Countries where authors publish in Pacific studies
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Pacific studies. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by papers published in Pacific studies with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Pacific studies more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Pacific studies. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Pacific studies.
About Pacific studies
The 292 papers published in Pacific studies in the last decades have received a total of 1.6k indexed citations . Papers published in Pacific studies usually cover Geography, Planning and Development (86 papers), Demography (136 papers), Cultural Studies (32 papers), Anthropology (30 papers) and General Psychology (3 papers) specifically the topics of Island Studies and Pacific Affairs (132 papers), Pacific and Southeast Asian Studies (84 papers), Climate Change, Adaptation, Migration (35 papers), Asian American and Pacific Histories (30 papers), Anthropological Studies and Insights (15 papers), Migration and Labor Dynamics (10 papers), Indigenous Studies and Ecology (9 papers) and Australian History and Society (8 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Pacific studies are Peter Larmour, David Hyndman, C. B. Macpherson, Ian C. Campbell, Donald H. Rubinstein, Eugène Ogan, Colin Filer, W. Kempf, Niko Besnier and Mike Evans.
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive
bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global
research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include
incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and
delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in
Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.