Mapping of Research in the Field of Forest Therapy-Related Issues: A Bibliometric Analysis for 2007–2021

Abstract

Exposure to forest environments promotes human health. The number of relevant studies in this area has increased rapidly. However, an overall review of relevant analyses from the perspectives of bibliometrics and visualization is lacking. A scientometric analysis of 2,545 publications from 2007 to 2021 via the Web of Science database was conducted to identify the knowledge structure and frontiers objectively. The publications were subsequently analyzed in terms of the distribution of journals and countries, citation bursts, major subject areas, and evolutionary stages. The findings showed that the knowledge foundation of forest therapy was multidisciplinary with most published in the fields of environmental sciences and ecology but lacking input from social disciplines. The research hotspots evolved from the early focus on individual benefits obtained from nature to increasing attention on human well-being at the social-ecological scale. More rigorous experiments with strict randomized controlled trials and blinding are needed to accommodate the trend of forest therapy toward non-pharmacological treatments. According to Shneider’s four-stage theory, forest therapy research is in the third stage of the scientific research process. More future studies utilizing novel technologies and decision-making frameworks to solve practical issues are needed for introducing health into policies and promoting human well-being.

Bibliometric Analysis of Nature-Based Therapy Research

“…Considering the results obtained from the distribution of publications by country, the USA emerged as the country with the highest number of publications, in line with the findings of other bibliometric studies on the subject [44], as it is a country with a large number of researchers who increase scientific production in most fields [64][65][66][67]. The USA doubled the number of publications of the second most prolific country, South Korea, followed by Australia and Canada, with China in the sixth position, in contrast to a study related to forest therapies, where it was the second most prolific country.…”

“…It is unknown whether this could be related to the COVID-19 pandemic, based on the need for outdoor activities or as a response to population confinement and/or the psychological problems that this entailed. Other bibliometrics on similar topics also reported a massive increase in publications in 2020 [44]. Among the findings of this study was that forest and adventure therapies were of greater interest to researchers than other nature-based therapies, according to the number of publications related to and keywords in the set of documents.…”

“…The first article published on the subject, "The Significance of the Forest for the Therapeutic Value of the German Low Mountain Range", was published in 1937 [61]. A similar bibliometric study was found for publications related to forest therapy [44], but it only considered the period between 2007 and 2021 and did not apply the traditional laws of bibliometrics [48,49,51,52,55,59]. The existence of various bibliometrics with similar themes indicates an interest in the field, in line with the increase in the number of researchers interested in nature-based therapies as a means of escaping from urban routines.…”

“…The second, much more influential cluster, featuring Ikei, Miyazaki, and Song, with 8 papers and 597 citations, was connected to the fourth most influential author, Kagawa, with 4 papers and 382 citations. This cluster explored the applications and characteristics of forest therapy, which is also highlighted by bibliometrics in this area [44]. This cluster of researchers is the most influential in forest therapies [7].…”

“…Thus, such studies can help identify research trends; help researchers make informed decisions; and assess researchers, institutions, and countries' performance in terms of scientific production and impact [43]. To the best of our knowledge, only one bibliometric study on forest therapies or forest bathing exists but using a different methodology [44]. Furthermore, no bibliometric analysis of nature-based therapies has been conducted in a broad sense, nor have there been any that use traditional bibliometric laws.…”