<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

HAL
open science

# Foundations and conditions of green jobs in developing economies: Systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis

Alexandre Mathieu

► To cite this version:

Alexandre Mathieu. Foundations and conditions of green jobs in developing economies: Systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis. Development and Sustainability in Economics and Finance, 2024, 2-4, pp.100016. 10.1016/j.dsef.2024.100016. hal-05022697

HAL Id: hal-05022697

https://hal.science/hal-05022697v1

Submitted on 4 Dec 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# Foundations and conditions of green jobs in developing economies: Systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis

Alexandre MATHIEU

* This work was published in the journal *Development and Sustainability in Economics and Finance*. Please cite it as follows:

Mathieu, A. (2024). *Foundations and conditions of green jobs in developing economies: Systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis*. Development and Sustainability in Economics and Finance, vol. 2-4, 100016. ISSN 2950-5240. DOI:10.1016/j.dsef.2024.100016

* The data employed in this study is housed on a public repository :

Mathieu, A. (2023). "BDGJ - Bibliometric Dataset on Green Jobs". *Recherche Data Gouv*, v1. DOI: 10.57745/4LOIZB

* A data paper elaborating on the data construction methodology is also published :

Mathieu, A. (2024). "Bibliometric dataset (1995-2022) on green jobs: A comprehensive analysis of scientific publications". *Data in Brief*, 52, pp. 109845. DOI: 10.1016/j.dib.2023.109845

## Abstract

This article examines the challenges and opportunities for implementing Green Jobs (GJs) in developing economies. A systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis of 516 scientific articles reveals a tension between short term economic aspirations and long-term sustainable goals. The objective is to identify the conditions under which green jobs can effectively contribute to sustainable development in these economies. In the current context marked by multiple shocks, the concept of green jobs is perceived as a potential response to crises. However, debates about its definition persist, particularly in developing economies that are often
overlooked and that question both the “green” and “jobs” components of GJs. The pervasive
informal sector in these economies presents both a challenge and an opportunity for the green
transition. The success of this transition is contingent upon substantial investments in human
capital, as well as a long-term vision that harmoniously integrates economic and sustainabil-
ity considerations. Emerging small-scale technologies appear as transformative opportunities,
especially in these contexts. However, for green jobs to be genuinely effective, they must be
supported by a robust economic and legislative framework. The study concludes by empha-
sizing the underrepresentation of developing economies in the English-language literature on
green jobs, underscoring the need for a more inclusive approach.

***Keywords :*** Green jobs ; Developing economies ; Systematic Literature Review ; SLR ; Resilience ; Sustainability

Classification JEL : F63 ; F66 ; I25 ; J21 ; J24 ; J46 ; O1 ; Q01

Recent global crises, such as the 2008–2009 recession and the COVID-19 pandemic, have ex-
acerbated global unemployment and inequalities. These crises have impacted different sectors
and regions unevenly, raising significant questions about the transition towards a green, in-
clusive, and sustainable economy, and vigorously reopens the debate on an alternative to
conventional growth.

In response to these interconnected crises, the valorization of Green Jobs (GJs) emerges as a
viable solution, at least in the short term (Aceleanu, 2015, Van der Ree, 2019). Green jobs,
defined in relation to direct employment in the fields of pollution control, energy efficiency,
and waste management, and more broadly, in connection with the professions of agriculture,
industry, and services that contribute to the preservation and restoration of environmental
quality (Kouri and Clarke, 2014), while providing decent working conditions (Ryder, 2017),
present several advantages. Indeed, these jobs are generally labor-intensive, mainly local, and
less likely to be relocated (Wei et al., 2010). They require more intensive use of high-level
cognitive and interpersonal skills, generally associated with higher levels of formal education,
increased professional experience, and ongoing training (Consoli et al., 2016).

Several concepts have emerged as alternatives to conventional economic growth, notably the
ideas of a “green economy” or “green growth”. Although these terms are often used inter-
changeably in scientific and political discourses, they actually represent distinct approaches
(Merino-Saum et al., 2020). Discussions on a sustainable transition towards green growth
seek to reconcile the increase in productivity and labor wages with an improvement in the
energy and environmental efficiency of production. This would occur alongside a less vulner-
able economic specialization, allowing for a more equitably distributed wealth accumulation
(Krugman, 2023). However, these perspectives face critiques notably from growth critics, who
highlight the biophysical limits of conventional economic growth, the inability to decouple
GDP from environmental pressures, social constraints related to the contradiction between
infinite growth and finite resources, as well as the political limitations of a model whose pri-
mary objective is not to reduce unemployment, inequalities, or improve well-being (Parrique,
2019). In sum, green growth mainly focuses on economic growth issues, often at the expense of
environmental and climate considerations (Merino-Saum et al., 2020). Conversely, the green
economy views economic growth as a means rather than an end in itself, and proposes a more
balanced approach to socio-economic and environmental issues. There are several thematic
currents around this concept, ranging from neoclassical economics, incrementalist perspectives,
to more transformative and sustainable visions (Merino-Saum et al., 2020). These two differ-
ent approaches are contrasting perspectives on sustainable transition, each having distinct
objectives.

The literature dedicated to GJs, expanding for over a decade, currently suffers from a lack of consensus regarding the approaches and definitions of the concept (Dordmond et al., 2021). This gap of general agreement leads to a shortage of available data and poses problems for the operationalization of the concept (Sulich and Zema, 2018, Bowen, 2019, Deschenes, 2013, Zugravu, 2011). It is also noteworthy that developing economies are frequently overlooked in existing analyses. This omission raises questions about the compatibility of the GJs concept in varied contexts, such as those of the Northern and Southern countries. A lack of adaptation and operationalization of the concept could explain the low adoption of the concept in the contexts of developing economies. Moreover, the main factors of this lack of consensus around the concept are the diversity of definitional approaches and the absence of coherent objectives related to the GJs concept. Regarding the latter point, two distinct objectives are in competition. On one hand, the creation of GJs is often envisioned as a lever to boost economic growth and reduce poverty in the short term, while having beneficial effects on the environment and climate (Rosiek, 2014, Fien and Guevara, 2013). These immediate objectives align with a more conventional economic model. On the other hand, a long-term perspective emerges, illustrated by concepts such as the green economy. This perspective encompasses social effects, such as inclusion and social cohesion, as well as sustainable development. This tension between short-term economic growth objectives and more sustainable and inclusive long-term aspirations raises a crucial question: which objective should be prioritized? This complex debate highlights the need for a more unified vision to address the issue of GJs on a global scale.

In light of the plethora of perspectives on the optimal environmental transition and the inherent
challenges in formulating a comprehensive difficulty definition of GJs, it is pertinent to examine
the recurring themes and theses associated with this concept. This analysis aims to elucidate
the core dimensions at play and assess the adaptability of this concept across diverse contexts.
Based on a database composed of 516 scientific articles dealing with GJs, this study seeks to
shed light on the conceptual foundations on which this term rests. Furthermore, it examines the
circumstances under which the concept of GJs may be pertinent in the context of developing
economies.

This study employs a combined methodology comprising quantitative bibliometric analysis
and qualitative text analysis. A database has been constituted, comprising a substantial
number of scientific articles in English, primarily sourced from the Scopus and Web of Science platforms. In order to ensure the rigor of the selection of articles, the PRISMA protocol (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) was applied throughout the process. A variety of analytical techniques were employed, including an examination of total citations, normalized citations, and thematic maps. Finally, a qualitative examination of different sets of articles was conducted in order to gain a deeper understanding of the subject matter.

This bibliometric study reveals a comprehensive mapping of the literature on GJs, indicating the growing importance of the subject since 2008. Three principal axes of inquiry emerge from the analysis: the economic and technological dimensions, the role of institutions and education, and the importance of individual and social implications. It is notable that the existing literature on GJs dedicates relatively little attention to developing economies. This suggests that there is a need to reflect on the relevance of the GJs concept in these regions. The analysis ultimately identifies five distinct challenges that developing economies must address in order to foster inclusive GJs growth. These are: the strategic integration of the informal sector, the recognition of the diversity of the sectors involved, significant investment in human capital, the adoption of a bottom-up approach, focused on local practices and small-scale technologies, and the necessity for a robust economic and legislative framework to support this transition.

# 1. Characteristics and definitional frameworks of GJs

A number of distinctive features of GJs have been identified in the literature. These include the observation that they are typically labor-intensive, predominantly domestic, decentralized, and less prone to offshoring (IEA, 2009, Ürge-Vorsatz et al., 2010, Wei et al., 2010). They would use high-level cognitive and interpersonal skills more intensively, compared to non-green jobs, presenting higher levels of formal education, work experience, and on-the-job training (Consoli et al., 2016). It is crucial to differentiate between the concepts of “green skills” and “green competencies” when analyzing these jobs. The term “green skills” is frequently associated with particular tasks within green jobs. These skills are often technical in nature and pertain to the abilities required to perform specific roles, such as expertise in renewable energy technologies or energy efficiency practices (Consoli et al., 2016). However, “green competencies” encompass a broader set of attributes, including not just technical skills but also ecological knowledge, pro-environmental behaviors, positive attitudes towards sustainability, the ability to innovate and apply green solutions, and a heightened awareness of environmental issues. This distinction emphasizes the necessity for a comprehensive approach to the development of the workforce required for a sustainable economy, addressing both the specific technical demands of green jobs and the broader competencies required to foster long-term environmental stewardship. (Cabral and Lochan Dhar, 2019b, Sulich and Kozar, 2024a). The development of GJs is inextricably linked to the broader transformation of the labor market, driven by the increasing integration of sustainability principles across various sectors, particularly the energy sector (Sulich and Kozar, 2024). These jobs are not only a source of economic growth, through capital accumulation
and innovation (Cecere and Mazzanti, 2017, Elliott et al., 2021), but also play a crucial role
in promoting environmental sustainability and social equity.

In evaluating the extant literature on GJs, it is evident that a consensus on their definition
remains elusive. The literature frequently differentiates between “green” jobs – which are as-
sociated with the ecological transition but have an ambiguous environmental impact – and
green jobs that clearly contribute to sustainability. Although this distinction is not consis-
tently applied, it reflects the conceptual and methodological nuances in the evaluation and
measurement of green jobs (Apostel and Barslund, 2024). To ensure clarity and consistency,
this paper will uniformly refer to these as Green Jobs (GJs) (Kozar and Sulich, 2023b, Kozar
and Sulich, 2023a, Sulich and Soloducho-Pelc, 2022). This common term encompasses the
various notations and variants employed during the methodological phase of this study (Sulich
and Kozar, 2024a, Kozar and Sulich, 2023b). The quality of GJs has been a topic of significant
interest and debate. The extant literature suggests that green-intensive jobs generally offer
high-quality work conditions, such as full-time employment, above-average wages, and health
benefits (Başol, 2016, Peters, 2014). These jobs are also seen as instrumental in addressing
economic downturns and environmental degradation. Policies designed to foster the creation
of such jobs are believed to have potential to stimulate economic growth and reduce unem-
ployment (Scully-Russ, 2018). However, challenges persist regarding the lack of a standard
definition, measurement inconsistencies, and concerns about safety and working conditions
(Green, 2020).

The lack of a common definition poses a barrier to data production and the operationalization
of the concept (Bowen et al., 2018, Sulich and Zema, 2018, Deschenes, 2013, Zugravu, 2011).
The question of what constitutes the “green” aspect of a job is particularly relevant when
distinguishing between “green” and “non-green” (or “brown”) jobs. This dichotomy often
encounters difficulties in classifying activities that fall into a “gray zone” (UNEP, 2008) where
the environmental impact is uncertain. Examples include electric vehicle manufacturers and
recycling plant operators, whose operations, while environmentally beneficial, involve energy
and resource consumption.

The concept of GJs has been defined and approached in various ways across the literature,
reflecting the complexity and diversity of the green economy (Bohnenberger, 2022, Sulich
and Zema, 2018, Bowen et al., 2018). Given the multitude of definitions and the challenges
in estimating the number of green jobs, Bowen et al. (2018) propose a structured typology
of three main definitional : The first approach, developed by the Bureau of Labor Statis-
tics (BLS) (BLS, 2013), focuses on outcomes and production processes, defining GJs as roles
within companies that either produce environmentally beneficial goods or enhance production
processes to reduce resource consumption. The Eurostat approach (Eurostat, 2009) narrows
this focus by considering only those jobs within industries dedicated solely to environmental
protection, excluding indirect contributions. To address the nuances between fully green and
transitional roles, the National Center for O*NET Development (for O*N.E.T. Development,
2024) introduces the “greening effect”, which recognizes a spectrum of job roles affected by
ecological practices. Lastly, we propose a people-centered approach (Acey and Culhane, 2013)
that broadens the definition to include social dimensions such as poverty reduction and social justice, aligning GJs with broader sustainable development goals. This addition reflects our effort to expand the conceptualization of GJs, ensuring that they not only address environmental challenges but also contribute to socio-economic equity. These approaches were selected on the basis of their representation of the diverse conceptualizations of GJs (Sulich and Kozar, 2024a, Stanef-Puică et al., 2022), offering a comprehensive approach that acknowledges the interdependence of environmental and socio-economic factors in the evolving green economy.

# 2. Materials and methods

## 2.1. Mixed method : SLR and bibliometric analysis

A rigorous approach was employed to construct a comprehensive database of research on green jobs. This was achieved by integrating a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) with bibliometric analysis. The SLR provided a structured and transparent methodology to minimize bias and ensure exhaustive coverage of the existing literature (Linnenluecke et al., 2020, Siddaway et al., 2019). The process commenced with the formulation of a clear research question (Krupinski, 2019), followed by the development of a protocol delineating the criteria for study inclusion, search strategies, and keywords. This approach enabled an exhaustive search of relevant databases, allowing for the meticulous screening of studies based on predefined criteria. Subsequently, the selected studies were subjected to a critical appraisal to ascertain their quality and reliability. The results were then synthesized both quantitatively and qualitatively in order to address the research question (Kraus et al., 2020).

In order to support the SLR in both the construction and analysis of the database, bibliometric methods were employed, comprising the collection and analysis of bibliographic data with the objective of uncovering the intellectual structure and emerging trends within the field of green jobs (Donthu et al., 2021, Jaiswal et al., 2024). The SLR provided a transparent and reproducible framework for reducing subjectivity, while bibliometric analysis further enhanced this process by identifying key trends and influential works on a quantitative basis. The data from the Scopus and Web of Science databases were merged using the Bibliometrix package in R, thereby enabling citation analysis. This analysis measures the frequency with which an article is referenced by other publications, indicating its influence within the field. A frequently cited article is frequently perceived as being highly relevant or exerting considerable influence within its field. Furthermore, a co-citation analysis was performed, which examined the frequency with which two articles were jointly mentioned in other publications. This approach helped to identify connections between articles and map the structure of the research field (Caputo et al., 2021). These methods, in conjunction with keyword co-occurrence analysis, enabled the identification of the most influential articles, authors, journals, and key conceptual references within the field.
The study established a robust database supporting both quantitative and qualitative examination of the green jobs literature by combining SLR with bibliometric analysis. The bibliometric analyses identified the most relevant and impactful texts, which were subsequently examined in greater depth through qualitative analysis. This dual approach ensured a comprehensive understanding of the research landscape, allowing for the identification of significant trends and gaps, as well as the provision of valuable insights for researchers, institutions, and policymakers.

## 2.2. Protocol and database

The PRISMA protocol, reknown for its rigor in systematic reviews, was adopted (Shamseer et al., 2015, Moher et al., 2009). This protocol unfolds in four steps: Identification, Screening, Eligibility, and Inclusion. Initially conducted in 2022, the protocol led to the creation of a database of 414 articles, documented in a data paper and deposited in a freely accessible repository (Mathieu, 2023, Mathieu, 2024). In 2024, the database was updated, expanding it to 516 articles. The same methods were applied in both the 2022 and 2024 phases. However, for the 2024 update, the approach differed slightly: instead of starting from the beginning, only articles from the years 2022, 2023, and 2024 were selected. The goal was to add these new articles to the previously established database. Therefore, the 2024 protocol in Fig. 1 specifically represents research from those years. For a detailed analysis of the variables and steps of the protocol, readers are referred to the aforementioned data paper. The search was carried out on Scopus and Web of Science, with results merged and filtered to obtain the final dataset. Articles were identified by searching for the terms “green jobs” or similar expressions in the title, abstract, or keywords (see Table 1), ensuring both singular and plural forms were included.

It is important to acknowledge that the selection of queries may, on occasion, introduce a degree of bias. To illustrate, some articles identified through the aforementioned queries made reference to “green jobfish”, a particular fish species, whereas others focused on “green workplaces”, underscoring the environmental aspects of the workspace rather than the job and sector itself. Articles related to “Green Human Resource Management (HRM)” were also excluded, as they predominantly address the establishment of eco-friendly work environments rather than the core concept of green jobs. While these topics are valuable (Sulich and Kozar, 2024a), they fall outside the specific focus of the present study.
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>Figure 1: Diagram of procedures and results at each PRISMA stage.</figcaption></figure>

After conducting a qualitative analysis, commonly used queries in the literature were prioritized. For instance, “environmental job” was deemed too narrow, as it specifically relates to jobs directly tied to environmental work. Similarly, “sustainable employment” was excluded because it refers to a broader concept than “green jobs” (Bohnenberger, 2022, WCED et al., 1987). The term “green work*” was avoided to prevent the inclusion of unrelated keywords, such as “Green Working management”, “Green work-life balance”, or “Green work engagement”. Instead, the focus was placed on “green work” in both singular and plural forms to ensure the relevance of the dataset.

<table><caption>Table 1: Bibliographic dataset and keywords.</caption><thead><tr><td>Base de données bibliographiques</td><td>Date</td><td>Chaîne de recherche</td><td>Résultats</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Web of Science</td><td>18/08/2024</td><td>TS=("green job*" OR "green collar job*" OR "green employment*" OR "green work" OR "green works")</td><td>N = 179</td></tr><tr><td>Scopus</td><td>18/08/2024</td><td>TITLE-ABS-KEY("green job*" OR "green collar job*" OR "green employment*" OR "green work" OR "green works")</td><td>N = 298</td></tr></tbody></table>
# 3. Structure of literature around the concept

## 3.1. Journal analysis

The analysis of journals through citation and co-citation comparison offers insight into the journals that publish the most on GJs (see Table 2). The 516 articles in the database are published in 272 different journals. The five journals with the highest number of citations are Energy Policy with a total of 1013 citations, Environmental Science and Policy with 344 citations, Sustainable Production and Consumption with 315 citations, Sustainability with 215 citations and Agriculture and Human Values with 213 citations. The co-citation analysis shows that the articles from the database mainly come from the journals Energy Policy, which has 398 citations, Journal of Cleaner Production with 228 citations, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews with 221 citations, Sustainability with 175 citations, and Ecological Economics with 140 citations. The comparison of the two indicators shows the recurrence of the two journals Energy Policy and Sustainability. It can therefore be posited that these journals represent the most significant publications in the field of GJs, as evidenced by the references contained within the database. It should be noted that the research methodology employed is inherently biased, as it was limited to Scopus and Web of Science and focused exclusively on English-language literature. This is why only Anglo-Saxon journals are retained.

The articles in the database are drawn from these particular journals as a consequence of a thematic synergy between GJs and their respective editorial orientations. All these journals share more or less an interest in sustainability issues, renewable energy or environmental policies, themes directly aligned with that of GJs, but all with their own field of specialty. Furthermore, this field is inherently multidisciplinary, encompassing environmental, economic, social, and technological dimensions. The aforementioned journals, such as Sustainability and Ecological Economics, are also multidisciplinary and welcome research that crosses different fields of knowledge. GJs are frequently discussed in the context of sustainable development policies and energy transition. Journals such as Research Policy and Energy are particularly relevant for exploring the political and practical implications of GJs. GJs are also linked to technological innovation and the development of new sustainable practices and strategies. Journals such as Research Policy and Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews focus on innovation and development in the fields of sustainability and energy. Most of these journals are highly ranked. This may be explained by the fact that high-ranked journals are generally perceived as high-quality and reputable sources. Researchers tend to reference works from credible and respected sources to enhance the validity and reliability of their own research. As a result, articles from these journals are the most visible and therefore the most likely to be read, and also the most likely to have a significant impact in the literature.

The efforts to establish correlations between the articles from the mentioned journals and the four definitional approaches of GJs (Section 2), by analyzing the titles and abstracts from our database of articles, do not result in a clear convergence between the scientific strategies of the journals and the different approaches. A systematic match between a journal and a specific
approach is not evident, as the definitions of GJs often overlap within different journals. This overlap can be explained by the lack of consensus around the notion of GJs, making its strict categorization challenging. The variety of approaches also justifies the diversity of the most cited journals, illustrating the multiplicity of viewpoints on GJs. However, the fact that the four main definitions are found in the most cited journals helps validate them. For instance, the 21 articles from the Sustainability journal correspond to various approaches of GJs. The BLS approach is present in Calvo et al. (2014), which emphasizes the management of construction and demolition waste, a key element of environmental and natural resource preservation. The model described uses regulatory measures and economic incentives to influence stakeholder behavior, which aligns with the idea of making production processes more environmentally friendly. It explores the socioeconomic implications of waste management, which is coherent with the BLS approach that includes jobs that make production processes more environmentally friendly. Murga-Menoyo (2014) primarily aligns with the people-centered approach. The text emphasizes universities as training centers for a sustainable economy, focusing on education and training in green skills and sustainability, which is a key element of the people-centered approach. The text also talks about promoting sustainability skills not only among future graduates who will be employed in green jobs, but also among those who will work in other productive sectors. This reflects the idea of the people-centered approach that broadens the conception of employment by including environmental criteria, improvement of livelihoods, and empowerment. The study acknowledges the impact of sustainability training not only on the individuals directly involved but also on citizens and society as a whole, as consumers, producers, and beneficiaries of the effects of the sustainable economy. This corresponds to the social justice and societal impact aspect of the people-centered approach.

The general characteristics of the journals presented in this section are interpretations based on the abstracts of the articles from the database. A more in-depth analysis of the full articles from each journal would be interesting for determining a definitional trend according to the journals.

<table><caption>Table 2: Most-cited journals in the database, comparison of total citations (left) and co-citations (right).</caption><thead><tr><th>Rang</th><th>Source (Total citations)</th><th>Papers</th><th>TC</th><th>Source (Co-citations)</th><th>MCS</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>ENERGY POLICY</td><td>13</td><td>1013</td><td>ENERG POLICY</td><td>398</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY</td><td>1</td><td>344</td><td>J CLEAN PROD</td><td>228</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION</td><td>2</td><td>315</td><td>RENEW SUST ENERG REV</td><td>221</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><thead><tr><th>Rang</th><th>Source (Total citations)</th><th>Papers</th><th>TC</th><th>Source (Co-citations)</th><th>MCS</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>4</td><td>SUSTAINABILITY</td><td>21</td><td>215</td><td>SUSTAINABILITY</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>AGRICULTURE AND HUMAN VALUES</td><td>3</td><td>213</td><td>ECOL ECON</td><td>140</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES</td><td>1</td><td>205</td><td>RES POLICY</td><td>103</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>ENERGY</td><td>3</td><td>189</td><td>ENERGIES</td><td>99</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>JOURNAL OF ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE MANAGEMENT</td><td>1</td><td>155</td><td>ENERGY</td><td>96</td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>RESEARCH POLICY</td><td>3</td><td>143</td><td>ENERG ECON</td><td>78</td></tr><tr><td>10</td><td>APPLIED ENERGY</td><td>2</td><td>137</td><td>ENERGY RES SOC SCI</td><td>70</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND RESOURCE ECONOMICS</td><td>1</td><td>124</td><td>APPL ENERG</td><td>67</td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>ENVIRONMENT AND URBANIZATION</td><td>1</td><td>116</td><td>J ENVIRON MANAGE</td><td>66</td></tr><tr><td>13</td><td>NATURE CLIMATE CHANGE</td><td>1</td><td>109</td><td>ENVIRON SCI POLLUT R</td><td>55</td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>ERGONOMICS</td><td>3</td><td>104</td><td>GEOFORUM</td><td>45</td></tr><tr><td>15</td><td>POLICY AND SOCIETY</td><td>1</td><td>104</td><td>AM ECON REV</td><td>44</td></tr></tbody></table>

## 3.2. Author analysis

The database lists 954 authors for 421 publications on GJs. The most cited authors are not those who have published the most on this topic (see Table 3). The most cited authors are Max Wei, Shana Patadia, and Daniel M. Kammen (363), who have published between 1 and 2 articles, one in common in 2010. The age of this publication might justify its predominance in the ranking. On the other hand, co-citation analysis allows measuring how many times
an author from the base is cited by an article also included in the base. The five authors
most cited by the articles in the collection are Giovanni Marin (37), Davide Consoli (27),
Francesco Vona (26), Alberto Marzucchi (23), and Adam Sulich (20). It is interesting to note
that Marin is both among the 30 most cited authors and the most cited by the articles in the
collection. Researchers Giovanni Marin, Davide Consoli, and Francesco Vona have strongly
collaborated together, as shown in Fig. 2, which represents the connections between authors.
These researchers have shared several articles together, all recent, dating from 2016 to 2021.
Thus, among the most impacting authors in the field of GJs, it is current researchers who
stand out. This analysis may point towards the current relevance of research in this field. The
articles from the base of these latter authors explore the implications of the development of
GJs in terms of job growth, required skills, regional impacts, and efficacy as economic stimulus.
On the question of the main characteristics of GJs, according to Consoli et al. (2016), GJs are
distinguished by a higher intensity in terms of cognitive and interpersonal skills and require
higher levels of human capital such as formal education, work experience, and on-the-job
training. Chen et al. (2020) highlight the importance of green skills to maximize the efficiency
of green investments in a post-pandemic recovery context. According to their study, these
investments are most effective in communities where workers already have the necessary green
skills. However, they identify a significant gap between these green skills and those of jobs
most threatened by COVID-19, particularly in the sectors of restoration, personal services, and
transport. These jobs, characterized by a low ability to be performed at home and high physical
proximity, are particularly vulnerable to social distancing measures. This gap underscores the
potential need for training programs and professional retraining to help these workers adapt
to a greener economy. Moreover, Vona et al. (2019) reveal that these jobs are associated
with a higher salary, are mainly pro-cyclical, and geographically concentrated. Barbieri and
Consoli (2019) demonstrate that industrial and occupational diversification in regions plays a
significant role in GJs growth, with regions showing unrelated industrial diversity being better
positioned to take advantage of opportunities in the green sector. Unrelated diversification
refers to the strategy where a region or a company diversifies into sectors not directly related
to their main activity. This approach can help reduce risks associated with dependency on a
single sector and exploit new opportunities. Unrelated diversification would be a significant
driver of GJs growth, with varied implications depending on the skill level and job type. On
their impact on employment and economic growth, Vona et al. (2019) establish a close link
between green employment, job growth, and green stimulus, with an additional GJs having
a multiplier effect on job creation in other local areas, especially non-tradable ones (destined
for local consumption). The results of Popp et al. (2022) demonstrate that green investments
seem to create mainly permanent jobs, especially in manual occupations performing green
tasks, indicating the potential of green investments as economic stimulus, particularly in a
post-pandemic economic recovery context. Finally, Gagliardi et al. (2016) establish a positive
and significant link between environmental innovation and long-term job creation, indicating
that green innovations have a greater impact on job growth compared to non-environmental
innovations.

In summary, these articles, especially those of Consoli et al., 2016, Vona et al., 2019, Chen et
al., 2020, Barbieri and Consoli, 2019, and Gagliardi et al. (2016), depict the green economy as a crucial domain for long-term job creation, skill development, and sustainable growth. They reveal the inherent possibilities in green stimulus policies, but also note the associated challenges such as regional disparities and skill mismatch, which require particular attention in terms of education, training, and regional diversification to fully realize the benefits of transitioning to a green economy.

<table><caption>Table 3: Most cited local authors in the database, comparing total citations (left) and co-citations (right).</caption><thead><tr><th>Rank</th><th>Authors (Total Citations)</th><th>Papers</th><th>TC</th><th>Authors (Co-citations)</th><th>CC</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>KAMMEN DM</td><td>2</td><td>363</td><td>MARIN G</td><td>37</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>PATADIA S</td><td>1</td><td>363</td><td>CONSOLI D</td><td>27</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>WEI M</td><td>1</td><td>363</td><td>VONA F</td><td>26</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>BREIL M</td><td>1</td><td>344</td><td>MARZUCCHI A</td><td>23</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>CALFAPIETRA C</td><td>1</td><td>344</td><td>SULICH A</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>FRANTZESKAKI N</td><td>1</td><td>344</td><td>CECERE G</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>GENELETTI D</td><td>1</td><td>344</td><td>MAZZANTI M</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>KABISCH P</td><td>1</td><td>344</td><td>GAGLIARDI L</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>NITA MR</td><td>1</td><td>344</td><td>MIRIELLO C</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>10</td><td>RAYMOND CM</td><td>1</td><td>344</td><td>POPŁAWSKI L</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>DIETRICH K</td><td>2</td><td>315</td><td>RUTKOWSKA M</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>DUMONT MJ</td><td>2</td><td>315</td><td>PARK S</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>13</td><td>YI H</td><td>5</td><td>235</td><td>ZEMA T</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>BORENSTEIN S</td><td>1</td><td>205</td><td>BOWEN WM</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>15</td><td>ALKON AH</td><td>2</td><td>186</td><td>ELVERY JA</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>MCCAULEY D</td><td>2</td><td>183</td><td>PRIMROSE D</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>HEFFRON R</td><td>1</td><td>182</td><td>STILWELL F</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>18</td><td>EDLER D</td><td>2</td><td>174</td><td>ANNESI N</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>19</td><td>MARES TM</td><td>1</td><td>174</td><td>BATTAGLIA M</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>20</td><td>LEHR U</td><td>1</td><td>166</td><td>CERRINI E</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>21</td><td>LUTZ C</td><td>2</td><td>166</td><td>CLARKE A</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>22</td><td>MARIN G</td><td>5</td><td>165</td><td>DE OLIVEIRA HC</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>23</td><td>DEL RIO LF</td><td>1</td><td>164</td><td>DORDMOND G</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>24</td><td>ORSAT V</td><td>1</td><td>164</td><td>KOURI R</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>25</td><td>CLIFFORD A</td><td>1</td><td>155</td><td>SILVA IR</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>26</td><td>DIXON SEA</td><td>1</td><td>155</td><td>SWART J</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>27</td><td>DEL RIO V</td><td>1</td><td>151</td><td>BAER P</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>28</td><td>SULICH A</td><td>12</td><td>146</td><td>BROWN MA</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>29</td><td>CAI W</td><td>2</td><td>146</td><td>CIOBANU CI</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>30</td><td>FISCHER C</td><td>1</td><td>124</td><td>CUERVA MC</td><td>5</td></tr></tbody></table>
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>Figure 2: Intensity of connections between authors.</figcaption></figure>

**3.3. Article analysis**

The annual production of scientific publications on GJs has exhibited a marked increase since 2009, with a notable rise from 5 articles in 2008 to 31 articles in 2009. Subsequently, production has increased in a gradual yet consistent manner, with a sharp acceleration observed since 2021 (see Fig. 4). This trend invites us to posit that global crises, such as the 2008–2009 financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic, might have stimulated increased academic interest in GJs (Stanef-Puică et al., 2022, Sulich et al., 2020). However, this remains a preliminary observation that would require further, more detailed analysis to confirm any definitive correlations. It is acknowledged that the impact of these crises has been felt differently in different countries. However, the objective here is to gain insight into how these disruptions have shaped the discourse and research on GJs, particularly in the context of developing economies. The co-citation analysis of the articles in the collection, which examines the references cited in these articles, helps identify the most influential publications in the field of GJs (Caputo et al., 2021). Using a minimum threshold of 5 citations for each Ferreira (2018) and Caputo et al. (2021), a collection of 84 references was identified among the 16,790 in the database<fnref n="1" />. Among these references, the five most cited considered as the “main theoretical pillars” (Caputo et al., 2021) of the field of GJs, are represented in Fig. 3².

Three of the references discuss issues related to renewable energies. Wei et al. (2010) advance a model for job creation in the American electricity sector, highlighting the potential of renewable energy to generate new jobs. Furthermore, Cai et al. (2011) question the real capacity of

<footnote n="1">¹This number refers to the total references cited by the 432 articles in the database. This information is provided on Bibliometrix.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">²For details of the most frequently cited documents, see Appendix E, Appendix F.</footnote>
energy policies to encourage the creation of GJs. Their research studies the impact of energy policies on employment and tries to understand the processes through which these policies can generate jobs. On its part, Yi (2013) characterizes renewable energies as vectors of development while underlining the importance of considering the local context when implementing sustainable energy solutions. Consoli et al. (2016), being the second most cited reference, focus on issues of training and green skills. Their work compares green and non-green jobs in terms of skills and human capital. They conclude that green jobs are less routine, require more significant skills than non-green jobs, demand high-level analytical and technical abilities related to technology, high-level abstract skills, and call for more in-depth education, more extended work experience, and continuous training. Finally, the report (UNEP, 2008) represents the third most cited reference in the articles from the base and stands as a major document in defining the concept of GJs (Stanef-Puică et al., 2022). This report analyzes GJs primarily in their environmental dimension: "We define green jobs as work in agricultural, manufacturing, research and development (R and D), administrative, and service activities that contribute substantially to preserving or restoring environmental quality. Specifically, but not exclusively, this includes jobs that help to protect ecosystems and biodiversity; reduce energy, materials, and water consumption through high-efficiency strategies; de-carbonize the economy; and minimize or altogether avoid generation of all forms of waste and pollution". Moreover, it also emphasizes the social dimension, stating that green jobs must be decent jobs: "Green jobs need to be decent work, i.e. good jobs which offer adequate wages, safe working conditions, job security, reasonable career prospects, and worker rights".

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>Figure 3: Main Theoretical Pillars of the field of GJs.</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>Figure 4: Growth in annual scientific output on the theme of green jobs.</figcaption></figure>

3.4. Keyword analysis

The focus was placed on the analysis of keywords categorized in the “keyword plus” section<fnref n="3" />. However, in cases where an article only provides “author’s keywords”, that is, keywords generated by the authors, they have been used as a substitute for “keyword plus”. Additionally, to ensure the most accurate representation of keywords, “keyword plus” and “author’s keywords” were merged within the same cells, with duplicates carefully removed. Despite this, 39 articles do not present keywords. Therefore, keywords that appear at least 5 times were retained (Caputo et al., 2021). Of the 1999 keywords in the database, 81 meet this criterion. The 5 most frequent keywords<fnref n="4" /> are “Green jobs” (178 occurrences), “Employment” (79), “Sustainable development” (55), “Green economy” (52), and “Renewable energy” (42)<fnref n="5" />.

The method of thematic maps was used to present key conceptual references in the field of GJs
(see Fig. 5). Thematic maps are visual tools used to distinguish and analyze various themes
in a specific field using a clustering algorithm on a keyword network. On these maps, each
bubble symbolizes a network cluster, and the name attributed to each bubble corresponds to
the word of the cluster with the highest frequency. The bubble size represents the frequency

<footnote n="3">³The term “keyword plus” refers to the frequency distribution of keywords associated with the manuscript by SCOPUS and Thomson Reuters’ ISI Web of Knowledge databases. It opposes “author’s keywords” which refers to the keywords proposed directly by the authors of the articles. (Aria and Cuccurullo, 2017).</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴Following the “Most Frequent Words” entry on Bibliometrix.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵See Appendix A to view the 30 most frequently cited keywords, among those mentioned at least 5 times. Given that “green jobs” and “employment” were among our initial research keywords, it may be insightful to also consider the other keywords that appear frequently.</footnote>
of words within a cluster, while its position is determined by the centrality and density of the
cluster, based on Callon's method<fnref n="6" />. Centrality measures the theme's relevance, and density
assesses its development. Thematic maps are divided into four quadrants: driver themes (upper
right) link to the main theme, basic and transversal themes (lower right) are foundational,
emerging or declining themes (lower left) show change, and niche themes (upper left) are
highly specialized. Despite limitations, such as the inability to categorize documents or analyze
meta-information, thematic maps remain valuable tools for visualizing thematic relationships.
The Walktrap clustering algorithm was selected for this analysis due to its suitability for
small to medium-sized graphs. While other algorithms like Louvain, Leiden, and Spinglass
offer distinct advantages – such as Louvain’s efficiency for large networks (Lee et al., 2020) –
Walktrap excels in detecting communities within smaller graphs (Kheirkhahzadeh and Analoui,
2020). It identifies clusters of nodes that are more densely connected internally than with the
rest of the network. The algorithm uses short random walks to generate a proximity matrix,
indicating the likelihood of nodes being part of the same community. Employing a hierarchical
agglomerative approach, Walktrap merges nodes and clusters incrementally, allowing users to
choose the final communities based on criteria like modularity.

The keywords were grouped into three main clusters: (1) Green Jobs and Economy ; (2) Employment and Institutions ; (3) Human (or Individuals) and Social capital, with a total of 106 words out of 239 retained for analysis. This method allowed to distinguish the main thematic groups and to identify the articles that are attached to them<fnref n="7" />.

The review of the titles and abstracts of the articles from each cluster provides insights. Clus-
ter 1 (red) encompasses cross-cutting themes centered on the green economy, with a strong
focus on renewable energies, technologies, and related policies. The literature within this
cluster extensively explores how these factors contribute to job creation, economic growth,
and sustainable development. Several studies investigate the impact of energy policies on the
emergence of green jobs. For instance, Wei et al. (2010) examines how adopting non-fossil fuel
technologies can generate employment opportunities in the United States. Similarly, Yi (2013)
analyzes the employment effects of clean energy policies at both state and local levels across
the U.S., while Fischer (2010) evaluates the effectiveness and interplay of various renewable
energy policies. The benefits of the green economy in promoting sustainable development are
also highlighted in this cluster. Raymond et al. (2017) proposes a comprehensive framework
for assessing and implementing nature-based solutions in urban environments, emphasizing
their multiple co-benefits. In parallel, Kasayanond et al. (2019) explores Malaysia’s commit-
ment to a clean and green economy, assessing its impact on environmental sustainability. The
economic implications of renewable technologies are further explored by Lehr et al. (2012), Yi
and Liu (2015) and Kozar et al. (2022). Lehr et al. (2012) examines the labor market conse-
quences of substantial investments in renewable energy within Germany, outlining significant
employment outcomes. Meanwhile, Yi and Liu (2015) investigates regional disparities and

<footnote n="6">⁶Method developed by Michel Callon, notably in his key Callon et al. (1991) where centrality and density, two key measures in thematic mapping, are introduced and explained. These concepts have been used to analyze and visualize the conceptual and thematic structure of different research fields.</footnote>

<footnote n="7">⁷The most cited articles of each cluster are summarized in Appendix B, Appendix C, Appendix D.</footnote>
political influences on the green economy in China, with a particular focus on the distribution of green jobs and businesses. Entrepreneurship within the green economy is addressed by Dixon and Clifford (2007), who explores how ecopreneurs successfully establish economically viable businesses while upholding core environmental and social values, thereby bridging the gap between entrepreneurship and environmentalism. Innovation in sustainable materials is represented by Dietrich et al. (2017), who examines the production of bioplastics like polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA). This study highlights how such innovations can reduce greenhouse gas emissions and drive progress in the biotechnology sector.

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>Figure 5: Thematic map of most frequently occurring keywords.</figcaption></figure>

Cluster 2 (blue) centers on the intersection of institutional themes like policy and education in driving the transition to a green and sustainable economy. Institutions, particularly governments and educational establishments, are highlighted as key players in ensuring a just and equitable transition. For instance, Baker and Eckerberg (2007) illustrate how the Swedish government actively promotes sustainable development at the local level. Similarly, Murgamienyo (2014) emphasizes the critical role of universities as hubs for learning and training, underlining the importance of educating future leaders in sustainability and equipping them with the necessary values and skills. Equity and justice are also prominent, especially in the context of the “Just Transition” towards green jobs, reflecting concerns about the social implications
of this shift. McCauley and Heffron (2018) explores this concept, stressing the importance
of climate, energy, and environmental justice within the framework of the Paris Agreement,
and advocates for inclusive policies and support mechanisms to ensure a fair transition for
affected workers and communities. In the same vein, Louie and Pearce (2016) addresses the
specific challenges and opportunities related to retraining workers in the coal sector, proposing
tailored programs and regional initiatives to support this transition equitably. Extending the
discussion on education, Sharma and Banerjee (2021) highlights the need for training infor-
mal workers in the solid waste management sector to unlock the potential of green jobs and
promote the circular economy. This complements the broader call by Renner et al. (2008) for
a significant expansion of green education and training programs across various professions,
which is crucial for managing the transition to a green economy strategically. Similarly, Cai et
al. (2011) underscores that a robust educational system and appropriate personnel structures
are essential for supporting the development of the green economy and green jobs in China's
energy sector.

Lastly, Cluster 3 (green) is characterized by its focus on the well-being, dignity, and empowerment of individual workers in the green economy, particularly concerning working conditions, health, safety, economic opportunity, and the role of unions in fostering social cohesion. For instance, Wandzich and Płaza (2017) explores emerging risks associated with green jobs, proposing strategies to ensure workers' safety and health. Similarly, Valenti et al. (2015) examines Italian stakeholders' perceptions of the potential health and safety implications of green jobs, especially within the renewable energy sector. Matatiele and Gulumian (2016) adds a note of caution, highlighting potential health and environmental risks linked to green technologies and advocating for a careful approach in transitioning to these technologies. The economic and social impacts of green jobs are also discussed. Hendricks et al. (2009) addresses fundamental questions about green jobs, noting that many align with existing professions but are adapted for a low-carbon economy. This study highlights the range of skills and compensation associated with green jobs, suggesting that they offer pathways to middle-class status for many workers. However, it also points out that while green jobs might reduce employment in some polluting sectors, there is a critical need for transition policies to support affected workers. Podesta (2009) emphasizes the importance of green jobs in building a strong middle class, particularly through energy efficiency initiatives. Social cohesion is another significant theme within this cluster, particularly regarding the role of unions. Delp et al. (2013) discusses the Occupational Health Internship Program (OHIP), which recruits a new generation of professionals to advance health and safety in the workplace through union and community initiatives. This effort could enhance cooperation and solidarity among workers, unions, and communities, thereby contributing to social cohesion. Similarly, Chenven and Copeland (2013) highlights a project that involved collaboration between unions and employers to develop a training and education model for frontline workers in healthcare facilities. This partnership between various stakeholders and the focus on education and training could strengthen social bonds and social capital.

The thematic map visualization reveals the complexity of the green jobs (GJs) domain. Cluster 1 focuses on the economic and technological aspects of the green transition, while Cluster 2
emphasizes the need for cross-disciplinary interaction, with a strong focus on institutional issues. Cluster 3, though less central, underscores the importance of individual and societal concerns, supporting a people-centered approach as presented in Section 2. This highlights the necessity of a balanced, integrative approach that considers both macro (economic, political) and micro (individual, social) aspects to effectively address the challenges and opportunities of the green transition.

# 4. Conceptual applicability to developing economies

## 4.1. Developing economies in Green jobs scientific literature

Based on the 516 articles in the database, there is a clear underrepresentation of developing economies in the GJs scientific, with 107 papers concerning developing economies compared to 409 on other countries, representing 20 percent versus 80 percent.

In order to identify the articles dealing with developing economies, a specific set of key terms was searched for in the keywords, titles, and abstracts of the articles in our database. The expanded list of search terms used for classifying developing economies is shown in Table 4. This list was also manually verified.

Fig. 6 illustrates the temporal distribution of these 20 percent of articles. This trend is consistent with the overall increase in scientific production on GJs, particularly from 2020 onwards. It is also worth noting that publications mentioning developing economies began to appear around 2008.

<table><caption>Table 4: List of keywords related to developing economies.</caption><thead><tr><td>#</td><td>Keywords</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>"Africa"</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>"Developing countries"</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>"African"</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>"Global South"</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>"Developing country"</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>"Asia"</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>"Islands"</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>"Developing economies"</td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>"Latin America"</td></tr><tr><td>10</td><td>"Developing economy"</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>"South America"</td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>"Developing market*"</td></tr><tr><td>13</td><td>"Small islands"</td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>"Transition economy"</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><thead><tr><td>#</td><td>Keywords</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>15</td><td>"Transition economies"</td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>"Less developed"</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>"Least developed"</td></tr><tr><td>18</td><td>"LDC"</td></tr><tr><td>19</td><td>"Oceania"</td></tr><tr><td>20</td><td>"Caribbean"</td></tr><tr><td>21</td><td>United Nations list of developing countries</td></tr></tbody></table>

However, despite the increase in recent years, the representation of developing economies in the green jobs scientific literature remains marginal. As can be inferred from the overview of green job estimates in Apostel and Barslund (2024), estimates of GJs show a lack of substantial coverage of developing economies, with only a few mentions of countries like Bangladesh, South Africa, Mexico, Mauritius, and Tunisia. This limited presence highlights that, despite the growth in publications, the focus is still predominantly on Western nations, leaving a significant gap in the understanding and developing GJs strategies that are tailored to the specific needs of developing economies.

The trend analysis of key topics in the GJs literature in Fig. 7 reveals a growing focus on economies such as “India”, “Brazil”, “South Africa”, and “Africa”, reflecting an increasing awareness of the importance of integrating GJs strategies in these regions. Additionally, there has been a significant increase in discussions surrounding the socio-economic dimensions of GJs. Terms like “poverty alleviation”, “justice”, “sustainable development” or “economic development” have become more frequent, suggesting an expansion of the GJs discourse to encompass not only environmental sustainability but also social equity and economic justice. Traditional environmental issues like “climate change”, “biodiversity”, and “deforestation” remain central, but the growing inclusion of socio-economic topics underscore the evolving understanding of GJs as roles that contributes to both environmental sustainability and social well-being. Despite the growing interest, developing economies remain underrepresented in the GJs scientific literature. Although publications have increased since 2020, they still constitute a small fraction of the overall research, which remains heavily focused on Western nations. This underrepresentation points to a significant gap, particularly in the context of developing tailored strategies that address the unique challenges and opportunities in these regions.
<figure><img src="image_8.png" /><figcaption>Figure 6: Breakdown of publications mentioning developing economies, by year of publication.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /><figcaption>Figure 7: Trend Topics of publications on GJs mentioning developing economies.</figcaption></figure>

## 4.2. Green jobs relevance in informal economies

The relevance of the concept of GJs can be questioned in light of the context of a majority of Sub-Saharan African countries. The predominance of the agricultural sector and the lack
of economic diversification in these countries is reflected in the absence of industries and the prevalence of informal employment characterized by a lack of contract, variable wages, and little security. This reality raises the question of “employment” to describe the nature of work in these countries. Informal employment represents between 80 and 95 percent of total employment in low-income SSA countries (Golub et al., 2014). The limited existence of jobs in the conventional sense of the term could therefore justify the underrepresentation of these countries in the literature. The integration of green employment in an informal context remains a challenge to be explored. Finally, the question of the skills required for renewable energies is a crucial development issue for these countries. These findings question the relevance of the concept of GJs for developing economies and highlight the need to take into account the specificities of these contexts to envisage sustainable and inclusive development.

According to the OIT (2013)(19th International Conference of Labor Statisticians), individuals in employment are all those who, at the legal working age, have carried out an activity of goods production or service provision for a wage or profit during a specific reference period. This category includes those who have worked at least one hour (“at work”) and those who were not working but have a job from which they were temporarily absent or who have flexible working arrangements (such as shift work, flexible hours, or leave in compensation for overtime (“not at work”). This approach overlooks activities specific to Southern contexts where the economic valorization of certain activities is embedded in a social and cultural logic that is superior to it. Speaking of “activity” integrates the both commercial and non-commercial character of the samples, their also private or customary characters, as well as multi-activity. While the “green” aspect of “green jobs” is often scrutinized in the literature (Apostel 2024), particularly regarding the true environmental impact of certain activities, the context of developing economies challenges both “green” and the “jobs” component of this concept. In regions where informal employment dominates and the notion of formal jobs is often absent, the applicability of “green jobs” becomes problematic. The concept of employment, as traditionally understood, is not always relevant in these contexts where economic activities are deeply embedded in social and cultural practices rather than formalized wage labor. This raises critical questions about how to integrate green employment within informal economies and whether the standard definition of “jobs” adequately captures the realities of work in these countries. Therefore, while the “green” in “green jobs” is scrutinized for its true environmental contribution, the “jobs” in “green jobs” must also be reconsidered to align with the specificities of developing economies.

However, applying this concept to developing economies presents significant challenges, particularly in terms of measurement (Fabry et al., 2022, Dhakal and Burgess, 2021). In regions where informal employment dominates and formal job structures are less prevalent, assessing whether a job meets the criteria for “decent work” is complex and often problematic (Bello and Fagbemi, 2023, Fabry et al., 2022). The informal nature of much of the employment in these contexts complicates the evaluation of job quality, security, and adherence to labor standards, as traditional metrics may not fully capture the economic activities and realities faced by workers (Fox et al., 2016). This difficulty is further exacerbated by the lack of robust social protection systems and the prevalence of precarious work, making it hard to ensure
that green jobs genuinely offer decent work conditions (Bello and Fagbemi, 2023). These
challenges raise important questions about the applicability of the green jobs framework in
such settings, suggesting that its implementation and measurement in developing economies
require careful adaptation (Dhakal and Burgess, 2021). To remain relevant and inclusive, the
framework must reflect the diverse, often informal nature of work, and be sensitive to the
specific socio-economic contexts of these regions.

**4.3. Five main challenges for green jobs in developing economies**

Based on a thorough review of the most cited articles focused on developing economies in the database (Table 11), a typology of five major challenges associated with GJs or green activities in developing economies can be identified.

**4.3.1. Green activity must adapt to the informal sector**

The integration of the informal sector into GJs initiatives is essential for a successful transition to a green economy. Research highlights the ambivalent role of the informal economy: on one hand, it can accelerate the dissemination of ecological practices, such as waste management and recycling, due to its close ties to local communities; on the other hand, cost-cutting pressures can lead to environmentally harmful practices. This duality complicates the relationship between the informal sector and the green economy, necessitating careful consideration in public policy formulation.

In China, Chen and Li (2021) underscores the importance of addressing the specificities of the informal sector to achieve an inclusive green economy. He critiques the capitalist nature of “green jobs” within the Global Green New Deal (GGND) and suggests that solutions beyond traditional neoliberal approaches are necessary, such as improving social benefits and enforcing stricter labor regulations. Additionally, King and Shackleton (2020) notes that in South Africa, most green jobs are found in the informal sector, offering opportunities for less skilled workers but also exposing them to vulnerabilities like job insecurity and exploitation. To mitigate these risks, the study recommends employing these workers through small companies or cooperatives rather than leaving them as self-employed.

The importance of the informal sector is also supported by studies in developing economies. For example, Kazungu et al. (2014) and Kazungu and Magigi (2012) highlights the potential of urban green jobs in Tanzania to drive economic growth and reduce poverty. Acey and Culhane (2013) argues for a reinterpretation of green jobs in Africa, advocating for small-scale technologies that align with the informal economy in sectors such as urban agriculture and solar energy. These studies emphasize that while green jobs in developed economies often focus on large-scale, formal employment, the potential of small-scale green jobs in the informal sector of developing economies is frequently overlooked.
Moreover, Smit and Musango (2015) explores the connection between the green economy and the informal economy, identifying a gap between green economy policies and the realities of the informal sector. His research shows that green activities do exist within the informal sector, often driven by NGOs, researchers, or community organizations, with waste collection and recycling being particularly prominent. Finally, Chen (2017) raises concerns about the quality of jobs generated by investments in renewable energies within the informal economy.

These studies collectively stress the need to incorporate the informal sector into the green economy transition. They advocate for policies that enhance the bargaining power of workers and their participation in decision-making processes. Additionally, they call for a broader definition of green jobs that includes activities aimed at mitigating environmental degradation, improving livelihoods, reducing vulnerability, and increasing security for individuals and families.

### 4.3.2. Incorporating a variety of sectors

The informal economy spans a diverse array of sectors, each holding potential for generating GJs in developing economies. These sectors include for example municipal services, renewable energy, agriculture, green urban infrastructure (UGI), tourism, transport, small-scale entrepreneurship, waste management, and landscape restoration. To fully realize the potential of these sectors, it is crucial to ensure inclusivity across generations, genders, and skill levels. The capacity of each sector to generate GJs depends on various factors, including the specific context of the developing economy, which necessitates tailored approaches.

Wijesinghe and Thorn (2021) highlights the potential of green urban infrastructure (UGI) to create green jobs, using Windhoek, Namibia, as an example. By involving residents in the implementation, maintenance, and management of UGI projects, steady employment opportunities, particularly for low-skilled workers, could be created. This approach not only provides jobs but also addresses social challenges by fostering collective governance and community involvement.

Simon (2013) examines the significance of green urban investments in African cities for the development of green jobs. Investments in infrastructure such as drainage systems, sustainable public transport, waste management, and renewable energy can have significant multiplier effects on the economy, public health, and the environment. However, the study notes obstacles to broader acceptance of urban greening projects, particularly the perception that these interventions might delay or divert other development priorities like job creation and housing production. Effective governance, flexible enough to adapt to changing needs and specific challenges of cities, is essential to overcoming these obstacles.

Dedinec et al. (2022) focuses on the renewable energy sector as a crucial area for green job creation. The study emphasizes the importance of replacing traditional energy sources like coal, natural gas, and nuclear power with clean technologies such as photovoltaic and wind
energy. Additionally, the construction and renovation of energy-efficient buildings, along with advancements in electrification, are highlighted as key areas for expanding green jobs.

Xames et al. (2022) explores the potential of the bicycle industry in Bangladesh as a driver of post-pandemic green recovery and job creation. The article suggests that policymakers should support the launch of start-up bicycle companies and recognize the industry's role in last-mile deliveries for e-commerce, which can enhance business profitability. The rising popularity of public bike-sharing services, along with growing health and climate awareness, particularly among the youth, presents further opportunities for job creation. The study also underscores the need to attract foreign investors to finance large-scale facilities and to develop bike-friendly infrastructure to support this growth.

Acey and Culhane (2013) argues that small-scale technologies can significantly transform employment in developing economies, particularly in African cities, where entrepreneurs are increasingly adopting domestic alternative energy technologies. These off-grid solutions are crucial for the poorest communities and offer a distinct type of green job opportunity, especially in regions where renewable energy is heavily taxed. This perspective contrasts with the focus on industrial green jobs in developed countries, suggesting that a different approach is necessary for developing contexts.

Agriculture can be added to this list of sectors contributing to GJs creation in developing economies. With significant potential, particularly in rural areas, agriculture has the capacity to address environmental challenges such as soil degradation and climate change through sustainable practices like agroecology and land rehabilitation (Bianco, 2016). This transition not only fosters economic growth but also strengthens food security and resilience against climate impacts (Goutte and Sanin, 2024). However, ensuring that these green jobs offer decent working conditions and are accessible to marginalized groups is essential for maximizing their social and economic benefits (Dumont and Baret, 2017).

#### 4.3.3. Investment in human capital

Investment in human capital is essential for promoting GJs in developing economies, particularly by advancing women's work and gender equality. According to Babugura (2020), green employment in the agricultural sector, where women comprise over 60 percent of the workforce in Sub-Saharan Africa, has significant potential to enhance gender equality and empower women. However, this potential can only be realized if supported by appropriate policies, technologies, training, and access to financing. Investing in green jobs within this sector would not only empower women but also contribute to national economic growth. The article draws a connection between promoting gender equality, empowering women, and achieving broader development outcomes. For instance, a study by UN Women cited in the article demonstrates that closing the gender gap in agriculture could lift hundreds of thousands of people out of poverty in countries like Malawi, Tanzania, and Uganda. Despite this potential, the study emphasizes that green jobs do not always ensure decent working conditions, calling for concerted
action from stakeholders at both national and international levels to address the violations of women workers' rights.

Pathak et al. (2021) also underscores the importance of green employment as a means to diversify income sources and strengthen the resilience of youth and women, especially in the Caribbean. The article highlights that effective development of green jobs, particularly in the tourism sector in the Bahamas, requires investment in training and skill development focused on climate change and sustainable environmental practices.

Cai et al., 2011, Reddy, 2016 and Tong et al. (2020) emphasize that the development of jobs in the renewable energy sector necessitates an appropriate educational system and the enhancement of skills, particularly among youth. Investing in human capital, particularly in education and health, is viewed as a crucial strategy to foster the green transformation of the economy. For example, Cai et al. (2011) notes that China's rapid development of renewable energy has contributed to emission reductions and job creation, but stresses that the simultaneous development of skilled labor is urgently needed. The current pace of change in workforce education levels is insufficient to meet industry demands, resulting in structural unemployment. A relevant educational system is therefore essential for the coexistence of the green economy and green jobs. Reddy (2016) discusses similar issues in India, where the renewable energy sector offers significant job opportunities for young people. The study argues that improving education quality and skill levels is necessary in a country where the unemployment rate among those aged 15 to 24 is about 10 percent. Tong et al. (2020) further establishes a strong link between human capital investment and green transformation, arguing that such investment can accelerate green transformation, enhance workforce resilience, and improve overall human well-being. The study suggests that as pollutant emissions decrease, the workforce becomes healthier and more resilient, thereby increasing economic productivity.

Matatiele and Gulumian (2016) highlights the critical importance of investing in human capital to ensure the health and safety of workers in green jobs. The mere deployment of green technologies is not sufficient, particularly in developing economies. While these technologies create new employment opportunities, they also introduce new occupational health and safety risks, especially in countries where workers already face vulnerabilities due to climate change and precarious working conditions. The study notes that many jobs in the renewable energy sector are held by workers with relatively low levels of formal education, making them more susceptible to exploitation and unsafe working conditions. Therefore, investment in human capital, through education and training, is indispensable for creating green jobs that are both safe and healthy.

Hlahla et al. (2016) explores how economically disadvantaged women in Pietermaritzburg, South Africa, are using the principles of the green economy to increase their incomes and improve their quality of life while promoting environmental sustainability. The study reveals that green jobs have a dual impact: they benefit the environment and transform women's roles within their households. For example, some married women interviewed in the study
reported surpassing their husbands in income, becoming the primary breadwinners. Addi-
ally, some women have launched their own small businesses by taking advantage of green job
opportunities.

Overall, these studies underscore the importance of investing in human capital to promote GJs, enhance well-being, strengthen resilience, and advance gender equality in developing economies.

**4.3.4. Bottom-up approach for designing Green activities**

According to Acey and Culhane (2013), the emphasis on large-scale green jobs in high-income countries often overshadows the potential of small-scale technologies to create transformative jobs in developing economies. Debates surrounding the definition and scope of GJs frequently overlook the everyday ecological subsistence practices of impoverished populations in African cities, who face institutional challenges such as subsidies for non-renewable fuels and high taxes on renewable energy sources. The article provides field experiences from countries like Egypt, Nigeria, and Kenya, offering concrete examples of communities implementing strategies that generate income, empower individuals, and preserve the environment.

Acey argues that academics and practitioners dedicated to social justice and environmental preservation should adopt a bottom-up, people-centered definition of GJs. The study suggests shifting the focus of GJs discussions from the macroeconomic perspective to one centered on the direct impact these jobs have on people's livelihoods, security, and quality of life. From this viewpoint, GJs are not solely those contributing to environmental sustainability; they also include jobs that reduce poverty, increase independence – such as from traditional energy networks – provide stable income opportunities, contribute to household food security, and empower communities.

Field experiences highlighted in the article underscore the vital role of non-governmental organ-
nizations (NGOs) in supporting transformative and sustainable green jobs and livelihoods at
the local level. This support manifests through the establishment of demonstration projects,
the promotion of innovation, research, coalition building, and advocacy for the adoption of
off-grid renewable energy solutions, despite the reluctance of consumers and suppliers due to
the perceived risks of these new approaches.

**4.3.5. Development of these jobs must be inserted into a coherent economic framework**

The works of Jung (2015) and Kasayanond et al. (2019) provide valuable insights into effective green jobs policy models, particularly in the context of developing economies. Jung (2015) examines South Korea's experience, noting that the failure of its GJs policy, initiated in 2008, can be attributed to a lack of a strong action ideology and insufficient citizen participation. Jung argues that the economic framework for GJs should transcend mere economic stimulation
policies. Instead, it should be designed as an alternative growth model and systemic policy
that enhances the development of the market economy and strengthens democracy.

Jung further notes that the ideological foundations of GJs policies differ between developed and developing economies. In developed economies, GJs are often seen as a means to integrate environmental challenges with job creation, environmental conservation, and economic growth, typically focusing on short-term outcomes. In contrast, GJs policies in developing economies tend to prioritize economic growth. For example, South Korea's green jobs policy was based on a model of weak green growth that emphasized economic growth while neglecting citizen participation. Jung advocates for green economy policies with long-term objectives that include job creation, greenhouse gas emissions reduction, and decreased environmental and energy consumption. Specifically, GJs policies in developing economies should promote a long-term alternative development model that replaces short-term economic growth paradigms. This model should aim to improve both the quantity and quality of jobs by demanding environment-related skills that enhance green investment and productivity, while also targeting broader public values.

Kasayanond et al. (2019) offers a complementary perspective, suggesting that economic growth and the green economy can coexist and mutually reinforce each other. The framework proposed by Kasayanond encourages innovation, investment, and competition, which can generate new sources of economic growth. Through an analysis of Malaysia's situation, Kasayanond highlights the government's failure to regulate and enforce green measures, which is largely due to the absence of a dedicated legislative framework for green technology and growth. This underscores the need for a coherent economic and legislative framework. Kasayanond also emphasizes the importance of social inclusivity within this model, which is crucial for creating a more equitable and sustainable society. By providing opportunities to marginalized groups, this approach strengthens community cohesion—a critical factor for the long-term success of environmental initiatives. Social inclusivity not only ensures justice and equity but also optimizes the use of human resources by leveraging a diversity of skills and perspectives. It is thus a key pillar in ensuring the sustainability and effectiveness of environmental efforts.

Discussion

Recent literature has begun to propose bibliometric analyses of GJs to better understand the evolving discourse in this field. For example Stanef-Puică et al. (2022) and Kozar and Sulich (2023a) have made significant contributions by identifying definitions and key areas within GJs, utilizing tools such as VOSViewer and focusing on specific time frames and datasets. Our study builds on and complements these existing works by offering a comprehensive analysis that integrates both quantitative and qualitative approaches. We do not impose temporal limits, allowing us to capture the full breadth of the GJs literature, including earlier influential works that are crucial for capturing the start of the development of this field. Our use of Bibliometrix, as opposed to VOSViewer, introduces complementary bibliometric indicators, such
as comparisons between total citation and normalized citations, thematic map, or evolution
of trend topics. These tools provide a multi-dimensional perspective that enhances the un-
derstanding of how GJs have been discussed and applied across various contexts. In addition
to these bibliometric insights, our study conducts a thorough qualitative analysis of the texts,
with a particular focus on developing economies—a context often underrepresented in global
GJs literature. This dual approach not only identifies key trends and seminal works but also
uncovers the specific challenges and opportunities in regions where employment structures are
typically informal and differ significantly from those in industrialized nations.

The report UNEP (2008) formulates a definition of green jobs that incorporates an environmen-
tal dimension and highlights a significant social dimension, emphasizing the need for decent
jobs. The International Labor Organization (ILO) has, since 1999, developed the Decent Work
agenda, structured around four fundamental standards of free labor, namely the prohibition
of forced labor, child labor, any discrimination at work, and the freedom of association and
collective bargaining. These standards have been broken down into ten indicators, encompass-
ing access to employment, the right to fair remuneration, respect for working time, work-life
balance, elimination of unacceptable work, employment stability, equity and equal opportu-
nities, safety at work, social protection, and the promotion of social dialog. However, the
concept of decent work is complex and its measurement proves to be arduous, also raising
questions about the adaptation of indicators to various cultural and national contexts (Ghai,
2003). This normative concept aims to reconcile workers' rights and the right to development,
highlighting both development and inequalities (Hoehtker, 2019). Alternative concepts like
"good jobs" and "job quality" have emerged to address the challenges of defining and measur-
ing decent work across diverse contexts. "Good jobs" emphasize a middle-class standard of
living, economic security, and opportunities for advancement (Rodrik and Stantcheva, 2021,
Osterman, 2019). Meanwhile, "job quality" considers factors like skill development, job auton-
omy, and participation in decision-making, recognizing that job quality is relative and varies
by socio-economic context (Findlay et al., 2013). These alternatives also highlight the impor-
tance of social capital and well-being at work, aspects that the traditional concept of decent
work may overlook (Zugravu-Soilita et al., 2021). Therefore, when analyzing GJs, especially in
developing economies, integrating these broader concepts is crucial to ensure that green jobs
contribute to both environmental sustainability and social equity.

This work is based on a collection of references that is not the most exhaustive. The exclusive
use of English literature, the strict selection of articles, and the limitation of the search to
a predefined list of keywords can potentially restrict the scope of the results. Therefore,
it would be necessary to compare these results with French literature to complement them.
Although the Scopus and Web of Science platforms offer an unparalleled enumeration of articles
in quantity and richly referenced, they present limitations in terms of access to non-English
journals. Furthermore, studying the birth of the GJ concept through the prism of international
political economy, particularly in non-academic sectors such as institutions, funders, and the
media, would enrich our understanding of its origins and development.
Conclusion

This systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis have resulted in the compilation of a comprehensive database of 516 articles on GJs and related concepts. The quantitative analysis of bibliometric indicators allowed to identify trends and seminal works in the literature, providing a foundation for a more focused qualitative examination of the most influential references. The study shows a notable increase in research on GJs since 2008, and among the most cited articles are recent ones, all of which attest to the growing importance of this topic. Key articles focus on renewable energies, green skills, the economic implications of GJs, and the role of institutions and policy frameworks, with the UNEP-ILO 2008 report standing out as a key reference. Additionally, issues related to job quality, social justice, and the integration of GJs into broader sustainability strategies are also prominent in the literature, underscoring the multifaceted nature of the green jobs discourse. The keyword analysis yielded three conceptual clusters. The first cluster emphasizes the economic and technological aspects, whereas the second cluster underscores the critical role of institutions and education. The third, though less emphasized, points to the necessity to consider the individual and social implications of the green transition. These clusters illustrate that the transition to a green economy is a complex, multidimensional process that requires a comprehensive approach, integrating both macroeconomic and microsocial dimensions.

The transition to a green economy in developing regions faces significant challenges, partic-
ularly due to their underrepresentation in global GJs literature. This gap underscores the
need for research and strategies tailored to these specific contexts. GJs must be adapted to
the realities of developing economies, where employment structures are often informal, and
the concept of “jobs” differs from that in industrialized nations. While debates emphasize
the ‘green’ aspects, the definition and structure of ‘jobs’ themselves in developing economies
receive limited attention.

Through the qualitative study of scientific literature related to developing economies, critical
challenges in green activities demand urgent action to enhance both their quantity and qual-
ity. The informal sector plays a pivotal role, yet it also presents significant risks, such as
environmental degradation and job insecurity. Integrating this sector into GJs initiatives is
essential, with strategies to mitigate its drawbacks. The findings also highlight that the green
transition requires recognizing the diversity of sectors involved – such as renewable energy
and waste management – each offering distinct opportunities that necessitate context-specific
approaches. Investing in human capital is equally crucial, with a focus on gender equality,
skills development, and safe working conditions. Additionally, a bottom-up approach that
incorporates local ecological practices and small-scale technologies is essential for achieving
transformative impact. Ultimately, effective green jobs need to be grounded in a solid eco-
nomic and legislative foundation, supported by a long-term vision that balances economic
growth with environmental sustainability.

However, this study reveals the underrepresentation of developing economies' contexts in the
English-language academic literature on green jobs, bringing into question how well the concept
is adapted within these specific economic and employment settings. Faced with this issue, promising suggestion is to favor the concept of activity for developing economies, opening up perspectives for better integration of GJs in these particular contexts where diverse exchanges can coexist.

# References

## Annexes

### Annexe A

<table><caption>Table 5: 30 most frequent keywords in the database, appearing at least 5 times.</caption><thead><tr><td>Rank</td><td>Keyword</td><td>Frequency</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>green jobs</td><td>178</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>employment</td><td>79</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>sustainable development</td><td>55</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>green economy</td><td>52</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>renewable energy</td><td>42</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>sustainability</td><td>42</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>climate change</td><td>28</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>economy</td><td>26</td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>policy</td><td>25</td></tr><tr><td>10</td><td>united states</td><td>25</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>environmental health</td><td>23</td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>growth</td><td>23</td></tr><tr><td>13</td><td>human</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>innovation</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td>15</td><td>humans</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>impact</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>jobs</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>18</td><td>green job</td><td>18</td></tr><tr><td>19</td><td>energy</td><td>17</td></tr><tr><td>20</td><td>trade union</td><td>17</td></tr><tr><td>21</td><td>china</td><td>16</td></tr><tr><td>22</td><td>labor unions</td><td>16</td></tr><tr><td>23</td><td>environment</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>24</td><td>circular economy</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>25</td><td>impacts</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>26</td><td>India</td><td>14</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><thead><tr><td>Rank</td><td>Keyword</td><td>Frequency</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>27</td><td>industry</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>28</td><td>management</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>29</td><td>organization and management</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>30</td><td>economic development</td><td>13</td></tr></tbody></table>

Annexe B

<table><caption>Table 6: Cluster 1 — Green jobs and economy papers. The 30 most-cited articles according to Total Citations (TC) and Normalized Total Citations (NTC).</caption><thead><tr><td>Rank</td><td>Source (TC)</td><td>TC</td><td>Source (NTC)</td><td>NTC</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>WEI M, 2010, EP</td><td>363</td><td>WEI M, 2010, EP</td><td>11.312</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>RAYMOND CM, 2017, ESP</td><td>344</td><td>RAYMOND CM, 2017, ESP</td><td>10.55</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>LEHR U, 2012, EP</td><td>166</td><td>CHEN Y, 2022, EE</td><td>10.353</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>DIXON SEA, 2007, JOCM</td><td>155</td><td>SULICH A, 2022, ESPR</td><td>8.627</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>DIETRICH K, 2017, SPC</td><td>151</td><td>KASAYANOND A, 2019, IJEEP</td><td>8.163</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>FISCHER C, 2010, IRERE</td><td>124</td><td>DELL'ANNA F, 2021, EP</td><td>7.945</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>KASAYONOND A, 2019, IJEEP</td><td>87</td><td>YI H, 2013, EP</td><td>6.04</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>CONSOLI D, 2016, RP</td><td>86</td><td>YI H, 2015, GEC-HPD</td><td>5.77</td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>YI H, 2013, EP</td><td>84</td><td>CONSOLI D, 2016, RP</td><td>5.639</td></tr><tr><td>10</td><td>YI H, 2015, GECHPD</td><td>79</td><td>MACARTHUR JL, 2020, ERSS</td><td>4.951</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>MARKANDYA A, 2016, AE</td><td>72</td><td>THATCHER A, 2013, ERG</td><td>4.89</td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>THATCHER A, 2013, ERG</td><td>68</td><td>MARKANDYA A, 2016, AE</td><td>4.721</td></tr><tr><td>13</td><td>MCCAULEY SM, 2012, SS</td><td>66</td><td>DIETRICH K, 2017, SPC</td><td>4.631</td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>MU Y, 2018, AE</td><td>65</td><td>BALTA-OZKAN N, 2015, EP</td><td>4.236</td></tr><tr><td>15</td><td>YI H, 2014, ENERGY</td><td>60</td><td>BURGER M, 2019, RES POLICY</td><td>4.035</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><thead><tr><th>Rank</th><th>Source (TC)</th><th>TC</th><th>Source (NTC)</th><th>NTC</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>16</td><td>BALTA-OZKAN N, 2015, EP</td><td>58</td><td>FISCHER C, 2010, IRERE</td><td>3.864</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>CALVO N, 2014, SUST</td><td>50</td><td>LEHR U, 2012, EP</td><td>3.788</td></tr><tr><td>18</td><td>MULVANEY D, 2014, GEOF</td><td>49</td><td>BOHNENBERGER K, 2022, EMP</td><td>3.451</td></tr><tr><td>19</td><td>DELL'ANNA F, 2021, EP</td><td>46</td><td>BECKER RA, 2009, BEJEAP</td><td>3.309</td></tr><tr><td>20</td><td>BURGER M, 2019, RP</td><td>43</td><td>SULICH A, 2020, JEM</td><td>3.244</td></tr><tr><td>21</td><td>KARAKHAN AA, 2017, JCEM</td><td>42</td><td>MU Y, 2018, AE</td><td>3.201</td></tr><tr><td>22</td><td>SNELL D, 2010, TRANS</td><td>42</td><td>ABORAMADAN M, 2021, JHOMM</td><td>3.109</td></tr><tr><td>23</td><td>SIMON D, 2013, LE</td><td>41</td><td>UNAY-GAILHARD I, 2019, JCP</td><td>3.002</td></tr><tr><td>24</td><td>FINLEY-BROOK M, 2016, IJERPH</td><td>40</td><td>SIMON D, 2013, LE</td><td>2.948</td></tr><tr><td>25</td><td>BRANCALION PHS, 2013, JSF</td><td>36</td><td>YI H, 2014, ENERGY</td><td>2.857</td></tr><tr><td>26</td><td>SHAPIRA P, 2014, TFSC</td><td>34</td><td>FINLEY-BROOK M, 2016, IJERPH</td><td>2.623</td></tr><tr><td>27</td><td>HANSON MA, 2013, ERG</td><td>33</td><td>BRANCALION PHS, 2013, JSF</td><td>2.589</td></tr><tr><td>28</td><td>CECERE G, 2017, REE</td><td>33</td><td>DARMANDIEU A, 2022, BSE</td><td>2.588</td></tr><tr><td>29</td><td>POCIOVALISTEANU 32 DM, 2015, SUST</td><td>32</td><td>HANSON MA, 2013, ERG</td><td>2.373</td></tr><tr><td>30</td><td>UNAY-GAILHARD I, 2019, JCP</td><td>32</td><td>HANSON MA, 2013, ERG</td><td>2.373</td></tr></tbody></table>

Annexe C

<table><caption>Table 7: Cluster 2 — Employment and institutions papers. The 30 most-cited articles according to Total Citations (TC) and Normalized Total Citations (NTC).</caption><thead><tr><th>Rank</th><th>Source (TC)</th><th>TC</th><th>Source (NTC)</th><th>NTC</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>MCCAULEY D, 2018, EP</td><td>182</td><td>MCCAULEY D, 2018, EP</td><td>8.962</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>CAI W, 2011, E</td><td>81</td><td>CAI W, 2011, E</td><td>6.964</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><thead><tr><th>Rank</th><th>Source (TC)</th><th>TC</th><th>Source (NTC)</th><th>NTC</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>3</td><td>NIJAKI LK, 2012, IJPSM</td><td>76</td><td>SHARMA HB, 2021, STE</td><td>6.391</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>GAGLIARDI L, 2016, ICC</td><td>47</td><td>RENNER M, 2008, WP</td><td>4.375</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>SHAPIRA P, 2014, TFSC</td><td>41</td><td>GAGLIARDI L, 2016, ICC</td><td>3.082</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>ANGELES M-M M, 2014, S</td><td>37</td><td>TĂNASIE AV, 2022, S</td><td>2.588</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>SHARMA HB, 2021, STE</td><td>37</td><td>LOUIE EP, 2016, EE</td><td>2.23</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>LOUIE EP, 2016, EE</td><td>34</td><td>LAVIDAS G, 2019, RE</td><td>2.158</td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>BOWEN A, 2018, EE</td><td>34</td><td>SHAPIRA P, 2014, TFSC</td><td>1.952</td></tr><tr><td>10</td><td>BAKER S, 2007, LE</td><td>33</td><td>ANGELES M-M M, 2014, S</td><td>1.762</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>CURLEY A, 2018, G</td><td>31</td><td>NIJAKI LK, 2012, IJPSM</td><td>1.734</td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>VARELA-VÁZQUEZ P, 2017, RE</td><td>25</td><td>DHYANI S, 2022, RE</td><td>1.725</td></tr><tr><td>13</td><td>LAVIDAS G, 2019, RE</td><td>23</td><td>BOWEN A, 2018, EE</td><td>1.674</td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>SULICH A, 2018, EJES</td><td>21</td><td>CURLEY A, 2018, G</td><td>1.527</td></tr><tr><td>15</td><td>ACELEANU MI, 2015, S</td><td>20</td><td>ACELEANU MI, 2015, S</td><td>1.461</td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>BLOMQUIST T, 2004, BSE</td><td>18</td><td>SHARMA A, 2021, EP</td><td>1.209</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>CHAUDHARY K, 2018, B</td><td>16</td><td>SULICH A, 2018, EJES</td><td>1.034</td></tr><tr><td>18</td><td>BOEHRINGER C, 2012, BEJEAP</td><td>11</td><td>MATTA JR, 2009, U</td><td>0.882</td></tr><tr><td>19</td><td>HORBACH J, 2016, II</td><td>11</td><td>MCCAULEY D, 2022, GECHPD</td><td>0.863</td></tr><tr><td>20</td><td>ACEY CS, 2013, LE</td><td>11</td><td>KWAUK CT, NA, DPR</td><td>0.863</td></tr><tr><td>21</td><td>HLAHLA S, 2016, UF</td><td>11</td><td>TÖBBEN JR, 2022, S</td><td>0.863</td></tr><tr><td>22</td><td>THOMAS I, 2010, S</td><td>9</td><td>ACEY CS, 2013, LE</td><td>0.791</td></tr><tr><td>23</td><td>ACELEANU MI, 2015, PIE</td><td>9</td><td>CHAUDHARY K, 2018, B</td><td>0.788</td></tr><tr><td>24</td><td>PADELLA M, 2012, EEEP</td><td>8</td><td>VARELA-VÁZQUEZ P, 2017, RE</td><td>0.767</td></tr><tr><td>25</td><td>BOUZAHER A, 2015, LSRS</td><td>8</td><td>BLOMQUIST T, 2004, BSE</td><td>0.735</td></tr><tr><td>26</td><td>JONAS AEG, 2017, ERDE</td><td>8</td><td>HORBACH J, 2016, II</td><td>0.721</td></tr><tr><td>27</td><td>ELLIOTT RJR, 2017, EE</td><td>8</td><td>HLAHLA S, 2016, UF</td><td>0.721</td></tr><tr><td>28</td><td>SHARMA A, 2021, EP</td><td>7</td><td>CHEN Y, 2021, ELRR</td><td>0.691</td></tr><tr><td>29</td><td>RENNER M, 2008, WP</td><td>7</td><td>ACELEANU MI, 2015, PIE</td><td>0.657</td></tr><tr><td>30</td><td>SHUTTERS ST, 2016, EPBPD</td><td>6</td><td>RENNER M, 2008, WW</td><td>0.625</td></tr></tbody></table>

Annexe D
<table><caption>Table 8: Cluster 3 — Human and social inclusiveness. The 30 most-cited articles according to Total Citations (TC) and Normalized Total Citations (NTC).</caption><thead><tr><th>Rank</th><th>Source (TC)</th><th>TC</th><th>Source (NTC)</th><th>NTC</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>ZHANG L, 2018, EEP</td><td>292</td><td>ZHANG L, 2018, EEP</td><td>9.762</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>WANG Y, 2013, E</td><td>187</td><td>WANG Y, 2013, E</td><td>7.964</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>LIU Z, 2015, IJPSM</td><td>176</td><td>KUMAR S, 2021, STE</td><td>7.391</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>CHEN J, 2017, ICC</td><td>147</td><td>MARTIN R, 2009, WP</td><td>6.375</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>PARK J, 2016, TFSC</td><td>141</td><td>CHEN J, 2017, ICC</td><td>5.082</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>KIM H, 2014, S</td><td>137</td><td>TAN B, 2022, S</td><td>4.588</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>LEE K, 2020, STE</td><td>134</td><td>JONES E, 2017, EE</td><td>4.230</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>JONES E, 2017, EE</td><td>131</td><td>SMITH P, 2018, RE</td><td>4.158</td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>MARTIN R, 2009, LE</td><td>129</td><td>PARK J, 2016, TFSC</td><td>3.952</td></tr><tr><td>10</td><td>SMITH P, 2018, LE</td><td>127</td><td>KIM H, 2014, S</td><td>3.762</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>TAN B, 2019, G</td><td>124</td><td>LIU Z, 2015, IJPSM</td><td>3.734</td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>LEE K, 2017, RE</td><td>122</td><td>YANG D, 2022, RE</td><td>3.725</td></tr><tr><td>13</td><td>YANG D, 2018, RE</td><td>119</td><td>MARTIN R, 2009, EE</td><td>3.674</td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>KUMAR S, 2018, EJES</td><td>116</td><td>LEE K, 2020, G</td><td>3.527</td></tr><tr><td>15</td><td>JUNG W, 2015, S</td><td>113</td><td>JUNG W, 2015, S</td><td>3.461</td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>BROWN T, 2005, BSE</td><td>111</td><td>LEE K, 2017, EP</td><td>3.209</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>KIM H, 2018, B</td><td>108</td><td>KUMAR S, 2018, EJES</td><td>3.034</td></tr><tr><td>18</td><td>LEE K, 2012, BEJEAP</td><td>105</td><td>BROWN T, 2005, GECHPD</td><td>2.863</td></tr><tr><td>19</td><td>PARK J, 2016, II</td><td>103</td><td>KIM H, 2018, G</td><td>2.863</td></tr><tr><td>20</td><td>JUNG W, 2013, LE</td><td>101</td><td>TAN B, 2019, S</td><td>2.863</td></tr><tr><td>21</td><td>MARTIN R, 2016, UF</td><td>99</td><td>LEE K, 2012, S</td><td>2.863</td></tr><tr><td>22</td><td>SMITH P, 2010, S</td><td>97</td><td>JUNG W, 2013, LE</td><td>2.791</td></tr><tr><td>23</td><td>KIM H, 2015, PIE</td><td>95</td><td>KIM H, 2015, B</td><td>2.788</td></tr><tr><td>24</td><td>LEE K, 2012, EEEP</td><td>93</td><td>LEE K, 2017, RE</td><td>2.767</td></tr><tr><td>25</td><td>TAN B, 2015, LSRS</td><td>91</td><td>BROWN T, 2004, BSE</td><td>2.735</td></tr><tr><td>26</td><td>JONES E, 2017, ERDE</td><td>89</td><td>PARK J, 2016, II</td><td>2.721</td></tr><tr><td>27</td><td>ZHANG L, 2017, EE</td><td>87</td><td>MARTIN R, 2016, UF</td><td>2.721</td></tr><tr><td>28</td><td>KUMAR S, 2021, EP</td><td>85</td><td>ZHANG L, 2018, ELRR</td><td>2.691</td></tr><tr><td>29</td><td>MARTIN R, 2009, WP</td><td>83</td><td>ZHANG L, 2018, WW</td><td>2.625</td></tr><tr><td>30</td><td>PARK J, 2016, EPBPD</td><td>81</td><td>PARK J, 2016, EPBPD</td><td>2.625</td></tr></tbody></table>

Annexe E
<table><caption>Table 9: Comparison of Total Citation (TC) and Normalized Citation (NTC) for the most globally cited documents.</caption><thead><tr><th>Rank</th><th>Source (TC)</th><th>TC</th><th>Source (NTC)</th><th>NTC</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>WEI M, 2010, EP</td><td>363</td><td>MENDONÇA M, 2009, PS</td><td>22.94</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>RAYMOND CM, 2017, ESP</td><td>344</td><td>WEI M, 2010, EP</td><td>11.31</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>BORENSTEIN S, 2012, JEP</td><td>205</td><td>SULICH A, 2022, ESPR</td><td>11.14</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>MCCAULEY D, 2018, EP</td><td>182</td><td>RAYMOND CM, 2017, ESP</td><td>10.55</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>ALKON AH, 2012, AHV</td><td>174</td><td>MCCAULEY D, 2018, EP</td><td>8.96</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>LEHR U, 2012, EP</td><td>166</td><td>KASAYONOND A, 2019, IEEP</td><td>8.16</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>DIETRICH K, 2017, SPC</td><td>164</td><td>DELL'ANNA F, 2021, EP</td><td>7.95</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>DIXON SEA, 2007, JOCM</td><td>155</td><td>NAPATHORN C, 2022, APJBA</td><td>7.26</td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>DIETRICH K, 2017, SPC</td><td>151</td><td>BERNAUER T, 2016, NCC</td><td>7.15</td></tr><tr><td>10</td><td>FISCHER C, 2010, IRER</td><td>124</td><td>CAI W, 2011, E</td><td>6.96</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>ROBERTS D, 2010, EU</td><td>116</td><td>SHARMA HB, 2021, STE</td><td>6.39</td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>BERNAUER T, 2016, NCC</td><td>109</td><td>YI H, 2013, EP</td><td>6.04</td></tr><tr><td>13</td><td>MENDONÇA M, 2009, PS</td><td>104</td><td>YI H, 2015, GECHPD</td><td>5.77</td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>KASAYONOND A, 2019, IEEP</td><td>87</td><td>CONSOLI D, 2016, RP</td><td>5.64</td></tr><tr><td>15</td><td>CONSOLI D, 2016, RP</td><td>86</td><td>TĂNASIE AV, 2022, SUST</td><td>5.09</td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>YI H, 2013, EP</td><td>84</td><td>DIETRICH K, 2017, SPC</td><td>5.03</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>CAI W, 2011, E</td><td>81</td><td>MACARTHUR JL, 2020, ERSS</td><td>4.95</td></tr><tr><td>18</td><td>YI H, 2015, GECHPD</td><td>79</td><td>THATCHER A, 2013, ERG</td><td>4.89</td></tr><tr><td>19</td><td>NIJAKI LK, 2012, IJPSM</td><td>76</td><td>MARKANDYA A, 2016, AE</td><td>4.72</td></tr><tr><td>20</td><td>MARKANDYA A, 2016, AE</td><td>72</td><td>BORENSTEIN S, 2012, JEP</td><td>4.68</td></tr><tr><td>21</td><td>THATCHER A, 2013, ERG</td><td>68</td><td>DIETRICH K, 2017, SPC</td><td>4.63</td></tr><tr><td>22</td><td>MCCAULEY SM, 2012, SS</td><td>66</td><td>RENNER M, 2008, WP</td><td>4.38</td></tr><tr><td>23</td><td>MU Y, 2018, AE</td><td>65</td><td>BALTA-OZKAN N, 2015, EP</td><td>4.24</td></tr><tr><td>24</td><td>YI H, 2014, E</td><td>60</td><td>CHAKRABARTY S, 2011, E</td><td>4.13</td></tr><tr><td>25</td><td>BALTA-OZKAN N, 2015, EP</td><td>58</td><td>BURGER M, 2019, RP</td><td>4.03</td></tr><tr><td>26</td><td>MAILATH GJ, 2000, AER</td><td>54</td><td>ALKON AH, 2012, AHV</td><td>3.97</td></tr><tr><td>27</td><td>CALVO N, 2014, SUST</td><td>50</td><td>FISCHER C, 2010, IRER</td><td>3.86</td></tr><tr><td>28</td><td>MULVANEY D, 2014, G</td><td>49</td><td>LEHR U, 2012, EP</td><td>3.79</td></tr><tr><td>29</td><td>CHAKRABARTY S, 2011, E</td><td>48</td><td>BRANCALION PHS, 2022, PN</td><td>3.63</td></tr><tr><td>30</td><td>GAGLIARDI L, 2016, ICC</td><td>47</td><td>DARMANDIEU A, 2022, BSE</td><td>3.63</td></tr></tbody></table>

Annexe F
<table><caption>Table 10: Comparison of Total Citation (TC) and Normalized Citation (NTC) for the most globally cited documents. {\#tab-cluster10}</caption><thead><tr><th>Rank</th><th>Source (TC)</th><th>TC</th><th>Source (NTC)</th><th>NTC</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>WEI M, 2010, EP</td><td>363</td><td>MENDONÇA M, 2009, PS</td><td>22.94</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>RAYMOND CM, 2017, ESP</td><td>344</td><td>WEI M, 2010, EP</td><td>11.31</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>BORENSTEIN S, 2012, JEP</td><td>205</td><td>SULICH A, 2022, ESPR</td><td>11.14</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>MCCAULEY D, 2018, EP</td><td>182</td><td>RAYMOND CM, 2017, ESP</td><td>10.55</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>ALKON AH, 2012, AHV</td><td>174</td><td>MCCAULEY D, 2018, EP</td><td>8.96</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>LEHR U, 2012, EP</td><td>166</td><td>KASAYONOND A, 2019, IEEP</td><td>8.16</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>DIETRICH K, 2017, SPC</td><td>164</td><td>DELL'ANNA F, 2021, EP</td><td>7.95</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>DIXON SEA, 2007, JOCM</td><td>155</td><td>NAPATHORN C, 2022, APJBA</td><td>7.26</td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>DIETRICH K, 2017, SPC</td><td>151</td><td>BERNAUER T, 2016, NCC</td><td>7.15</td></tr><tr><td>10</td><td>FISCHER C, 2010, IRER</td><td>124</td><td>CAI W, 2011, E</td><td>6.96</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>ROBERTS D, 2010, EU</td><td>116</td><td>SHARMA HB, 2021, STE</td><td>6.39</td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>BERNAUER T, 2016, NCC</td><td>109</td><td>YI H, 2013, EP</td><td>6.04</td></tr><tr><td>13</td><td>MENDONÇA M, 2009, PS</td><td>104</td><td>YI H, 2015, GECHPD</td><td>5.77</td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>KASAYONOND A, 2019, IEEP</td><td>87</td><td>CONSOLI D, 2016, RP</td><td>5.64</td></tr><tr><td>15</td><td>CONSOLI D, 2016, RP</td><td>86</td><td>TĂNASIE AV, 2022, SUST</td><td>5.09</td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>YI H, 2013, EP</td><td>84</td><td>DIETRICH K, 2017, SPC</td><td>5.03</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>CAI W, 2011, E</td><td>81</td><td>MACARTHUR JL, 2020, ERSS</td><td>4.95</td></tr><tr><td>18</td><td>YI H, 2015, GECHPD</td><td>79</td><td>THATCHER A, 2013, ERG</td><td>4.89</td></tr><tr><td>19</td><td>NIJAKI LK, 2012, IJPSM</td><td>76</td><td>MARKANDYA A, 2016, AE</td><td>4.72</td></tr><tr><td>20</td><td>MARKANDYA A, 2016, AE</td><td>72</td><td>BORENSTEIN S, 2012, JEP</td><td>4.68</td></tr><tr><td>21</td><td>THATCHER A, 2013, ERG</td><td>68</td><td>DIETRICH K, 2017, SPC</td><td>4.63</td></tr><tr><td>22</td><td>MCCAULEY SM, 2012, SS</td><td>66</td><td>RENNER M, 2008, WP</td><td>4.38</td></tr><tr><td>23</td><td>MU Y, 2018, AE</td><td>65</td><td>BALTA-OZKAN N, 2015, EP</td><td>4.24</td></tr><tr><td>24</td><td>YI H, 2014, E</td><td>60</td><td>CHAKRABARTY S, 2011, E</td><td>4.13</td></tr><tr><td>25</td><td>BALTA-OZKAN N, 2015, EP</td><td>58</td><td>BURGER M, 2019, RP</td><td>4.03</td></tr><tr><td>26</td><td>MAILATH GJ, 2000, AER</td><td>54</td><td>ALKON AH, 2012, AHV</td><td>3.97</td></tr><tr><td>27</td><td>CALVO N, 2014, SUST</td><td>50</td><td>FISCHER C, 2010, IRER</td><td>3.86</td></tr><tr><td>28</td><td>MULVANEY D, 2014, G</td><td>49</td><td>LEHR U, 2012, EP</td><td>3.79</td></tr><tr><td>29</td><td>CHAKRABARTY S, 2011, E</td><td>48</td><td>BRANCALION PHS, 2022, PN</td><td>3.63</td></tr><tr><td>30</td><td>GAGLIARDI L, 2016, ICC</td><td>47</td><td>DARMANDIEU A, 2022, BSE</td><td>3.63</td></tr></tbody></table>

Annexe G
<table><caption>Table 11: Most-cited articles on developing economies in the database, comparing Total Citations (TC) and Normalized Total Citations (NTC).</caption><thead><tr><th>Rank</th><th>Source (TC)</th><th>TC</th><th>Source (NTC)</th><th>NTC</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>ALKON AH, 2012, AGRIC HUMAN VALUES</td><td>174</td><td>NAPATHORN C, 2022, ASIA-PAC J BUS ADM</td><td>6.52</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>ROBERTS D, 2010, ENVIRON URBAN</td><td>116</td><td>KASAYANOND A, 2019, INT J ENERGY ECON POLICY</td><td>4.77</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>KASAYANOND A, 2019, INT J ENERGY ECON POLICY</td><td>87</td><td>CHAKRABARTY S, 2011, ENERGY</td><td>4.11</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>CHAKRABARTY S, 2011, ENERGY</td><td>48</td><td>DHYANI S, 2023, LAND DEGRAD DEV</td><td>3.56</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>SIMON D, 2013, LOCAL ECON</td><td>41</td><td>BRANCALION PHS, 2022, PEOPLE NAT</td><td>3.26</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>BRANCALION PHS, 2013, J SUSTAINABLE FOR</td><td>36</td><td>VAN DE VEN DJ, 2022, ONE EARTH</td><td>3.04</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>NAPATHORN C, 2022, ASIA-PAC J BUS ADM</td><td>30</td><td>KING A, 2020, URBAN FOR URBAN GREEN</td><td>3.00</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>MUHAMMAD-SUKKI F, 2014, ENERGY POLICY</td><td>29</td><td>LOPES DE SOUSA JABBOUR AB, 2015, J CLEAN PROD</td><td>2.93</td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>LAVIDAS G, 2019, RENEW ENERGY</td><td>23</td><td>ROBERTS D, 2010, ENVIRON URBAN</td><td>2.78</td></tr><tr><td>10</td><td>LOPES DE SOUSA JABBOUR AB, 2015, J CLEAN PROD</td><td>21</td><td>MUHAMMAD-SUKKI F, 2014, ENERGY POLICY</td><td>2.72</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>BOHLMANN HR, 2019, ENERGY POLICY</td><td>20</td><td>SUBRAMANIAN N, 2023, INT J MANPOW</td><td>2.67</td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>SIMAS M, 2013, J SUSTAIN DEV ENERG WATER ENVIRON SYST</td><td>19</td><td>SONG M, 2020, INT J MANPOW</td><td>2.67</td></tr><tr><td>13</td><td>CHAUDHARY K, 2018, BENCHMARKING</td><td>16</td><td>DORDMOND G, 2021, ENVIRON DEV SUSTAIN</td><td>2.48</td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>BRANCALION PHS, 2022, PEOPLE NAT</td><td>15</td><td>SOVACOOL BK, 2023, ELECTR J</td><td>2.37</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><thead><tr><th>Rank</th><th>Source (TC)</th><th>TC</th><th>Source (NTC)</th><th>NTC</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>15</td><td>REDDY BS, 2016,<br>RENEW ENERGY</td><td>14</td><td>SIMON D, 2013,<br>LOCAL ECON</td><td>2.22</td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>ABDULLAH H, 2017,<br>INT J ENERGY ECON<br>POLICY</td><td>14</td><td>REDDY BS, 2016,<br>RENEW ENERGY</td><td>2.09</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>VAN DE VEN DJ, 2022,<br>ONE EARTH</td><td>14</td><td>CHAUDHARY K, 2018,<br>BENCHMARKING</td><td>2.06</td></tr><tr><td>18</td><td>DORDMOND G, 2021,<br>ENVIRON DEV<br>SUSTAIN</td><td>13</td><td>BRANCALION PHS,<br>2013, J</td><td>1.95</td></tr><tr><td>19</td><td>ELFANI M, 2011, INT J<br>TECHNOL</td><td>13</td><td>SUSTAINABLE FOR<br>TAZHBAYEVA A,<br>2023, J ENVIRON<br>MANAGE TOUR</td><td>1.78</td></tr><tr><td>20</td><td>DHYANI S, 2023,<br>LAND DEGRAD DEV</td><td>12</td><td>RENNER M, 2008,<br>WORLDWATCH PAP</td><td>1.75</td></tr><tr><td>21</td><td>ACEY CS, 2013,<br>LOCAL ENVIRON</td><td>11</td><td>HLAHLA S, 2016,<br>URBAN FORUM</td><td>1.64</td></tr><tr><td>22</td><td>HLAHLA S, 2016,<br>URBAN FORUM</td><td>11</td><td>MATTA JR, 2009,<br>UNASYLVA</td><td>1.60</td></tr><tr><td>23</td><td>RAWAT YS, 2017,<br>CURR OPIN ENVIRON<br>SUSTAIN</td><td>9</td><td>ONUBI HO, 2023, J<br>MANAGE ENG</td><td>1.48</td></tr><tr><td>24</td><td>KING A, 2020, URBAN<br>FOR URBAN GREEN</td><td>9</td><td>DLIMBETOVA G,<br>2016, INT J ENVIRON<br>SCI EDUC</td><td>1.34</td></tr><tr><td>25</td><td>DLIMBETOVA G, 2016,<br>INT J ENVIRON SCI<br>EDUC</td><td>9</td><td>OKANOVIC A, 2021,<br>SUSTAINABILITY</td><td>1.33</td></tr><tr><td>26</td><td>SUBRAMANIAN N,<br>2023, INT J MANPOW</td><td>9</td><td>SHARMA A, 2021,<br>ENERGY POLICY</td><td>1.33</td></tr><tr><td>27</td><td>JUNG YM, 2015,<br>SUSTAINABILITY</td><td>8</td><td>LAVIDAS G, 2019,<br>RENEW ENERGY</td><td>1.26</td></tr><tr><td>28</td><td>ALMUTAIRI K, 2018,<br>SUSTAINABILITY</td><td>8</td><td>ABDULLAH H, 2017,<br>INT J ENERGY<br>ECON POLICY</td><td>1.22</td></tr><tr><td>29</td><td>SONG M, 2020, INT J<br>MANPOW</td><td>8</td><td>RASMUSSEN PU,<br>2023, WASTE<br>MANAGE</td><td>1.19</td></tr><tr><td>30</td><td>BENNIE A, 2011,<br>SOUTH AFR REV SOC</td><td>8</td><td>JUNG YM, 2015,<br>SUSTAINABILITY</td><td>1.12</td></tr></tbody></table>