Progress in Planning

435 papers and 15.5k indexed citations i.

About

The 435 papers published in Progress in Planning in the last decades have received a total of 15.5k indexed citations. Papers published in Progress in Planning usually cover Urban Studies (150 papers), Sociology and Political Science (85 papers) and Economics and Econometrics (85 papers) specifically the topics of Urban Planning and Governance (93 papers), Housing, Finance, and Neoliberalism (59 papers) and Urbanization and City Planning (45 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Progress in Planning are Jacek Malczewski, Vanessa Watson, Tore Sager, Petter Næss, John Rogan, Dongmei Chen, Mark Roseland, Bryan H. Massam, A. J. Fielding and Shlomo Angel.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Progress in Planning

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Progress in Planning. 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 Progress in Planning.

Countries where authors publish in Progress in Planning

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Progress in Planning. 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 Progress in Planning with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Progress in Planning more than expected).

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.

Explore journals with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025