancing at the list of urban studies projects
granted by the European Union (EU) framework programs (FP) in recent years. The FP has substantially
determined the research in terms of financing since its inception. In FP8, known as Horizon 2020 (H2020),
the Societal Challenges pillar supported research that “target society and citizens” and included areas
such as “Demographic Change”, “Smart Green and Integrated Transport”, “Climate action and
environment”, “Inclusive, innovative & reflective societies” and “Secured Societies”. Almost all of these
issues come from similar denominations since FP4 (1994), although it should be noted that some are

2020, Universitat Politècnica de València

 EAAE – ARCC INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
June, 10-13,2020 | Valencia
Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4995/EAAE-ARCC-IC-2020.2020.XXXX

newly created: the term “security” appears for the first time in FP7 (2006), and the concern for social
integration is incorporated only in H2020 (2013) (Reillon 2017). The preliminary structure of Horizon
Europe includes in the pillar of “Global Challenges and European Industrial Competitiveness” various
clusters with the aforementioned areas. This structural evolution shows an intention to obtain
breakthrough solutions coming from multi-disciplinary collaborations. Regardless, the funded projects of
these open calls are endowed with financial resources and must demonstrate the impact of their results
through academic publications and dissemination actions.
For almost three decades now, the CORDIS database offers information on projects and their results,
classifying these by areas and sub-areas: 12 projects are included in the programs. The results always
mention two chapters: “deliverables” (reports, pilots, websites) and publications (books, conference
proceedings, but mostly peer-reviewed articles).
The subjects of smart city, sustainable energy, urban regeneration and social cohesion emerge through
these analyses (Fig. 7). One can find in their web sites the impact that each of the projects has had on
social contexts: specific actions in the consortium cities, webinars and press releases.

Figure 7: Funded research projects where urban studies are involved in the sub-programs H2020. Sources: CORDIS
and Open-H2020 observatory, January 2020.

CONCLUSION: WHO DO WE TALK TO WHEN WE RESEARCH THE CITY?

If we were to come up with a headline, we could say that we speak little when we research the city: other
knowledge areas are more productive in writing. We do it in diversified forums that do not offer a simple
and a global overview because urban studies have a multidisciplinary nature and a contribution might be
included in similar categories and under different names. Mostly, our research is not supported with
funding –other subject areas are much more financed– and therefore, the issues we address on our own
are unlikely to be coincident with our institutions’ interests. Besides, we talk ‘in a closed circuit’ and what
we say remains in a very small area, so we may not see much beyond this. Finally, we talk about topics
that do not seem to correspond fully with the emerging issues of interest, at least if a comparison is made
between the most cited articles and the funded projects entrusted for applied results.
This conclusion would support existing studies that warn of the black-boxing of academic communication
and its evaluation, thus paraphrasing the black-boxing that Latour coined when referring to the
development of scientific research (Bruni and Magaudda 2017). The high-impact journals on urban studies
(those that are more relevant for the research evaluation) are less visible to the scientific community.
Therefore, the topics discussed in them do not need to be directly linked to real needs.
Finally, this study shows that it is not an easy task to monitor the transfer of knowledge. Who do we talk
to when we investigate the city? We speak for few, but it has repercussions on many and it is difficult to
trace the path because the track is lost. Recipients of the research results are the general public (citizens),
the service providers (transportation, energy), the management decision-makers (community
organizations, and private businesses), and the policy decision-makers, but the contact details with this

2020, Universitat Politècnica de València

 EAAE – ARCC INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
June, 10-13,2020 | Valencia
Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4995/EAAE-ARCC-IC-2020.2020.XXXX

target audience are lost beyond the results reports of a project. The questions about the effectiveness of
the knowledge transfer asked in other areas (Lavis et al. 2003) could help to reflect on our urban studies.

REFERENCES
ACSA. 2019. ACSA White Paper on Assessing the Quality of Architectural Research & Scholarship.
Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture.
ACSA. 2017. Research and Scholarship for Promotion, Tenure, and Reappointments in Schools of
Architecture. White Paper. Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture.
Bruni, A., Magaudda, P. 2017. “Opening the Black-Box of Academic Research: Assessment, Publishing
and Critical Perspectives.” Teknokultura 14, no. 1: 57–65. https://doi.org/10.5209/TEKN.54674.
Clarivate Analytics. “Web of Science Group.” Accessed February 7, 2020.
https://clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup/.
Clemens, E. S., Powell, W.W., McIlwaine, K., Okamoto, D. 1995. “Careers in Print: Books, Journals, and
Scholarly Reputations.” American Journal of Sociology 101, no. 2 (September): 433–94.
https://doi.org/10.1086/230730.
Colledge, L., Moya-Anegón, F., Guerrero-Bote, V., López-Illescas, C., El Aisati, M., Moed, H.F. 2010.
“SJR and SNIP: Two New Journal Metrics in Elsevier’s Scopus.” Serials 23, no. 3: 215–21.
https://doi.org/10.1629/23215.
Elsevier B.V. “Scopus.” Accessed February 7, 2020. https://www.scopus.com/home.uri.
European Commission. “CORDIS.” Accessed February 7, 2020. https://cordis.europa.eu/en.
European Commission. 2017. “Open Access & Data Management - H2020 Online Manual.” Accessed
February 13, 2020. https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/docs/h2020-funding-guide/cross-cutting-
issues/open-access-dissemination_en.htm.
DOAJ. “Directory of Open Access Journals.” Accessed February 7, 2020. https://doaj.org/.
Garfield, E. 1999. “Journal Impact Factor: A Brief Review.” Cmaj 161, no. 8: 979–80.
Lavis, J. N., Robertson, D., Woodside, J.M., McLeod, C.B., Abelson, J. 2003. “How Can Research
Organizations More Effectively Transfer Research Knowledge to Decision Makers?” The Milbank
Quarterly 81, no. 2: 221–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0009.t01-1-00052.
Norwegian Centre for Research Data. “ERIH PLUS.” Accessed February 7, 2020.
https://dbh.nsd.uib.no/publiseringskanaler/erihplus/.
Reillon, V. 2017. EU Framework Program for Research and Innovation. Evolution and Key Data from FP1
to Horizon 2020 in View of FP9. European Union. https://doi.org/10.2861/60724.
Rawat, S., Meena, S. 2014. “Publish or Perish: Where Are We Heading?” Journal of Research in Medical
Sciences 19, no. 2 (February): 87–89.

ENDNOTES

i
The DOAJ does not allow to extract this type of information and therefore it is not here considered.
ii
However, all journals included in ERIH PLUS are also in Scopus. The differences are due to the
cataloguing or to the greater number of articles published in WoS and Scopus.
iii
ERIH PLUS and DOAJ do not order their journals according to quantitive value. Equally, WoS journals
included exclusively in the Arts & Humanities Citation Index cannot be considered either in this sub-
sample as they have not an impact factor.

2020, Universitat Politècnica de València