Countries where authors publish in Planning Perspectives
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Planning Perspectives. 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 Planning Perspectives with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Planning Perspectives more than expected).
Fields of papers published in Planning Perspectives
This network shows the impact of papers published in Planning Perspectives. 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 Planning Perspectives.
About Planning Perspectives
The 1.3k papers published in Planning Perspectives in the last decades have received a total of 9.8k indexed citations . Papers published in Planning Perspectives usually cover Urban Studies (438 papers), Architecture (32 papers), Archeology (124 papers), Finance (95 papers) and Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law (106 papers) specifically the topics of Urbanization and City Planning (238 papers), Urban Planning and Governance (174 papers), Urban and Rural Development Challenges (75 papers), Housing, Finance, and Neoliberalism (70 papers), Cultural Heritage Management and Preservation (62 papers), Political and Economic history of UK and US (51 papers), Urban Planning and Landscape Design (48 papers) and American Environmental and Regional History (44 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Planning Perspectives are André Sørensen, Lucy E. Hewitt, Ambe J. Njoh, Stephen Essex, Brian Chalkley, Ceri Peach, Javier Monclús, Robert Home, Liora Bigon and Stephen V. Ward.
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.