The bibliometric impact of books published by the International Consortium on Landslides

The bibliometric impact of books published by the International Consortium on Landslides Review Article Landslides (2018) 15:1459–1482 DOI 10.1007/s10346-018-1019-8 Matjaž Mikoš Received: 23 February 2018 Accepted: 18 May 2018 The bibliometric impact of books published Published online: 6 June 2018 © The Author(s) 2018 by the International Consortium on Landslides Abstract Dissemination of research results is an important part Introduction of basic as well as applied research if not the most important After years of roaring success for Open Access journals and one. A large part of research results is published in scientific article-level metrics, there is now a new wave of innovation literature, and since there are many forms of it, the question from publishers, funding agencies, and universities assessment arises which form is the most visible and attractive to the world around books. For those in disciplines where the majority of scientific community. The International Consortium on Land- research output is published as monographs, this likely comes slides (ICL), based in Kyoto, Japan, is one of the leading as a relief. An increased number of books are annually indexed institutions in the field of landslide research and landslide risk in citation databases, where we can gain insight into the cita- reduction. On behalf of ICL, Springer Nature has published the tion behavior and longevity of books. All of these new devel- journal Landslides: Journal of the International Consortium on opments give book authors and editors more credit for their Landslides since 2004. It is a very successful scientific journal hard work and offer new metrics for research assessments with regard to its scientometric parameters. Since January 2018, (Academic Book Week 2016). it has been a monthly journal published in full color in elec- Until 2004, there was only one widely used, comprehensive tronic as well as printed form. Another form of dissemination citation database, namely the ISI’s (Institute for Scientific of the ICL scientific and professional activities are published Information—later Thomson Reuters—now Clarivate Analytics) books in the form of monographs and proceedings from trien- Web of Science (WoS). In fall of 2004, two new and therefore rival nial World Landslide Forums. This paper discusses the impact citation databases entered the bibliometric world: Elsevier’s of 52 books with 3426 chapters taken from the field of landslide Scopus and the freely available Google Scholar (GS). Many studies science and published by Springer Nature from 2005 to 2018 in have revealed differences between them, taking into account the the earth sciences category, using different scientometric param- coverage and the number of citations, and the differences were not eters, such as Bookmetrix downloads and citations, Scopus the same for different scientific disciplines. For example, Kousha citations, Scopus h-index, Google citations, and Google h-index. and Thelwall (2008) compared four science disciplines and found The analysis was performed on the book chapter level (using that GS might exhibit a certain advantage by securing wider mainly citations as the main scientometric parameter) as well as coverage of non-journal documents especially a wider range of on the book level (using book h-index and percentage of cited open access scholarly documents. Remarkable differences between chapters). Out of the selected 52 titles, 22 were published on the three aforementioned citation databases were confirmed by behalf of the ICL, with 1419 chapters. The differences among taking one book as a case study (Bar-Ilan 2010); the differences landslide-related books can be quite large; only a few chapters between WoS and Scopus were visible due to a fact that citations in from analyzed book titles were found to be cited frequently Scopus are limited to the period of 1996 and onward. compared to highly cited scientific journal articles. On average, Torre-Salinas et al. (2014) analyzed the disciplinary coverage of the analyzed 3426 book chapters from 52 landslide-related Thomson Reuters’ Book Citation Index (BCI) database focusing books have been downloaded since publication over 53,000 on publisher presence, impact, and specialization. They have ex- times each; 1092 chapters (32%) received 2932 citations (2.68 amined coverage by discipline, publisher distribution by field and citations per cited chapter and 0.86 citations per published country of publication, and publisher impact. For this purpose, the chapter). The analysis shows that the books published on behalf Thomson Reuters’ subject categories were aggregated into 15 dis- of the ICL are, together with other landslide-related book titles, ciplines. Only a very few publishers mainly from the UK and USA on the forefront in the Springer eBook collection Earth and covered three quarters of these 15 disciplines, and 80.5% of the Environmental Science (EES). The selected 52 landslide-related books and chapters remained uncited. In addition, two serious book titles are above the average metrics for the whole EES errors were found in this database: the Book Citation Index does with regard to the total number of downloads per book, the not retrieve all citations for books and chapters and book citations total number of citations per book, and the total number of do not include citations to their chapters. readers per book. The ICL-related books are getting more The International Consortium on Landslides (ICL) as one of the downloads but less readers and citations (so far) as the selected leading international and non-governmental societies in the field non-ICL-related books. A way in raising the visibility and im- of landslide research and landslide risk reduction was established pact of the ICL books on landslide research community would in 2002 and is located in Kyoto, Japan. Since 2004, the ICL has be to support their open access publication in the form of e- been publishing the international Journal Landslides: Journal of Books as much as possible, and inclusion of ICL books into International Consortium on Landslides (Sassa 2018). The journal Web of Science. Landslides was analyzed several times for its impact on the world landslide community, using selected scientometric (bibliometric) . . Keywords Landslides Risk dialog Impact parameters (Sassa et al. 2009, 2015; Mikoš 2011, 2017)—the journal . . . Factor International Collaboration Citations Book metrics has been proved to be very successful, read by many stakeholders Landslides 15 & (2018) Review Article from the world landslide research society studying periodical in a given year for the documents published in the previous literature. 3 years (note that a 2-year window is used for the ISI Impact An important contribution of the ICL to capacity building Factor computation). for landslide risk reduction in the world are triennial World Landslide Forums (WLF): WLF1 in Tokyo 2008, WLF2 in Rome in 2011, WLF3 in Beijing in 2014, WLF4 in Ljubljana Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Knowledge database (WoK) in 2017, and forthcoming WLF5 in Kyoto in 2020—see http:// Web of Knowledge (Clarivate Analytics, 2018a) offers several web wlf5.iplhq.org/ for details. In the last few years, a debate tools for bibliometric research. One of them is Web of Science and started among the ICL community whether to publish accept- its Core Collection that covers different citation indices with ex- ed and reviewed papers at the world landslide forums in the tended coverage of international literature: classical printed book form, or to move to electronic book format only, combining it with open access for all papers and – peer-reviewed journals in Science Citation Index Expanded occasional customers’ tailored printing-on-demand. This paper (SCI_EXPANDED, since 1900), Social Sciences Citation Index has been originated from such discussions and was stimulated (SSCI, since 1900), Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI, by questions about the impact of the ICL book chapters since 1975), and in Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI, compared to journal Landslides papers and/or to other non- since 2015); ICL book chapters and books in the field of landslide re- – conference proceedings in Conference Proceedings Citation search. The main aim of the paper is to analyze between the Index—Science (CPCI-S, since 2011) and in Conference Pro- ICL monographs and proceedings of the World Landslide ceedings Citation Index—Social Sciences & Humanities (CPCI- Forums printed as books by Springer Nature, and selected SSH, since 2011) (Clarivate Analytics, 2018b); landslide-related book titles, not published by the ICL, in – books in Book Citation Index—Science (BKCI-S, since 2011) order to measure relative impact and reputation of the ICL and in Book Citation Index—Social Sciences and Humanities books. We will start with a short description of the most (BKCI-SSH, since 2011) (Clarivate Analytics, 2018c); widely used citation databases. Material and methods The coverage of WoS for books and conference proceedings The main databases used in the last two decades for journal since 2011 is not ideal, and for the purpose of this study, WoS only bibliometric analyses are the Web of Science (WoS) by Clarivate partially covers the ICL-related books published by Springer Na- Analytics (formerly Thomson Scientific, ISI—Institute for Scien- ture publisher. tific Information) and Elsevier’s Scopus database. Questions arise, Springer Nature web tools, Bookmetrix, and eBook collections can they also be used for book bibliometric analyses? Are there new web tools available to perform a bibliometric analysis of The Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB) has been offered at books, specifically books related to landslide science? the end of 2017 for over 10,000 academic peer-reviewed books and chapters from close to 250 publishers (DOAB 2018). Springer Nature is a sponsor of DOAB, and all SpringerOpen books Elsevier’s Scopus database (Springer 2018a) are freely available online at SpringerLink (Springer 2018b) and listed in the Directory of Open Access Books Developing its own Scopus database, Elsevier offers different jour- nal metrics, among others (Elsevier 2018): (DOAB 2018) since 2010. The Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY) license is the default license for SpringerOpen books. Although ICL publishes its books with Springer Nature, only one – SJR—SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) takes into account both the number of citations received by a journal and the prestige of book title has been published so far as an open access book (Sassa the journal based on where those citations come from. et al. 2017), all of which are electronically accessible per subscrip- tion using Springer Books platform (Springer 2018c). – SNIP—Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) measures contextual citation impact by weighting citations based on the This database offers data on selected book metrics using a web total number of citations in a subject field. It helps to compare tool called Bookmetrix (2018). Bookmetrix was developed by Springer Nature in partnership with Altmetric (2018), and it brings a journal with competing journals in a subject area. together a collection of performance metrics to measure how – New as of December 2016, the metric called CiteScore measures average citations received per document published in the books are being discussed, cited, and used around the world. It offers a comprehensive overview of the reach, usage, and serial—citations are taken into account that have been received Table 1 Correlation between four selected SCOPUS metrics for the period 2011–2016 (Elsevier 2018) Pearson coefficient All serials Journals Trade journals Book series Conference proceedings (49,145) (46,774) (663) (1245) (463) CiteScore—Percent 0.682 0.692 0.851 0.665 0.787 Cited CiteScore—SNIP 0.820 0.825 0.893 0.763 0.898 CiteScore—SJR 0.838 0.831 0.863 0.909 0.871 1460 Landslides 15 & (2018) Landslides 15 & (2018) 1461 Table 2 Springer eBook Package Earth and Environmental Science (data retrieved in May, 2018; Springer, 2018a) Year Nr. of Monographs Contributed Proceedings Others Subject collection Collection citation Total Total books volume performance performance downloads citations 5 and 2 years 1918–89 912 29% 34% 25% 16% 63% n. a. 0.27M 7.10K 1990–99 1099 22% 46% 13% 19% 63% n. a. 0.27K 6.10K 2000–04 654 27% 43% 7% 23% 37% n. a. 0.67M 4.45K 2005 150 45% 16% 15% 24% 59% 1.21 and 0.00 3.89M 6.77K 2006 167 49% 14% 19% 18% 59% 1.58 and 1.58 3.17M 6.29K 2007 164 51% 14% 19% 16% 45% 1.39 and 1.39 3.15M 6.09K 2008 209 56% 15% 13% 16% 48% 1.98 and 1.66 4.39M 7.48K 2009 206 51% 22% 12% 15% 68% 1.89 and 1.69 4.80M 7.15K 2010 223 56% 20% 7% 17% 46% 2.29 and 1.91 4.86M 6.75K 2011 225 55% 23% 9% 13% 72% 2.51 and 2.09 4.94M 7.36K 2012 221 52% 22% 8% 18% 31% 3.05 and 2.66 5.11M 4.70K 2013 343 55% 23% 3% 19% 51% 3.31 and 2.80 7.54M 6.01K 2014 412 49% 23% 4% 23% 45% 3.29 and 2.43 8.98M 5.45K 2015 391 55% 17% 4% 24% 33% 3.51 and 2.69 5.81M 3.45K 2016 421 55% 12% 3% 30% 23% 4.10 and 3.16 4.25M 2.70K 2017 409 56% 13% 4% 24% 3% 3.93 and 3.10 3.36M 1.37K Average per 6207 41% 28% 11% 20% 47% n. a. 3.14M 5.44K year Year Total Total Total Downloads Citations Reviews Mentions Readers reviews mentions readers per book per book per book per book per book 1918–89 17 18 2.43K 0.29K 8 0.0 0.0 3 1990–99 24 11 1.93K 0.25K 6 0.0 0.0 2 2000–04 94 48 4.70K 0.93K 7 0.1 0.1 7 2005 127 155 23.2K 25.9K 45 0.8 1.0 155 2006 103 125 20.6K 19.0K 38 0.6 0.7 123 2007 133 103 21.6K 19.2K 37 0.8 0.6 132 2008 119 128 23.5K 21.0K 36 0.6 0.6 112 2009 107 254 24.5K 23.3K 35 0.5 1.2 119 2010 118 219 22.5K 21.8K 30 0.5 1.0 101 2011 63 457 23.7K 22.0K 33 0.3 2.0 105 Review Article readership of books or book chapters by providing various book- level and chapter-level metrics all in one place. Now its full capacity can be used only within the Springer community, but free data are available via book pages on SpringerLink (Springer 2018b). Everyone can use these free pages to retrieve metrics for Springer books and chapters (Springer 2018d). Apart from classic metrics such as the number of downloads (using SpringerLink as the data source) and the number of citations (using CrossRef as the data source), alternative metrics are introduced, such as Men- tions (online mentions provided by Altmetric based on variety of online sources including blogs and social media among others) and Readers (using Mendeley as the data source). In its latest version, Bookmetrix is extending its scope by providing better insights into the reach and impact of Spring- er Nature’s various eBook collections. With these new, inno- vative features, Bookmetrix is adding value by offering detailed information for authors and readers as well as li- brarians. Especially interesting is a new book metric called Collection Citation Performance (CCP). The CCP for a select- ed year is calculated as the number of citations in this year of books published in two previous years (respectively 5 years for a 5-year indicator), divided by the total number of books published in this eBook collection in the same time period—similar to the well-established journal metrics, such as Impact Factor, as an example. Therefore, for the bibliometric analysis of the impact of the ICL books within the Springer environment, Springer-developed web tools and their selected subscription databases were used. As the ICL books are related to earth sciences, they are offered electron- ically as a part of the Springer eBook package Earth and Environ- mental Science (EES); hence, this specific book collection was used. Google Scholar Much larger than the abovementioned databases is the web database used by the Google Scholar (GS) search engine (Google 2018). In last years, Google Scholar with its wide coverage is starting to be used widely, especially as it is free of charge (free software Publish or Perish—www.harzing.com/ pop.htm was used) and while it yields higher bibliometric values due to its wide coverage of literature and documents. The application retrieves citations for books and/or book chapters using titles, ISBN resp. ISSN number, or authors’ names. Using these citation data, the application computes different metrics, such as h-index and g-index. Given a set of published articles, ranked in decreasing order of the number of citations that they received, the g-index is the (unique) largest number such that the top g articles received (together) at least g citations (Egghe 2006). Results and discussion In our analysis, we will present results starting from a wider perspective and then going into a more detailed presentation, focusing on the landslide-related books published by the ICL since As a proxy to estimate coverage of landslide science by a database, we used the word “landslide” as the search term in titles covered by Web of Science and SCOPUS. The latter generally gives a better coverage of the topic. 1462 Landslides 15 & (2018) Table 2 (continued) Year Total Total Total Downloads Citations Reviews Mentions Readers re- men- read- per book per per per per views tions ers book book book book 2012 72 355 18.6K 23.1K 21 0.3 1.6 84 2013 84 1740 23.3K 22.0K 18 0.2 5.1 68 2014 99 741 27.3K 21.8K 13 0.2 1.8 66 2015 78 1470 23.1K 14.9K 9 0.2 3.8 59 2016 69 2320 16.4K 10.1K 6 0.2 5.5 39 2017 31 3180 11.2K 8.20K 3 0.1 7.8 27 Average per 66 675 13.2K 10.5K 14.4 0.2 1.8 46 year Subject Collection Performance—Percentage of books from Subject Collection EES that are cited more than the discipline average; n. a.—not available Table 3 Springer eBook Package Earth and Environmental Science—landslide science-related top books in the period 2005–2018 and their rank no. (data retrieved in May 2018; Springer 2018a) Year No. of books Rank in Bookmetrix downloads Rank in Bookmetrix citations 2005 150 – No. 2—Jakob and Hungr (2005): Debris-Flow Hazards and Related Phenomena (489 citations) 2006 167 No. 3—Evans et al. (2006): Landslides – from Massive Rock Slope Failure (105K) 2007 164 No. 9—Sassa et al. (2007): Progress – in landslide Science (50.2K) 2008 209 –– 2009 206 No. 4—Sassa et al. (2009): Landslides—Disaster – Risk Reduction (116K) 2010 223 –– 2011 225 –– 2012 221 –– 2013 343 No. 1—Margottini et al. (2013b): Landslide – Science and Practice—Vol. 2 (257K) No. 3—Margottini et al. (2013a): Landslide Science and Practice—Vol. 1 (186K) 2014 412 – No. 1—Sassa et al. (2014b): Landslide Science for a Safer Geoenvironment—Vol. 2 (131 citations) 2015 391 – No. 1—Lollino et al. (2015b): Engineering Geology for Society and Territory—Vol. 2 (196 citations) 2016 421 –– 2017 409 No. 1—Sassa et al. (2017): Advancing Culture No. 3—Mikoš et al. (2017a): Advancing Culture of of Living with Landslides—Vol. 1 (196K) Living with Landslides—Vol. 2 (60 citations) 2018 445 –– WoS and SCOPUS coverage of landslide research 20% conference proceedings, and finally roughly 10% book titles. As of May 6, 2018, in Web of Science Core Collection, 8.080 titles Highly cited papers cannot be determined in SCOPUS. were found that have the word “landslide*” in its title. Out of these The three most productive organizations with regard to the 8.080 titles, there were 6.151 articles, 1.582 proceedings papers, 194 total number of publications among the 14.144 titles were the editorial material, 95 review papers, 85 book chapters, 66 book Chinese Academy of Sciences (602 publications, 4.3%), followed reviews, … More than three quarters of all item in WoS are journal by CNR (Italy) with 479 publications (3.4%), and Chinese Univer- articles. Out of 8.080 titles, 1.455 were open access items. sity of Geosciences, Wuhan (465 publications, 3.3%). Among 8.080 titles, 67 papers were recognized as Highly Cited The top cited papers received the following number of citations: in Field (top 1% with regard to citation), out of them 63 articles 1565, 1130, 1000, 791, 733, and so on—their h-index was 179. The and 4 review papers—one proceedings paper among them, but percentage of cited items cannot be determined, since SCOPUS published in a journal. allows only the first 2000 items to be displayed. The three most productive organizations with regard to the total number of publications among the 8.080 titles were CNR Scopus metrics (Italy) with 361 publications (4.5%), followed by the Chinese Acad- Only Scopus data for 2016 (given in Table 1) was used, and the CiteScore metrics were calculated using data available from emy of Sciences (330 publications, 4.1%), and Chinese University of Geosciences, Wuhan (242 publications, 3.0%). May 31, 2017. In the CiteScore database, there were 49,145 serials: The top cited papers received the following number of citations: 46,774 journals, 663 trade journals, 1245 book series, and 463 conference proceedings. The aim of the analysis was to find a 937, 799, 698, 622, 563, and so on—their h-index was 137, and 72% of them were cited at least once. correlation between metrics for different types of serials using As of May 6, 2018, in SCOPUS database, 14.144 titles were found Scopus data. For this purpose, Pearson correlation coefficient of linear correlation was determined for different pairs of metrics. that have the word “landslide*” in its title. Out of these 14.144 titles, there were 9.436 articles, 3.255 conference papers, 753 book The overall Pearson coefficient for all 49,145 serials is quite high chapters, 216 reviews, 150 articles in press, … or with regard to the (p = 0.682) and shows good linear correlation between the CiteScore of a serial and the Percent Cited (the proportion of the source type, there were 9.774 papers from journals, 2.683 confer- ence proceedings, 1.052 books, 565 book series, …. The share of the documents in the serials published in 2013–2015 that have received journals in SCOPUS database is roughly 70%, followed by roughly at least 1 citations in 2016). The Pearson correlation between Landslides 15 & (2018) 1463 Review Article Table 4 Selected 52 book titles from the Springer eBook collection Earth and Environmental Science (EES) No. Authors Book title ICL/IPL Publication Discipline Type activity year 1 Sassa et al. 2005 Landslides—Risk Analysis and WLF0 2005 GEOG M Sustainable Disaster Management 2 Sassa and Canuti 2009 Landslides—Disaster Risk Reduction WLF1 2009 ES M 3 Margottini et al. 2013a Landslide Science and Practice—Vol. 1 WLF2 2013 ES M 4 Margottini et al. 2013b Landslide Science and Practice—Vol. 2 WLF2 2013 ES M 5 Margottini et al. 2013c Landslide Science and Practice—Vol. 3 WLF2 2013 ES M 6 Margottini et al. 2013d Landslide Science and Practice—Vol. 4 WLF2 2013 ES M 7 Margottini et al. 2013e Landslide Science and Practice—Vol. 5 WLF2 2013 ES M 8 Margottini et al. 2013f Landslide Science and Practice—Vol. 6 WLF2 2013 ES M 9 Margottini et al. 2013g Landslide Science and Practice—Vol. 7 WLF2 2013 ES M 10 Sassa et al. 2014a Landslide Science for a Safer WLF3 2014 ENV P Geoenvironment—Vol. 1 11 Sassa et al. 2014b Landslide Science for a Safer WLF3 2014 ENV P Geoenvironment—Vol. 2 12 Sassa et al. 2014c Landslide Science for a Safer WLF3 2014 ENV P Geoenvironment—Vol. 3 13 Sassa et al. 2017 Advancing Culture of Living with WLF4 2017 ES P Landslides—Vol. 1 14 Mikoš et al. 2017a Advancing Culture of Living with WLF4 2017 ES P Landslides—Vol. 2 15 Mikoš et al. 2017b Advancing Culture of Living with WLF4 2017 ES P Landslides—Vol. 3 16 Mikoš et al. 2017c Advancing Culture of Living with WLF4 2017 ES P Landslides—Vol. 4 17 Mikoš et al. 2017d Advancing Culture of Living with WLF4 2017 ES P Landslides—Vol. 5 18 Sassa et al. 2007 Progress in Landslide Science IPL 2007 GEOG M 19 Sassa et al. 2013 Landslides: Global Risk Preparedness IPL 2013 ES M 20 Shan et al. 2014 Landslides in Cold Regions in the IPL 2014 ES M Context of Climate Change 21 Sassa et al. 2018a Landslide Dynamics: ISDR-ICL Landslide IPL 2018 ES M Interactive Teaching Tools, Vol. 1 22 Sassa et al. 2018b Landslide Dynamics: ISDR-ICL Landslide IPL 2018 ES M Interactive Teaching Tools, Vol. 2 23 Lollino et al. 2015a Engineering Geology for Society IAEG 2015 ES P and Territory—Vol. 1 24 Lollino et al. 2015b Engineering Geology for Society IAEG 2015 ES P and Territory—Vol. 2 25 Lollino et al. 2015c Engineering Geology for Society IAEG 2015 ES P and Territory—Vol. 3 26 Lollino et al. 2015d Engineering Geology for Society IAEG 2015 ES P and Territory—Vol. 4 27 Lollino et al. 2015e Engineering Geology for Society IAEG 2015 ES P and Territory—Vol. 5 28 Lollino et al. 2015f Engineering Geology for Society IAEG 2015 ES P and Territory—Vol. 6 29 Lollino et al. 2015g Engineering Geology for Society IAEG 2015 ES P and Territory—Vol. 7 30 Lollino et al. 2015h Engineering Geology for Society IAEG 2015 ES P and Territory—Vol. 8 1464 Landslides 15 & (2018) Table 4 (continued) No. Authors Book title ICL/IPL Publication Discipline Type activi- year ty 31 Locat and Mienert 2003 Submarine Mass Movements and No 2003 ES P Their Consequences—1st Int. Symp. 32 Lykousis et al. 2007 Submarine Mass Movements and No 2007 ES P Their Consequences—3rd Int. Symp. 33 Mosher et al. 2010 Submarine Mass Movements and No 2010 ES P Their Consequences—4th Int. Symp. 34 Yamada et al. 2012 Submarine Mass Movements and No 2012 ES P Their Consequences—5th Int. Symp. 35 Krastel et al. 2014 Submarine Mass Movements and No 2014 ES P Their Consequences—6th Int. Symp. 36 Lamarche et al. 2016 Submarine Mass Movements and No 2016 ES P Their Consequences—7th Int. Symp. 37 Erismann and Abele 2001 Dynamics of Rockslides and Rockfalls No 2001 ES M 38 Jakob and Hungr 2005 Debris-flow Hazards and Related No 2005 ES M Phenomena 39 Evans et al. 2006 Landslides from Massive Rock Slope No 2006 ES P Failure 40 L'Heureux et al. 2014 Landslides in Sensitive Clays: From No 2014 ES M Geosciences to Risk Management 41 Thakur et al. 2017 Landslides in Sensitive Clays: From No 2017 ES M Research to Implementation 42 Thiebes 2012 Landslide Analysis and Early Warning No 2012 ES PhD Systems 43 Pradhan and Buchroithner Terrigenous Mass Movements No 2012 ES M 44 Ugai et al. 2013 Earthquake-Induced Landslides No 2013 ES P 45 Ren 2015 Storm-triggered Landslides in Warmer No 2015 ES M Climates 46 Scaioni 2015 Modern Technologies for Landslide No 2015 ES M Monitoring and Prediction 47 Mandal and Maiti 2015 Semi-quantitative Approaches for No 2015 ES M Landslide Assessment and Prediction 48 Klose 2015 Landslide Databases as Tools for No 2015 ES PhD Integrated Assessment of Landslide Risk 49 Wu 2015 Recent Advances in Modeling Landslides No 2015 ENG M and Debris Flows 50 Pradhan 2017 Laser Scanning Applications in No 2017 ES M Landslide Assessment 51 Zhao 2017 Coupled DEM-CFD Analyses of No 2017 ENG M Landslide-Induced Debris Flows 52 Yamagishi and Bhandari GIS Landslide No 2017 ES M Discipline: ES Earth Sciences, ENV Environment, GEOG Geography; Type: M Monograph, P Proceedings, PhD Doctoral Thesis CiteScore and SNIP (p = 0.820) and CiteScore and SJR (p = 0.838) exhibiting higher linear correlation between CiteScore and each are even higher. This shows a good potential of CiteScore as a new of the other three metrics when compared to journals (46,774 metric for serials. Conference proceedings (463 titles) are titles, leaving out trade journals with only 663 titles). In addition, Landslides 15 & (2018) 1465 Review Article 1466 Landslides 15 & (2018) Table 5 Bookmetrics data for the selected 52 eBooks from the Springer package Earth and Environmental Science (EES) (data retrieved in May, 2018; Springer 2018a) Selected eBooks Bookmetrix No. Authors Chapters Downloads Citations Citations Book Journal h-index % cited Mentions Readers per item citations citations chapters 1 Sassa et al. 2005 46 87.9K 51 1.11 8 43 3 46 0 132 2 Sassa and Canuti 33 116K 119 3.61 23 96 5 79 5 154 3 Margottini et al. 79 186K 101 1.28 17 84 5 43 0 67 2013a 4 Margottini et al. 89 257K 49 0.55 10 39 3 30 0 446 2013b 5 Margottini et al. 60 109K 48 0.80 12 36 3 47 1 19 2013c 6 Margottini et al. 55 78.1K 38 0.69 10 28 3 40 0 47 2013d 7 Margottini et al. 45 60.7K 28 0.62 3 25 3 33 2 14 2013e 8 Margottini et al. 101 23.1K 65 0.64 10 55 3 35 1 42 2013f 9 Margottini et al. 44 50.4K 34 0.77 8 26 3 30 3 11 2013g 10 Sassa et al. 2014a 67 78.9K 67 1.00 25 42 4 46 1 289 11 Sassa et al. 2014b 129 61.4K 131 1.02 47 84 4 46 0 254 12 Sassa et al. 2014c 106 37.9K 45 0.42 10 35 2 32 1 169 13 Sassa et al. 2017 51 196K 5 0.10 0 5 1 8 1 23 14 Mikoš et al. 2017a 133 80.4K 61 0.46 53 8 2 40 5 61 15 Mikoš et al. 2017b 70 45.2K 25 0.36 12 13 2 29 1 17 16 Mikoš et al. 2017c 79 37.0K 8 0.10 0 8 1 10 3 29 17 Mikoš et al. 2017d 63 22.1K 12 0.19 2 10 1 16 15 217 18 Sassa et al. 2007 26 54.2K 64 2.46 6 58 3 62 0 301 19 Sassa et al. 2013 26 43.3K 18 0.69 9 9 3 31 1 97 20 Shan et al. 2014 21 14.0K 25 1.19 4 21 2 38 0 36 21 Sassa et al. 2018a 42 14.5K 0 0.00 0 0 0 0% 2 85 22 Sassa et al. 2018b 54 7.62K 0 0.00 0 0 0 0% 0 3 23 Lollino et al. 2015a 105 29.3K 32 0.30 2 30 2 22 15 316 24 Lollino et al. 2015b 388 36.5K 196 0.51 33 166 4 28 9 1060 25 Lollino et al. 2015c 129 71.4K 44 0.34 5 39 3 22 2 449 Landslides 15 & (2018) 1467 Table 5 (continued) Selected eBooks Bookmetrix No. Authors Chapters Downloads Citations Citations Book Journal h-index % cited Mentions Readers per item cita- cita- chap- tions tions ters 26 Lollino et al. 2015d 43 27.5K 13 0.30 1 12 2 21 5 254 27 Lollino et al. 2015e 265 18.2K 62 0.23 6 56 3 17 20 576 28 Lollino et al. 2015f 195 83.7K 18 0.09 0 18 1 9 4 389 29 Lollino et al. 2015g 54 26.6K 5 0.09 3 2 1 7 3 100 30 Lollino et al. 2015h 103 36.1K 22 0.21 3 19 2 17 6 286 31 Locat and Mienert 58 14.7K 185 3.19 16 169 7 71 0 382 32 Lykousis et al. 2007 43 45.6K 99 2.30 13 86 5 74 0 161 33 Mosher et al. 2010 62 76.5K 65 1.05 6 59 3 56 0 1170 34 Yamada et al. 2012 66 109K 130 1.97 26 104 6 73 7 665 35 Krastel et al. 2014 61 74.6K 94 1.54 15 79 3 61 3 184 36 Lamarche et al. 61 63.3K 36 0.59 8 28 3 38 15 338 37 Erismann and Abele 7 1.09K 73 10.43 5 68 0 0 0 38 38 Jakob and Hungr 27 77.2K 489 18.11 51 438 12 93 3 760 39 Evans et al. 2006 32 105K 138 4.31 12 126 6 88 2 164 40 L'Heureux et al. 31 40.1K 57 1.84 40 17 4 77 0 112 41 Thakur et al. 2017 50 17.3K 24 0.48 20 4 2 28 10 23 42 Thiebes 2012 11 11.0K 11 1.00 1 10 1 9 0 59 43 Pradhan and 12 11.5K 52 4.33 4 48 3 75 0 207 Buchroithner 44 Ugai et al. 2013 107 61.6K 49 0.46 5 44 3 28 2 69 45 Ren 2015 11 8.45K 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 18 46 Scaioni 2015 12 14.7K 11 0.92 3 8 2 50 3 19 47 Mandal and Maiti 8 5.56K 7 0.88 0 7 1 25 0 30 48 Klose 2015 6 2.65K 3 0.50 3 0 1 17 0 40 49 Wu 2015 25 35.5K 10 0.40 0 10 1 32 1 129 Review Article book series with 1245 titles exhibit comparable Pearson coeffi- cients to those for journals. These results show that the proposed Scopus journal metrics may be used for different types of serials, also for book series and conference proceedings. It is therefore important for a book to be included into the Scopus database. Springer Nature eBook package Earth and Environmental Science (EES) Springer’s Earth and Environmental Science eBook Package brings together up-to-date resources from trusted authors work- ing around the world on topics such as water management, ecol- ogy, geology, environmental biotechnology, and sustainable development. The data for the period from 2005 to 2017 is shown in Table 2. In Table 2, a steady growth of book titles covered by the collection can be observed in the period from 2004 onward. The prevailing type of periodicals covered in the EES collection by the number of titles are monographs (41%), followed by contributed volumes (28%), and other types (20%)—the proceedings are mak- ing 11% out of all 6207 book titles. Looking at the Subject Collec- tion Performance (i.e., percentage of books from Subject Collection EES that are cited more than the discipline average—i.- e., 50%), the performance is very good. The EES Collection Cita- tion Performance (CCP) for 2 years grew over years steadily to over 3 in 2017, and for the 5 years, it is close to 4. The values of CCP are comparable to the journals’ Impact Factor. From Altmetric point of view, the number of Reviews and Mentions per package and year are rather small, and the impact of eBooks in this respect is limited as measured by Bookmetrix. The number of chapter downloads per package and year has roughly doubled from 4 to 8 million per year since mid-2000s, mainly due to the growth in number of titles per package, as shown by a stable average downloads per book in a year. Average number of citations per book in this period is ~ 14, but close to half of the book titles are not monographs (having individual chapters); this citation rate is not very high compared to journals. Searching for the top ranked book titles in the EES Package for the period 2005–2017 with respect to the number of downloads per book and the number of citations per book, some landslide re- search and landslide risk reduction-related book titles can be found, some of which are produced by the ICL (Table 3). This confirms the importance of landslide science within the earth and environmental sciences as covered by Springer books. Furthermore, looking at the highlights in Earth Sciences in 2017, prepared by Springer Nature (Springer 2018e), among 10 most downloaded journal articles, there is no article from the ICL journal Landslides, and among top downloaded new books in Earth Sciences, the title Landslides in Sensitive Clays (Thakur et al. 2017) is mentioned. Selected landslide-related book titles from Springer EES package For the analysis, we have selected 52 book titles from the Springer eBook package Earth and Environmental Science (EES), related to landslide science (Table 4). The distribution of 52 selected book titles to disciplines within the package is as follows: Earth Sciences (45 titles), Environment (3 titles), Geography (2 titles), and Engi- neering (2 titles). A similar distribution to the serial type is as follows: monographs (26 titles), proceedings (24), and PhD theses (2 titles). Overall, 22 book titles are related to the ICL activities, and the rest are not. The 52 selected books have together 3426 1468 Landslides 15 & (2018) Table 5 (continued) Selected eBooks Bookmetrix No. Authors Chapters Downloads Citations Citations Book Journal h-index % cited Mentions Readers per item cita- cita- chap- tions tions ters 50 Pradhan 2017 16 5.24K 12 0.75 2 10 2 56 0 41 51 Zhao 2017 6 1.90K 1 0.17 0 1 1 17 0 15 52 Yamagishi and 13 5.05K 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 2 33 Bhandari 2017 Average 65.9 53.4K 56.4 – 10.6 45.8 3 32 3 204 Sum 3426 2.78M 2932 – 552 2383 –– 154 10.6K Fig. 1 Bookmetrics chapter downloads and citations for the selected 28 book titles (data retrieved in May, 2018; Springer 2018a) chapters, or nearly 66 chapters per book on average. The total Downloads and Citations per book, as well as the number of number of downloads of all 52 books is over 2.778 million or 53,415 Mentions and Readers. on average per title. The total number of citations is 2932, and the Comparing the ICL-related books with the rest of the analyzed average number of citations per book title is 56.4, and per book books, we have taken the following two titles as the benchmark: chapter is 2.67, since only 1098 out of 3426 chapters have been Debris-flow Hazards and Related Phenomena by Jakob and Hungr cited so far—i.e., 32% chapters from the analyzed 52 books. Out of (2005) with 93% cited chapters and h-index = 12 and Landslides 56.4 received citations on average per 52 analyzed books, on from Massive Rock Slope Failure by Evans et al. (2006) with 88% average, 10.6 are from books and 45.8 are from journals—an cited chapters and h-index = 6. The ICL-related titles important conclusion that books are not cited only in other books. Landslides—Disaster Risk Reduction by Sassa and Canuti (2009) The average h-index of books is (only) 3—i.e., only 3 chapters, on with 79% cited chapters and h-index = 5 and Landslides—Risk average, received 3 or more citations (the average number of Analysis and Sustainable Disaster Management by Sassa et al. chapters per book is nearly 66). Comparing the selected (2005) with 46% cited chapters and h-index = 3 is not on pair with landslide-related 52 books (Table 5) with the whole eBook package these two highly cited books. Comparing the impact of, e.g., WLF2 EES (Table 2), the books in landslide science and landslide risk in Rome (Margottini et al. 2013a-2013g) and WLF3 in Beijing (Sassa reduction are above average with respect to the average number of et al. 2014a-2014c) with the XII IAEG Congress in Turin (Lollino Table 6 Comparison of the 52 landslide-related books and the whole Springer eBook Package Earth and Environmental Science (EES) (data retrieved in May, 2018; Springer 2018a) Book selection No. of Total Total Total Total Total Total books downloads citations readers downloads citations readers per book per book per book ICL-related books 22 1.660.720 994 2.513 75.487 45.2 114 Non-ICL-related 30 1.116.840 1.938 8.087 37.228 64.6 270 books Landslide-related books 52 2.777.560 2.932 10.600 53.415 56.4 204 2001–2017 EES 2000–2017 4196 64.857.000 76.020 284.200 15.457 18.1 68 EES 1918–2017 6207 65.392.000 89.220 288.560 10.535 14.4 46 Landslides 15 & (2018) 1469 Review Article Table 7 Correlation between the selected metrics for the 52 landslide-related books from the Springer eBook Package Earth and Environmental Science (EES) (data retrieved in May, 2018; Springer 2018a) Pearson Publication Number Total Total Citations Total Book % cited coefficient r year of downloads citations per Readers h-index chapters chapters chapter Publication 0.19 −0.13 −0.57 −0.67 −0.23 −0.57 −0.53 year Number of 0.13 0.20 −0.21 0.55 0.10 −0.14 chapters Total 0.22 0.04 0.19 0.35 0.26 down- loads Total 0.80 0.54 0.89 0.62 citations Citations per 0.25 0.63 0.46 chapter Total readers 0.47 0.29 Book 0.81 h-index % cited chapters The Pearson cofficient values in italics represent strong and moderate positive and negative linear correlations, respectively et al. 2015a-2015h) shows that the variability in the total number of Book metrics in Web of Science, Google Scholar, and SCOPUS citations among volumes of the same scientific event are larger We searched for the data on book metrics for the selected 52 book than between the events (WLF2, WLF3, and XII IAEG). This titles from Table 4 in the following three databases: Web of Science confirms that it is not easy for scientific committees and volume (WoS by Clarivate Analytics), Google Scholar (by Google Inc.), and editors to prepare a set of equally “important” volumes for a single in SCOPUS (by Elsevier). Not all book titles are covered by all scientific event that will be approximately equally cited in the three databases. The obtained results are shown in Table 8. Only 16 future, since some topics are “hot,” attract more researchers, and book titles are covered by WoS, among them only Landslides in are later more cited than other topics from the same scientific Cold Regions in the Context of Climate Change by Shan et al. (2014) event. is an ICL-related title. All 52 book titles are covered by Google The differences in the number of chapter downloads and the Scholar, only that separate volumes (book titles) from the same number of cited chapters are also shown graphically in Fig. 1 for event cannot be easily distinguished, and therefore, GS data are selected 28 book titles from the Springer eBook Package EES. For presented in this case for all volumes only. The SCOPUS database the whole package, the average number of downloads per book is has not covered 11 book titles; for 5 further book titles, no data was 10.5 K, and the average number of citations per book is 14.4—both available on the chapter level (% cited chapters, chapter h-index). metrics are taken from Table 2. Overall, the ICL-related books, Google Scholar (GS) achieves the highest metric values due to analyzed in this paper, are among well-cited book titles in the field its wide coverage of literature. The average number of citations per of earth sciences. book chapter is as follows: 79 in WoS, 207 in GS, and 139 in Scopus Furthermore, we have compared the selected 52 landslide- (for computation in GS, the total number of citations for a few related book titles (ICL- and non-ICL-related titles) and the whole books integrating all volumes (book titles) was divided by the Springer eBook package EES (Table 6). The selected 52 landslide- number of volumes, i.e., WLF2, WLF3, WLF4, ISDR-ICL Interac- related book titles are above the average metrics for the whole EES tive Teaching Tools, XII IAEG). The average (maximum) h-index is with regard to the total number of downloads per book, the total as follows: 3 (10) in WoS, 6 (19) in GS, and 5 (17) in Scopus. A direct number of citations per book, and the total number of readers per title-to-title comparison shows higher h-index values for GS for all book. The ICL-related books are getting more downloads but less book titles compared to Scopus. The annual growth of h-index is readers and citations (so far) as the selected non-ICL-related rarely over 1 (h-I,norm in Table 8). The GS data also show that books. typically the average number of authors per book chapter is close We also looked at the linear correlation using Pearson coeffi- to 3 (between 2 and 4). cient p between selected metrics for the 52 landslide-related Jakob and Hungr (2005) gets h-index = 19 (Bookmetrix: h-in- books—strong positive linear correlation (0.8 < p < 1), moderate dex = 12), and Evans et al. (2006) gets h-index = 16 (Bookmetrix: h- positive linear correlation (0.5 < p < 0.8), and moderate negative index = 6). The GS compound h-index for the ICL-related books is linear correlation (−0.8 < p < −0.5) are given in italics in Table 7. also higher as for the Bookmetrix data: Margottini et al. (2013a- To expand the comparison and to strengthen the bibliometric 2013g) from WLF2 in Rome 2011 gets h-index = 13 with ~60% cited analysis, further book metrics, made available by other widely chapters, comparable to Lollino et al. (2015a-2015h) from XII IAEG used databases, were used. in Turin 2014 that gets h-index = 10 with a bit over 40% cited 1470 Landslides 15 & (2018) Table 8 Web of Science, Google Scholar and Scopus data for the selected 52 eBooks from the Springer package Earth and Environmental Science (EES) (data retrieved in December 2017) Selected eBooks Web of Science Google No. Authors Citations h-index Average citations Authors per cited Citations h-index per chapter chapter 1 Sassa et al. 2005 n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.93 134 7 2 Sassa and Canuti 2009 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.48 420 11 3 Margottini et al. n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.41 1422 13 2013a 4 Margottini et al. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2013b 5 Margottini et al. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2013c 6 Margottini et al. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2013d 7 Margottini et al. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2013e 8 Margottini et al. 2013f n.a. n.a. n.a. 9 Margottini et al. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2013g 10 Sassa et al. 2014a n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.39 597 9 11 Sassa et al. 2014b n.a. n.a. n.a. 12 Sassa et al. 2014c n.a. n.a. n.a. 13 Sassa et al. 2017 n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.55 226 3 14 Mikoš et al. 2017a n.a. n.a. n.a. 15 Mikoš et al. 2017b n.a. n.a. n.a. 16 Mikoš et al. 2017c n.a. n.a. n.a. 17 Mikoš et al. 2017d n.a. n.a. n.a. 18 Sassa et al. 2007 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.50 175 6 19 Sassa et al. 2013 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.85 80 4 20 Shan et al. 2014 37 4 1.54 3.67 63 4 21 Sassa et al. 2018a n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.20 18 2 22 Sassa et al. 2018b n.a. n.a. n.a. 23 Lollino et al. 2015a 65 4 0.63 3.48 1524 10 24 Lollino et al. 2015b 206 4 0.53 25 Lollino et al. 2015c 106 4 0.82 26 Lollino et al. 2015d 11 1 0.26 27 Lollino et al. 2015e 101 3 0.38 28 Lollino et al. 2015f 27 1 0.14 29 Lollino et al. 2015g 15 2 0.30 30 Lollino et al. 2015h 46 3 0.45 31 Locat and Mienert n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.00 55 1 32 Lykousis et al. 2007 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.50 7 1 33 Mosher et al. 2010 n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.39 711 14 34 Yamada et al. 2012 335 10 5.08 3.52 592 14 35 Krastel et al. 2014 158 6 2.63 4.03 311 9 36 Lamarche et al. 2016 85 4 1.39 3.59 157 6 Landslides 15 & (2018) 1471 Review Article Table 8 (continued) Selected eBooks Web of Science Google No. Authors Citations h-index Average citations Authors per cited Citations h-index per chapter chapter 37 Erismann and Abele n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.00 0 0 38 Jakob and Hungr 2005 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.74 1790 19 39 Evans et al. 2006 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.97 809 16 40 L'Heureux et al. 2014 25 2 0.76 3.43 162 6 41 Thakur et al. 2017 n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.71 41 3 42 Thiebes 2012 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.00 3 1 43 Pradhan and n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.80 148 4 Buchroithner 2012 44 Ugai et al. 2013 n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.55 212 7 45 Ren 2015 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.00 4 1 46 Scaioni 2015 17 2 1.42 4.09 54 5 47 Mandal and Maiti n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.00 9 1 48 Klose 2015 3 1 0.50 1.00 0 0 49 Wu 2015 26 3 1.04 3.04 43 3 50 Pradhan 2017 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.29 7 2 51 Zhao 2017 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.00 0 0 52 Yamagishi and n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.23 0 0 Bhandari 2017 Selected eBooks Google Scopus No. h-I,norm h-I,annual g-index Citations % cited chapters Chapter h-index 1 3 0.23 10 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2 8 0.89 19 282 94% 10 3 6 1.20 18 179 61% 7 4 142 58% 6 5 81 60% 4 6 69 60% 4 7 45 51% 3 8 159 63% 5 9 53 48% 3 10 4 1.00 12 72 49% 4 11 207 61% 6 12 87 45% 4 13 1 1.00 3 n.a. n.a. n.a. 14 n.a. n.a. n.a. 15 n.a. n.a. n.a. 16 n.a. n.a. n.a. 17 3 5% 1 18 4 0.36 12 138 85% 5 19 2 0.40 8 44 73% 4 20 3 0.75 7 n.a. n.a. n.a. 21 1 0.50 4 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1472 Landslides 15 & (2018) Table 8 (continued) Selected eBooks Google Scopus No. h-I,norm h-I,annual g-index Citations % cited chapters Chapter h-index 22 n.a. n.a. n.a. 23 5 1.67 12 123 46% 5 24 337 43% 6 25 172 49% 6 26 29 42% 3 27 221 42% 5 28 76 28% 3 29 26 35% 2 30 81 44% 4 31 1 0.17 1 n.a. n.a. n.a. 32 1 0.09 2 246 89% 10 33 7 0.88 22 492 95% 11 34 6 0.86 19 477 91% 13 35 3 0.60 13 142 74% 6 36 2 0.67 7 123 73% 5 37 0 0 0 195 n.a. n.a. 38 16 1.14 39 1254 96% 17 39 14 1.17 28 n.a. n.a. n.a. 40 4 0.80 10 15 29% 1 41 1 1.00 3 3 4% 1 42 1 0.17 1 26 n.a. n.a. 43 3 0.50 10 56 58% 3 44 4 0.80 10 n.a. n.a. n.a. 45 1 0.33 2 1 n.a. n.a. 46 2 0.67 6 15 50% 2 47 1 0.33 2 3 n.a. n.a. 48 0 0 0 5 n.a. n.a. 49 2 0.67 4 0 0% 0 50 1 1.00 2 3 13% 1 51 0 0 0 0 0% 0 52 0 0 0 0 0% 0 n.a. data not available chapters. From the analyzed book titles, some older proceedings of higher than in Bookmetrix database of Springer. If we measure the international symposium on Submarine Mass Movements and impact of a scientific book using chapter citations, we must be Their Consequences are also highly cited—exhibiting h-index of 14 careful which database we use. (Mosher et al. 2010; Yamada et al. 2012) with over 90% of cited The number of Bookmetrix downloads is more or less the chapters. The average was 50% cited chapters for all book titles in same for all chapters in the same volume (book title), Scopus. reaching from 2000 to 3000 downloads per chapter in older The relation of citations to book chapters between Springer book titles. Bookmetrix data, GS, and Scopus is also shown on the sample of The Bookmetrix chapter citations are concentrated to only a selected chapters from 20 ICL-related eBooks from the Springer few best chapters in a book title; the best ones from each analyzed package EES with the highest Bookmetrix citations or Google book title has achieved until early 2018 between close to 10 and not Scholar citations or both (Table 9). The number of chapter cita- more than 20 Bookmetrix citations. The majority of those citations tions in Scopus is, in average, lower than in Google Scholar and came from journals and not from books. Landslides 15 & (2018) 1473 Review Article 1474 Landslides 15 & (2018) Table 9 Selected chapters from 20 ICL-related eBooks from the Springer collection Earth and Environmental Science (EES) with the highest number of Bookmetrix citations or Google citations or both (book titles Sassa et al. 2018a, b are too new to be included into this table) Type Book Chapter Title Bookmetrix Bookmetrix citations (in Google Scopus downloads books & journals) Scholar citations citations WLF0 Sassa et al. Tommasi et al. The Landslide Sequence Induced by the 2002 1.71K 5 (0 + 5) 32 n.a. 2005 2005 Eruption at Stromboli Volcano Boldini et al. 2005 Mechanism of Landslide Causing the December 1.72K 1 (0 + 1) 13 n.a. 2002 Tsunami at Stromboli Volcano (Italy) Sassa 2005 ICL History and Activities 1.82K 0 11 n.a. WLF1 Sassa and Lacasse and Nadim Landslide Risk Assessment and Mitigation 3.15K 16 (3 + 13) 62 37 Canuti 2009 Strategy Hervas and Mapping: inventories, susceptibility, hazard 2.96K 12 (0 + 12) 52 33 Bobrowsky 2009 and risk Cannon and The Increasing Wildfire and Post-Fire 2.67K 10 (2 + 8) 38 25 DeGraff 2009 Debris-Flow Threat in Western USA, and Implications for Consequences of Climate Change WLF2–1 Margottini Raspini et al. 2013 Landslide Mapping Using SqueeSAR Data: 2.22K 10 (1 + 9) 19 14 et al. Giampilieri (Italy) Case Study 2013a Tsangaratos et al. Case event system for landslide susceptibility 2.18K 6 (0 + 6) 19 12 2013 analysis Trigila et al. 2013 Landslide susceptibility mapping at national 2.24K 6 (1 + 5) 14 11 scale: The Italian case study Devoto et al. 2013 Landslides along the north-west coast of the 2.17K 4 (1 + 3) 12 10 island of Malta Ardizzone et al. Very high-resolution stereoscopic satellite 2.30K 7 (1 + 6) 13 10 2013 images for landslide mapping Hermanns et al. Systematic Mapping of Large Unstable Rock 2.26K 2 (1 + 1) 23 9 2013a Slopes in Norway WLF2–2 Margottini Antronico et al. Conventional and Innovative Techniques for the 2.75K 6 (1 + 5) 9 7 et al. 2013 Monitoring of Displacements in Landslide 2013b Affected Area Tapete et al. 2013 Radar interferometry for early stage warning on 2.74K 2 (0 + 2) 11 10 monuments at risk Arosio et al. 2013 Freeze-thaw cycle and rockfall monitoring 2.77K 4 (2 + 2) 13 8 WLF2–3 Margottini Scheidl et al. 2013 Runout Prediction of Debris Flows and Similar 1.72K 7 (5 + 2) 14 5 et al. 2013c Mass Movements Crosta et al. 2013b On controls of flow-like landslide evolution by 1.65K 2 (0 + 2) 9 6 an erodible layer Salvati et al. 2013 1.66K 0 3 6 Landslides 15 & (2018) 1475 Table 9 (continued) Type Book Chapter Title Bookmetrix Bookmetrix citations (in Google Scopus downloads books & journals) Scholar cita- citations tions A new digital catalog of harmful landslides and floods in Italy WLF2–4 Margottini Avelar et al. 2013 Mechanisms of the Recent Catastrophic 1.36K 4 (1 + 3) 31 2 et al. Landslides in the Mountainous Range 2013d of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Deline et al. 2013 The December 2008 Crammont Rock Avalanche, 1.34K 0 36 1 Mont Blanc Massif Area, Italy Springman et al. Rock glacier degradation and instabilities 1.33K 3 (0 + 3) 12 9 2013 in the European Alps: A characterization and monitoring experiment in the Turtmanntal, CH Damiano and Potential effects of climate change on slope 1.34K 4 (1 + 3) 9 6 Mercogliano stability in unsaturated pyroclastic soils WLF2–5 Margottini Harp et al. 2013 The Effect of Complex Fault Rupture on the 1.38K 3 (0 + 3) 21 5 et al. Distribution of Landslides Triggered by the 2013e 12 January 2010, Haiti Earthquake Crosta et al. 2013a Interaction of landslide mass and water 1.31K 3 (0 + 3) 9 7 resulting in impulse waves WLF2–6 Margottini Roberts et al. 2013 Impacts of the 2007 Landslide-Generated 0.29K 8 (0 + 8) 13 9 et al. 2013f Tsunami in Chehalis Lake, Canada Coelho Netto et al. January 2011: The Extreme Landslide Disaster 0.20K 2 (0 + 2) 32 3 2013 in Brazil Benedetti et al. San Leo: Centuries of coexistence with 0.15K 2 (0 + 2) 10 11 2013 landslides Hermanns et al. Rockslide dams in Møre og Romsdal County, 0.38K 0 11 9 2013b Norway WLF2–7 Margottini Schaub et al. 2013 Landslides and New Lakes in Deglaciating 1.16K 10 (1 + 9) 23 17 et al. Areas: A Risk Management Framework 2013g Trezzini et al. 2013 Landslide and flood: Economic and social 1.17K 3 (1 + 2) 8 5 impacts in Italy WLF3–1 Sassa et al. Sassa et al. 2014d Plenary: Progress in Landslide Dyanmics 1.14K 6 (2 + 4) 17 3 2014a Pennington et al. Antecedent precipitation as a potential proxy 1.13K 4 (2 + 2) 11 7 2014 for landslide incidence in South West United Kingdom Huntley et al. 2014 Fiber optic strain monitoring and evaluation 1.16K 1 (0 + 1) 11 5 of a slow-moving landslide near Ashcroft, British Columbia, Canada Review Article 1476 Landslides 15 & (2018) Table 9 (continued) Type Book Chapter Title Bookmetrix Bookmetrix citations (in Google Scopus downloads books & journals) Scholar cita- citations tions WLF3–2 Sassa et al. Dou et al. 2014 GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping 0.32K 15 (2 + 13) 30 20 2014b using a certainty factor model and its validation in the Chuetsu area, central Japan Zizioli et al. 2014 Rainfall-triggered shallow landslides mapping 0.29K 2 (1 + 1) 9 9 through Pleiades images Klose et al. 2014b Estimation of direct landslide costs in 0.29K 2 (1 + 1) 11 8 industrialized countries: Challenges, concepts, and case study WLF3–3 Sassa et al. Xu et al. 2014b Did the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake lead to 0.18K 1 (0 + 1) 7 7 2014c a net volume loss? Hermanns et al. Approach for systematic rockslide mapping of 0.18K 1 (1 + 0) 11 5 2014 unstable rock slopes in Norway Crosta et al. 2014 Large slope instabilities in northern Chile: 0.18K 1 (0 + 1) 7 5 Inventory, characterization and possible triggers WLF4–1 Sassa et al. Klose et al. 2014a Landslide Hazards and Climate Change 0.87K 0 3 n.a. 2017 Adaptation of Transport Infrastructures in Germany WLF4–2 Mikoš et al. Tanteri et al. 2014 Multitemporal UAV Survey for Mass Movement 0.35K 3 (2 + 1) 5 n.a. 2017a Detection and Monitoring WLF4–3 Mikoš et al. Hiraoka et al. 2014 A Full-Scale Model Test for Predicting Collapse 0.40K 0 3 n.a. 2017b Time Using Displacement of Slope Surface During Slope Cutting Work WLF4–4 Mikoš et al. Baczynski and Bar Landslide Monitoring and Management 0.24K 1 (0 + 1) 1 n.a. 2017c 2014 Challenge in Remote Papua New Guinea WLF4–5 Mikoš et al. Emmer and Inventory and Typology of Landslide-Dammed 0.12K 2 (0 + 2) 3 3 2017d Juřicová 2014 Lakes of the Cordillera Blanca (Peru) ICL Sassa et al. McSaveney and Rockslides and Their Motion 1.94K 17 (1 + 16) 52 46 Mono- 2007 Davis 2007 graph Hungr 2007 Dynamics of Rapid Landslides 1.99K 10 (0 + 10) 33 18 Picarelli 2007 Considerations about the Mechanics of Slow 1.94K 2 (0 + 2) 17 10 Active Landslides in Clay ICL Sassa et al. Mihalić and The Croatian-Japanese joint research project 1.54K 3 (3 + 0) 31 12 Mono- 2013 Arbanas 2013 on landslides: Activities and public benefits graph Nadim et al. 2013 Assessment of Global Landslide Hazard Hotspots 1.66K 3 (1 + 2) 8 5 Petkovšek et al. Mechanism of Active Landslides in Flysch 1.57K 3 (1 + 2) 8 5 Emmer et al. 2014 0.60K 8 (1 + 7) 23 n.a. Comparing the number of chapter citations from the 52 ana- lyzed books related to landslide science, we may conclude that their maximum numbers of citations are far below highly cited journal papers, e.g., from the ICL journal Landslides. Sassa et al. (2009) found that after 5 years of the journal Landslides (2004– 2008), the most cited journal articles received a few tens of Google Scholar citations, and up to 20 ISI WoS citations (Sassa et al. 2009; Table 1). This situation improved a lot in the second 5 years of the journal Landslides (2009–2013) since the most cited journal arti- cles received already close to and over 100 Google Scholar cita- tions, and several tens of WoS citations (Sassa et al. 2015, Table 4). The average number of journal article citations is much higher as for book chapters, even though the total number of article downloads is of the order of several hundred or a few thousand downloads, and not several ten thousand as is the case for book chapters. The rate between journal article citations to their num- ber of downloads is for the journal Landslides for the most cited articles up to 1:10. For example, 11 Highly Cited Papers in the journal Landslides are given in Table 10. The number of down- loads per citable item has no significant impact on its total number of received citations. Landslide-related scientific events The results so far have shown that articles in conference proceed- ings are not cited as often as journal articles, and that there are large differences between single chapters in the same conference proceedings and between chapters in different books. However, can we compare series of landslide-related scientific events with regard to their bibliometric impact? In Google Scholar, we compared selected metrics for the pro- ceedings of World Landslide Forums (ICL), congresses of the International Association for Engineering Geology and the Envi- ronment (IAEG), and proceedings of the International Sympo- sium on Landslides (ISL). The results are as follows: – WLF (2009–2017) reveals 999 papers with on average 3.45 authors per paper, h-index = 15 and g-index = 21 (query words “world landslide forum” plus all WLF proceedings titles); – IAEG (1970–2016) reveals 696 papers with on average 2.35 authors per paper, h-index = 21, and g-index = 27 (query words “IAEG, NOT conference bulletin bull. conf.”); – ISL (from third ISL on, 1980–2016) reveals 799 papers with on average 2.73 authors per paper, h-index = 29, and g-index = 64 (query words “international symposium on landslides OR landslides and engineered slopes”). On the basis of this rough estimation using Google Scholar data, we may conclude that ICL World Landslide Forums are “young” events (since 2009) and cannot compete yet with “established” events such as mature and large IAEG congress (since 1970) or mature and specialized International Symposium on Landslides (since 1972). A re- analysis in a due time will show whether ICL is catching up with these two well-known series of landslide-related events. Alternative metrics The bibliometric (scientometric) parameters, presented in this study, are only one part of the story. Alternative metrics are Landslides 15 & (2018) 1477 Table 9 (continued) Type Book Chapter Title Bookmetrix Bookmetrix citations (in Google Scopus downloads books & journals) Scholar cita- citations tions ICL Shan et al. Glacier Retreat, Lakes Development and Mono- 2014 Associated Natural Hazards in Cordilera graph Blanca, Peru Khomutov and Assessment of Landslide Zahards in a Typical 0.61K 3 (0 + 3) 9 n.a. Leibman 2014 Tundra of Central Yamal, Russia Leibman et al. 2014 Cryogenic Landslides in the West-Siberian Plain 0.61K 1 (0 + 1) 6 n.a. of Russia: Classification, Mechanisms, and Landforms n.a. data not available Review Article currently one of the most popular research topics in scientometric journal articles. On average, the analyzed 3426 book chapters research, and different services (such as, e.g., Altmetric.com) give from 52 landslide-related books have been downloaded over insight about how and where books are discussed online, i.e., in 53,000 times each; 1092 chapters (32%) received 2932 citations social media, but also in news articles, blogs, and policy (2.68 citations per cited chapter and 0.86 citations per pub- documents. Bornmann (2015) prepared an overview of three of lished chapter). the most important altmetrics: microblogging (Twitter), online – The selected 52 landslide-related book titles are above the average reference managers (Mendeley, CiteULike), and blogging—the metrics for the whole Springer eBook Package Earth and Environ- correlation with traditional citations for microblogging counts mental Science with regard to the total number of downloads per was negligible, for blog counts was small, and for bookmark book, the total number of citations per book, and the total number counts from online reference managers, medium to large. The of readers per book. The ICL-related books are getting more down- presence and density of social media altmetric counts are still very loadsbut lessreadersand citations(so far) astheselectednon-ICL- low and not very frequent among scientific publications, which related books. was shown by Costas et al. (2015). Altmetric measurements derived – The number of chapter downloads is more or less equal for all from the social web are increasingly advocated and used as early chapters in one book and the chapter citations in different citation indicators of article impact and usefulness, as discussed by databases are rather strictly limited to only a small fraction of a few Thelwall et al. (2013). The increasing popularity and usage of some highly cited chapters—many chapters are downloaded as a whole e- social media, e.g., LinkedIn or Researchgate, may well rise research Book but are not receiving any attention in the form of a chapter efforts in the field of alternative metrics for scientific impact of citation. This resembles in a way the situation in journals, where in published research papers and book chapters, including those many cases the journal Impact Factor is produced mainly by a produced by the ICL. fraction of highly cited papers, and not all journal articles get cited. – The h-index of the ICL monographs, using chapter citations, is Conclusions around 10 or less, and therefore much less than the most cited We analyzed selected landslide-related 52 books with 3426 chapters journals in the category geological engineering in the Web of published by Springer Nature in the period 2005–2018, using three Science (h-index around 50 or more). citation databases: Scopus (by Elsevier), Web of Science (by Clarivate – The ICL World Landslide Forum proceedings (since 2009) are Analytics), and Google Scholar. Out of the selected book titles, 22 were with regard to the total amount of citations (h-index, g-index) published on behalf of the ICL, with 1419 chapters. The bibliometric still behind the more established landslide-related scientific analysis was performed as well as on the book level, and as far as events, such as IAEG congresses (since 1970) and International possible, on the book chapter level. Based on results of this study, we Symposia on Landslides (since 1970). can draw the following conclusions: – Additional research on the impact of printed and electronic scientific books (scientific and technical monographs and pro- – Web of Science covers less than a third of the selected 52 book titles ceedings of scientific meetings) on world scientific community in the field of landslide science. For the analyzed 22 ICL-related book in the fields of landslide research and landslide risk reduction titles, WoS covers only one title. On the contrary, Google Scholar using different altmetrics can be a further step in evaluation of covers all selected book titles, and Scopus covers more than a half of books published by the International Consortium on Land- the analyzed book titles. In the future, more efforts should be slides (and any other international associations and societies). invested into bringing more ICL-related book titles to WoS. – The differences among landslide-related books can be quite large; only a few chapters from analyzed book titles were found A way in raising the visibility and impact of the ICL books on to be cited frequently compared to highly cited scientific landslide research community would be to support their open Table 10 Highly cited papers from the journal Landslides—comparison between WoS and Bookmetrix citations with Bookmetrix downloads No. Authors WoS citations Bookmetrix citations Bookmetrix downloads 1. Guzzetti et al. 2008 360 341 6.0K 2. Lee and Pradhan 2007 271 275 2.7K 3. Yin et al. 2008 202 204 3.7K 4. Pradhan and Lee 2010 147 157 1.8K 5. Akgun 2012 127 139 1.5K 6. Hungr et al. 2014 229 253 9.0K 7. Xu et al. 2014a 74 83 4.5K 8. Bui et al. 2016 54 80 2.5K 9. Li et al. 2016 23 21 1.9K 10. Yavari-Ramshe and Ataie-Asjtiani 2017 8 9 451 11. Bui et al. 2017 7 11 542 1478 Landslides 15 & (2018) living with landslides – volume 4: diversity of landslide forms. Springer, Cham, pp access publishing in the form of e-Books as much as possible, and 343–354 to strengthen the ICL presence in social media networks, such as Bar-Ilan J (2010) Citations to the “Introduction to informetrics” indexed by WOS, Scopus Researchgate or LindkedIn. and Google Scholar. Scientometrics 82:495–506 For libraries and promotional activities, printed books might be Benedetti G, Bernardi M, Bonaga G, Borgatti L, Continelli F, Ghirotti M, Guerra C, Landuzzi important, but it seems that the impact of published books in the A, Lucente CC, Marchi G (2013) San Leo: Centuries of coexistence with landslides. in: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume 6: risk field of landslide science relates much more to the potential of assessment, management and mitigation. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 529–537 open access and wide distribution of electronic databases than to Boldini D, Wang F, Sassa K, Tommasi P (2005) Mechanism of landslide causing the the number of printed books, distributed to participants at scien- December 2002 tsunami at stromboli volcano (Italy). In: Sassa K, Fukuoka H, Wang F, tific events, sold in bookstores, or available in libraries. Wang G (eds) landslides – risk analysis and sustainable disaster management. Springer, p 173–180 Acknowledgments Bookmetrix (2018) http://www.bookmetrix.com/ Bornmann L (2015) Alternative metrics in scientometrics: a meta-analysis of research into This paper was stimulated by discussions inside the ICL commu- three altmetrics. Scientometrics 103:1123–1144 nity about the future form of the ICL World Landslide Forum’s Bui DT, Tuan TA, Klempe H, Pradhan B, Revhaug I (2016) Spatial prediction models for proceedings and landslide-related books published by ICL. These shallow landslide hazards: a comparative assessment of the efficacy of support vector discussions were part of the preparation for the 5th World Land- machines, artificial neural networks, kernel logistic regression, and logistic model tree. slide Forum to be held in Kyoto in 2020. The research undertaken Landslides 13(2):361–378 Bui DT, Nguyen QP, Hoang ND, Klempe H (2017) A novel fuzzy K-nearest neighbor to prepare this paper was partially funded by the Slovenian Re- inference model with differential evolution for spatial prediction of rainfall-induced search Agency through research core funding P2-0180. The author shallow landslides in a tropical hilly area using GIS. Landslides 14(1):1–17 would especially like to thank Claudio Margottini for his com- Cannon SH, DeGraff J (2009) The increasing wildfire and post-fire debris-flow threat in ments and suggestions that considerably improved the manuscript western USA, and implications for consequences of climate change. In: Sassa K, Canuti in its final form. The proof reading by Binod Tiwari is also P (eds) Landslides – disaster risk reduction. Springer, p 177–190 Clarivate Analytics (2018a) Web of Science. https://apps.webofknowledge.com/ acknowledged. Clarivate Analytics (2018b) Conference Proceedings Index. http://wokinfo.com/ products_tools/multidisciplinary/webofscience/cpci/ Clarivate Analytics (2018c) Book Citation Index. http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/mul- Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the tidisciplinary/bookcitationindex/ Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http:// Costas R, Zahedi Z, Wouters P (2015) Do "altmetrics" correlate with citations? Extensive creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestrict- comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective. ed use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided J Assoc Inf Sci Technol 66(10):2003–2019 you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the Coelho Netto AL, Sato AM, de Souza Avelar A, Vianna LGG, Araújo IS, Ferreira DLC, Lima PH, Silva APA, Silva RP (2013) January 2011) The extreme landslide disaster in Brazil. source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume 6: indicate if changes were made. risk assessment, management and mitigation. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 377– Crosta GB, Imposimato S, Roddeman D (2013a) Interaction of landslide mass and water References resulting in impulse waves. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) (2013) Landslide science and practice – volume 5: complex environment. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, p Academic Book Week (2016) Springer Nature: Emerging Tools and Metrics in the Book 49–56 Impact Space. https://acbookweek.com/2016/12/08/springer-nature-emerging-tools- Crosta GB, Imposimato S, Roddeman D, Frattini P (2013b) Freeze-thaw cycle and rockfall and-metrics-in-the-book-impact-space/ (posted on December 8, 2016; updated on monitoring. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – December 13, 2016) volume 3: spatial analysis and modelling. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 263–270 Akgun A (2012) A comparison of landslide susceptibility maps produced by logistic Crosta GB, Hermanns R, Frattini P, Valbuzzi E, Valagussa A (2014) Large slope instabilities regression, multi-criteria decision, and likelihood ratio methods: a case study at Izmir, In Northern Chile: inventory, characterization and possible triggers. in: Sassa K, Canuti Turkey. Landslides 9(1):93–106 P, Yin Y (eds) Landslide science for a safer geoenvironment – volume 3: targeted Antronico L, Borrelli L, Peduto D, Fornaro G, Gullà G, Paglia L, Zeni G (2013) Conventional landslides. Springer, Cham, pp 175–181 and innovative techniques for the monitoring of displacements in landslide affected Damiano E, Mercogliano P (2013) Potential effects of climate change on slope stability in area. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume unsaturated pyroclastic soils. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide 2: early warning, instrumentation and monitoring. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp science and practice – volume 4: global environmental change. Springer, Berlin 125–131 Heidelberg, pp. 15-25 Altmetric (2018) What does Altmetric do? https://www.altmetric.com/ Deline P, Broccolato M, Noetzli J, Ravanel L, Tamburini A (2013) The December 2008 Ardizzone F, Fiorucci F, Santangelo M, Cardinali M, Mondini AC, Rossi M, Reichenbach P, crammont rock avalanche, mont blanc massif area, Italy. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Guzzetti F (2013) Very-high resolution stereoscopic satellite images for landslide Sassa K (eds) Landslide Science and Practice – Volume 4: Global Environmental mapping. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – Change. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 403–408 volume 1: landslide inventory and susceptibility and hazard zoning. Springer, Berlin Devoto S, Biolchi S, Bruschi VM, González Díez A, Mantovani M, Pasuto A, Piacentini D, Heidelberg, pp 95–101 Schembri JA, Soldati M (2013) Landslides along the north-west coast of the island of Arosio D, Longoni L, Mazza F, Papini M, Zanzi L (2013) Freeze-thaw cycle and rockfall Malta. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – monitoring. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume 1: landslide inventory and susceptibility and hazard zoning. Springer, Berlin volume 2: early warning, instrumentation and monitoring. Springer, Berlin Heidel- Heidelberg, pp 57–63 berg, pp 385–390 Dou J, Oguchi T, Hayakawa YS, Uchiyama S, Saito H, Paudel U (2014) GIS-Based landslide Avelar AS, Coelho Netto AL, Lacerda WA, Becker LB, Mendonça MB (2013) Mechanisms of susceptibility mapping using a certainty factor model and its validation in the Chuetsu the recent catastrophic landslides in the mountainous range of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Area, Central Japan. In: Sassa K, Canuti P, Yin Y (eds) Landslide science for a safer In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume 4: geoenvironment – volume 2: methods of landslide studies. Springer, Cham, pp 419– global environmental change. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 265–270 Baczynski N, Bar N (2014) Landslide monitoring and management challenge in remote DOAB (2018) Directory of Open Access Books. https://www.doabooks.org/ papua New Guinea. In: Mikoš M, Casagli N, Yin Y, Sassa K (eds) Advancing culture of Egghe L (2006) Theory and practice of the g-index. Scientometrics 69(1):131–152 Landslides 15 & (2018) 1479 Review Article Emmer A, Juřicová A (2014) Inventory and typology of landslide-dammed lakes of the Lamarche G, Mountjoy J, Bull S, Hubble T, Krastel S, Lane E, Micallef A, Moscardelli L, Cordillera Blanca (Peru). In: Mikoš M, Vilímek V, Yin Y, Sassa K (eds) Advancing culture Mueller C, Pecher I, Woelz S (Eds.) (2016) Submarine mass movements and their of living with landslides – volume 5: diversity of landslide forms. Springer, Cham, pp consequences: 7th international symposium. Springer, Cham, 621 p 259–266 Lee S, Pradhan B (2007) Landslide hazard mapping at Selangor, Malaysia using Emmer A, Vilímek V, Klimeš J, Cochachin A (2014) Glacier retreat, lakes development and frequency ratio and logistic regression models. Landslides 4(1):33–41 associated natural hazards in Cordilera Blanca, Peru. In: Shan W, Guo Y, Wang F, Leibman M, Khomutov A, Kizyakov A (2014) Cryogenic landslides in the west-siberian Marui H, Strom A (eds) Landslides in cold regions in the context of climate change. plain of Russia: classification, mechanisms, and landforms. In: Shan W, Guo Y, Wang F, Springer International Publishing Switzerland, p 231–255 Marui H, Strom A (eds) Landslides in cold regions in the context of climate change. Elsevier (2018) Scopus journal metrics. https://journalmetrics.scopus.com/ Springer International Publishing Switzerland, p 143–162 Erismann TH, Abele G (2001) Dynamics of rockslides and rockfalls. Springer-Verlag, Berlin L'Heureux J-S, Locat A, Leroueil S, Demers D, Locat J (eds) (2014) Landslides in sensitive Heidelberg 316 p clays: from geosciences to risk management. Springer, Netherlands 418 p Evans SG, Scarascia Mugnozza G, Strom A, Hermanns RL (eds) (2006) Landslides from Li DQ, Xiao T, Cao ZJ, Zhou CB, Zhang LM (2016) Enhancement of random finite element massive rock slope failure. Springer, Netherlands 662 p method in reliability analysis and risk assessment of soil slopes using subset Google (2018) Google Scholar. https://scholar.google.si/ simulation. Landslides 13(2):293–303 st Guzzetti F, Peruccacci S, Rossi M, Stark CP (2008) The rainfall intensity–duration control Locat J, Mienert J (eds) (2003) Submarine mass movements and their consequences: 1 of shallow landslides and debris flows: an update. Landslides 5(1):3–17 international symposium. Springer, Netherlands 542 p Harp EL, Jibson RW, Dart RL (2013) The effect of complex fault rupture on the Lacasse S, Nadim F (2009) Landslide risk assessment and mitigation strategy. In: Sassa K, distribution of landslides triggered by the 12 January 2010, Haiti Earthquake. In: Canuti P (eds) Landslides – disaster risk reduction. Springer, p 31–61 Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) (2013) Landslide science and practice – volume Lollino G, Manconi A, Clague J, Shan W, Chiarle M (eds) (2015a) Engineering geology for 5: complex environment. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 157–161 society and territory—volume 1: Climate change and engineering geology. Springer Hervás J, Bobrowsky P (2009) Mapping: inventories, susceptibility, hazard and risk. In: International Publishing, Switzerland 572 p Sassa K, Canuti P (eds) Landslides – disaster risk reduction. Springer p 321–349 Lollino G, Giordan D, Crosta GB, Corominas J, Azzam R, Wasowski J, Sciarra N (eds) Hermanns RL, Blikra LH, Anda E, Saintot A, Dahle H, Oppikofer T, Fischer L, Bunkholt H, (2015b) Engineering geology for society and territory—volume 2: Landslide process- Böhme M, Dehls JF, Lauknes TR, Redfield TF, Osmundsen PT, Eiken T (2013a) es. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland 2177 p Systematic mapping of large unstable rock slopes in Norway. In: Margottini C, Canuti Lollino G, Arattano M, Rinaldi M, Giustolisi O, Marechal J-C, Grant GE (2015c) Engineering P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume 1: landslide inventory and geology for society and territory—volume 3: River basins, reservoir sedimentation susceptibility and hazard zoning. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 29–34 and water resources. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland 657 p Lollino G, Manconi A, Locat J, Huang Y, Canals Artigas M (eds) (2015d) Engineering Hermanns RL, Dahle H, Bjerke PL, Crosta GB, Anda E, Blikra LH, Saintot A, Longva O (2013b) Rockslide dams in møre og romsdal county, Norway. In: Margottini C, Canuti geology for society and territory—volume 4: Marine and coastal processes. Springer P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume 6: risk assessment, International Publishing, Switzerland 235 p management and mitigation. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 3–12 Lollino G, Manconi A, Guzzetti F, Culshaw M, Bobrosky P, Luino F (eds) (2015e) Hermanns RL, Oppikofer T, Molina FXY, Dehls JF, Böhme M (2014) Approach for Engineering geology for society and territory—volume 5: Urban geology, sustainable systematic rockslide mapping of unstable rock slopes in Norway. In: Sassa K, Canuti planning and landscape exploitation. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland P, Yin Y (eds) Landslide science for a safer geoenvironment – volume 3: targeted 1400 p landslides. Springer, Cham, pp 129–134 Lollino G, Giordan D, Thuro K, Carranza-Torres C, Wu F, Marinos P, Delgado C (eds) Hiraoka N, Kikkawa K, Itoh K, Tamate S (2014) A full-Scale model test for predicting (2015f) Engineering geology for society and territory—volume 6: Applied geology for collapse time using displacement of slope surface during slope cutting work. In: major engineering projects. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland 1082 p Mikoš M, Arbanas Ž, Yin Y, Sassa K (eds) Advancing culture of living with landslides – Lollino G, Arattano M, Giradino M, Oliveira R (2015g) In: Peppoloni SC (ed) Engineering volume 3: advances in landslide technology. Springer, Cham, pp 111–121 geology for society and territory—volume 7: Education, professional ethics and Huntley D, Bobrowsky P, Qing Z, Sladen W, Bunce C, Edwards T, Hendry M, Martin D, public recognition of engineering geology. Springer International Publishing, Swit- Choi E (2014) Fiber optic strain monitoring and evaluation of a slow-moving landslide zerland 274 p near ashcroft, British Columbia, Canada. In: Sassa K, Canuti P, Yin Y (eds) Landslide Lollino G, Giordan D, Marunteanu C, Christaras B, Yoshinori I, Margottini C (eds) (2015h) science for a safer geoenvironment – volume 1: the international programme on Engineering geology for society and territory—volume 8: Preservation of cultural landslides (IPL). Springer, Cham, pp 415–421 heritage. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland 584 p Hungr O, Leroueil S, Picarelli L (2014) The Varnes classification of landslide types, an Lykousis V, Sakellariou D, Locat J (eds) (2007) Submarine mass movements and their update. Landslides 5(1):3–17 consequences: 3rd international symposium. Springer, Netherlands 424 p Hungr O (2007) Dynamics of Rapid Landslides. In: Sassa K, Fukuoka H, Wang F, Wang G Mandal S, Maiti R (2015) Semi-quantitative approaches for landslide assessment and (eds) (2007) Progress in Landslide Science. Springer, p 47–57 prediction. Springer, Singapore 292 p Jakob M, Hungr O (eds) (2005) Debris-flow hazards and related phenomena. Springer- Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) (2013a) Landslide science and practice—volume 1: Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg 739 p Landslide inventory and susceptibility and hazard zoning. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg Khomutov A, Leibman M (2014) Assessment of landslide hazards in a typical tundra of 607 p central Yamal, Russia. In: Shan W, Guo Y, Wang F, Marui H, Strom A (eds) Landslides Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) (2013b) Landslide science and practice—volume 2: in cold regions in the Context of climate change. Springer International Publishing Early warning, instrumentation and monitoring. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg 685 p Switzerland, p 271–290 Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) (2013c) Landslide science and practice—volume 3: Klose M, Auerbach M, Herrmann C, Kumerics C, Gratzki A (2014a) Landslide hazards and Spatial analysis and modelling. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg 440 p climate change adaptation of transport infrastructures in Germany. In: Sassa K, Mikoš Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) (2013d) Landslide science and practice—volume 4: M, Yin Y (eds) Advancing culture of living with landslides – Volume 1: ISDR-ICL sendai Global environmental change. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg 431 p partnerships 2015-2025. Springer, Cham, pp 535–541 Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) (2013e) Landslide science and practice—volume 5: Klose M, Highland L, Damm B, Terhorst B (2014b) Estimation of direct landslide costs in Complex environment. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg 354 p industrialized countries: challenges, concepts, and case study. In: Sassa K, Canuti P, Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) (2013f) Landslide science and practice—volume 6: Yin Y (eds) Landslide science for a safer geoenvironment – volume 2: methods of Risk assessment, management and mitigation. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg 789 p landslide studies. Springer, Cham, pp 661–667 Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) (2013g) Landslide science and practice—volume 7: Klose M (2015) Landslide databases as tools for integrated assessment of landslide risk. Social and economic impact and policies. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg 333 p Springer International Publishing, Switzerland 156 p McSaveney M, Davies T (2007) Rockslides and their motion. In: Sassa K, Fukuoka H, Wang Kousha K, Thelwall M (2008) Sources of Google scholar citations outside the science F, Wang G (eds) (2007) Progress in landslide science. Springer, p 113–133 citation index: a comparison between four science disciplines. Scientometrics Mihalić S, Arbanas Ž (2013) The Croatian–Japanese joint research project on landslides: 74(2):273–294 activities and public benefits. In: Sassa K, Rouhban B, Briceño S, McSaveney M, He B Krastel S, Behrmann J-H, Völker D, Stipp M, Berndt C, Urgeles R, Chaytor J, Huhn K, (eds) Landslides: global risk preparedness. Springer, p 333–349 Strasser M, Harbitz CB (eds) (2014) Submarine mass movements and their conse- Mikoš M (2011) Landslides: a state-of-the art on the current position in the landslide quences: 6th international symposium. Springer International Publishing 683 p research community. Landslides 8:541–551 1480 Landslides 15 & (2018) Mikoš M (2017) Landslides: a top international journal in geological engineering and Sassa K, Canuti P, Yin Y (eds) (2014a) Landslide science for a safer geoenvironment—volume engineering geology? Landslides 14(5):1827–1838 1: The International Programme on Landslides (IPL). Springer, Cham Mikoš M, Tiwari B, Yin Y, Sassa K (eds) (2017a) Advancing culture of living with Sassa K, Canuti P, Yin Y (eds) (2014b) Landslide science for a safer landslides—volume 2: Advances in landslide science. Springer International Publish- geoenvironment—volume 2: The International Programme on Landslides (IPL). ing, Cham 1197 p Springer, Cham Mikoš M, Arbanas Ž, Yin Y, Sassa K (eds) (2017b) Advancing culture of living with Sassa K,CanutiP, Yin Y(eds) (2014c) Landslide Science for a safer landslides—volume 3: Advances in landslide technology. Springer International geoenvironment—volume 3: The International Programme on Landslides (IPL). Publishing, Cham 621 p Springer, Cham Mikoš M, Casagli N, Yin Y, Sassa K (eds) (2017c) Advancing culture of living with Sassa K, Tsuchiya S, Fukuoka H, Mikos M, Doan L (2015) Landslides: review of landslides—volume: 4 Diversity of landslide forms. Springer International Publishing, achievements in the second 5-year period (2009–2013). Landslides 12(2):213–223 Cham 707 p Sassa K, Mikoš M, Yin Y (eds) (2017) Advancing culture of living with landslides—vol. 1. Mikoš M, Vilimek V, Yin Y, Sassa K (eds) (2017d) Advancing culture of living with Springer International Publishing, Cham 586 p landslides—volume 5: Landslides in different environments. Springer International Sassa K, Guzzetti F, Yamagishi H, Arbanas Ž, Casagli N, McSaveney M, Dang K (eds) Publishing, Cham 557 p (2018a) Landslide dynamics: ISDR-ICL landslide interactive teaching tools volume 1: Mosher DC, Shipp C, Moscardelli L, Chaytor J, Baxter C, Lee H, Urgeles R (eds) (2010) Fundamentals, mapping and monitoring. Springer International Publishing, Switzer- Submarine mass movements and their consequences: 4th international symposium. land 604 p Springer, Netherlands 786 p Sassa K, Tiwari B, Liu K-F, McSaveney M, Strom A, Setiawan H (eds) (2018b) Landslide Nadim F, Jaedicke C, Smebye H, Kalsnes B (2013) Assessment of global landslide hazard dynamics: ISDR-icl landslide interactive teaching tools volume 2: Testing, RISK hotspots. In: Sassa K, Rouhban B, Briceño S, McSaveney M, He B (eds): Landslides: management and country practices. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland global risk preparedness. Springer, p 59–71 836 p Petkovšek A, Maček M, Mikoš M, Majes B (2013) Mechanism of active landslides in Scaioni M (ed) (2015) Modern technologies for landslide monitoring and prediction. flysch. In: Sassa K, Rouhban B, Briceño S, McSaveney M, He B (eds) Landslides: global Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg 249 p risk preparedness. Springer, p 149–165 Schaub Y, Haeberli W, Huggel C, Künzler M, Bründl M (2013) Landslides and new lakes in Pennington C, Dijkstra T, Lark M, Dashwood C, Harrison A, Freeborough K (2014) deglaciating areas: A risk management framework. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K Antecedent precipitation as a potential proxy for landslide incidence in South West (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume 7: social and economic impact and United Kingdom. In: Sassa K, Canuti P, Yin Y (eds) Landslide science for a safer policies. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 31–38 geoenvironment – volume 1: the international programme on landslides (IPL). Scheidl C, Rickenmann D, McArdell BW (2013) Runout prediction of debris flows and Springer, Cham, pp 253–259 similar mass movements. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science Picarelli L (2007) Considerations about the mechanics of slow active landslides in clay. In: and practice – volume 3: spatial analysis and modelling. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Sassa K, Fukuoka H, Wang F, Wang G (eds) (2007) progress in landslide science. pp 221–229 Springer, p 27–45 Shan W, Guo Y, Wang F, Marui H, Strom A (eds) (2014) Landslides in cold regions in the Pradhan B (ed) (2017) Laser scanning applications in landslide assessment. Springer context of climate change. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland 310 p International Publishing, Switzerland 359 p Springman SM, Yamamoto Y, Buchli T, Hertrich M, Maurer H, Merz K, Gärtner-Roer I, Pradhan B, Buchroithner M (eds) (2012) Terrigenous mass movements: detection, Seward L (2013) Rock Glacier Degradation and Instabilities in the European Alps: A modelling, early warning and mitigation using geoinformation technology. Spring- Characterisation and Monitoring Experiment in the Turtmanntal, CH. In: Margottini C, er-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg 400 p Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide Science and Practice – Volume 4: Global Environ- Pradhan B, Lee S (2010) Regional landslide susceptibility analysis using back-propagation mental Change. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 5–13 neural network model at Cameron Highland, Malaysia. Landslides 7(1):13–30 Springer (2018a) SpringerOpen. https://www.springeropen.com/books Raspini F, Moretti S, Casagli N (2013) Landslide mapping using squeeSAR Data: Springer (2018b) SpringerLink. https://link.springer.com/ Giampilieri (Italy) Case Study. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide Springer (2018c) Springer Books. http://www.springer.com/gp/products/books science and practice – volume 1: landslide inventory and susceptibility and hazard Springer (2018d) Welcome to Bookmetrix https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/ zoning. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 147–154 book-authors-editors/bookmetrix Ren D (2015) Storm-triggered Landslides in Warmer Climates. Springer International Springer (2018e) Highlights in Earth Sciences in 2017. http://www.springer.com/gp/ Publishing, Switzerland 365 p marketing/highlights-2017/earth-sciences-2017 Roberts NJ, McKillop RJ, Lawrence MS, Psutka JF, Clague JJ, Brideau MA, Ward BC (2013) Tapete D, Casagli N, Fanti R (2013) Radar interferometry for early stage warning on Impacts of the 2007 landslide-generated tsunami in Chehalis Lake, Canada. In: monuments at risk. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume 6: risk practice – volume 2: early warning, instrumentation and monitoring. Springer, Berlin assessment, management and mitigation. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 133–140 Heidelberg, pp 619–625 Salvati P, Marchesini I, Balducci V, Bianchi C, Guzzetti F (2013) A new digital catalogue of Tanteri L, Rossi G, Tofani V, Vannocci P, Moretti S, Casagli N (2014) Multitemporal UAV harmful landslides and floods in Italy. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) survey for mass movement detection and monitoring. In: Mikoš M, Tiwari B, Yin Y, Landslide science and practice – volume 3: spatial analysis and modelling. Springer, Sassa K (eds) Advancing culture of living with landslides – volume 2: advances in Berlin Heidelberg, pp 409–414 landslide Science. Springer, Cham, pp 153–161 Sassa K (2018) Monthly publication of Landslides: journal of international consortium Thakur V, L'Heureux J-S, Locat A (Eds.) (2017) Landslides in sensitive clays: from research on landslides (ICL). Landslides 15(1):1–3 to implementation. Springer, Cham, 603 p Sassa K, Canuti P (eds) (2009) Landslides—disaster risk reduction. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Thelwall M, Haustein S, Lariviere V, Sugimoto CR (2013) Do Altmetrics work? Twitter and Heidelberg 650 p ten other social web services. PLoS One 8(5):e64841 Sassa K (2005) ICL history and activities. In: Sassa K, Fukuoka H, Wang F, Wang G (eds) Thiebes B (2012) Landslide analysis and early warning systems: local and regional case Landslides –risk analysis and sustainable disaster management. Springer. p 3–21 study in the Swabian Alb, Germany. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg 266 p Sassa K, Fukuoka H, Wang F, Wang G (eds) (2005) Landslides—risk analysis and Torre-Salinas D, Robinson-Garcia N, Campanario JM, Lopez-Cozar ED (2014) Coverage, sustainable disaster management. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg 385 p field specialisation and the impact of scientific publishers indexed in the book citation Sassa K, Fukuoka H, Wang F, Wang G (2007) Progress in landslide science. Springer, index. Online Inf Rev 38(1):24–42 Berlin Heidelberg 379 p Tommasi P, Baldi P, Chiocci FL, Coltelli M, Marsella M, Pompilio M, Romagnoli C (2005) Sassa K, Tsuchiya S, Ugai K, Wakai A, Uchimura T (2009) Landslides: a review of The Landslide Sequence Induced by the 2002 Eruption at Stromboli Volcano. In: Sassa achievements in the first 5 years (2004–2009). Landslides 6:275–286 K, Fukuoka H, Wang F, Wang G (eds) Landslides – Risk Analysis and Sustainable Sassa K, Rouhban B, Briceño S, McSaveney M, He B (2013) Landslides: global risk Disaster Management. Springer, p 251–258 preparedness. Springer, Cham Trezzini F, Giannella G, Guida T (2013) Landslide and flood: economic and social impacts Sassa K, He B, Dang K, Nagai O, Takara K (2014d) Plenary: progress in landslide dynamics. in Italy. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – In: Sassa K, Canuti P, Yin Y (eds) Landslide science for a safer geoenvironment – volume 7: social and economic impact and policies. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp volume 1: the international programme on landslides (IPL). Springer, Cham, pp 37–67 171–176 Landslides 15 & (2018) 1481 Review Article Trigila A, Frattini P, Casagli N, Catani F, Crosta G, Esposito C, Iadanza C, Lagomarsino D, Yavari-Ramshe S, Ataie-Asjtiani B (2017) A rigorous finite volume model to simulate Scarascia Mugnozza G, Segoni S, Spizzichino D, Tofani V, Lari S (2013) Landslide subaerial and submarine landslide-generated waves. Landslides 14(1):203–221 susceptibility mapping at national scale: the italian case study. In: Margottini C, Canuti Yin YP, Wang FW, Sun P (2008) Landslide hazards triggered by the 2008 Wenchuan P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume 1: landslide inventory and earthquake, Sichuan, China. Landslides 6(2):139–152 susceptibility and hazard zoning. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 287–295 Zhao T (2017) Coeupled DEM-CFD analyses of landslide-induced debris flows. Springer, Tsangaratos P, Ilia I, Rozos D (2013) Case event system for landslide susceptibility Singapore 220 p analysis. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – Zizioli D, Meisina C, Bordoni M, Zucca F (2014) Rainfall-triggered shallow landslides volume 1: landslide inventory and susceptibility and hazard zoning. Springer, Berlin mapping through pleiades images. In: Sassa K, Canuti P, Yin Y (eds) Landslide science Heidelberg, pp 585–593 for a safer geoenvironment – volume 2: methods of landslide studies. Springer, Ugai K, Yagi H, Wakai A (eds) (2013) Earthquake-induced landslides—proceedings of the Cham, pp 325–329 international symposium on earthquake-induced landslides, Kiryu, Japan, 2012. Xu C, Xu X, Gorum T, van Westen CJ, Fan X (2014b) Did the 2008 Wenchuan Earthquake Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg 996 p Lead to a Net Volume Loss? In: Sassa K, Canuti P, Yin Y (eds) Landslide Science for a Wu W (Ed.) (2015) Recent advances in modeling landslides and debris flows. Springer, Safer Geoenvironment – Volume 3: Targeted Landslides. Springer, Cham, pp 191–196 Cham, 323 p Xu C, Xu XW, Yao X, Dai FC (2014a) Three (nearly) complete inventories of landslides triggered by the May 12, 2008 Wenchuan Mw 7.9 earthquake of China and their M. Mikoš ()) spatial distribution statistical analysis. Landslides 11(3):441–461 Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering, Yamada Y, Kawamura K, Ikehara K, Ogawa Y, Urgeles R, Mosher D, Chaytor J, Strasser M University of Ljubljana, (eds) (2012) Submarine mass movements and their consequences: 5th international Jamova cesta 2, SI-1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia symposium. Springer, Netherlands 769 p Email: matjaz.mikos@fgg.uni-lj.si Yamagishi H, Bhandari NP (2017) GIS landslide. Springer, Japan 230 p 1482 Landslides 15 & (2018) http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Landslides Springer Journals

The bibliometric impact of books published by the International Consortium on Landslides

Free
24 pages
Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/the-bibliometric-impact-of-books-published-by-the-international-uhKf2Sc12x
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 by The Author(s)
Subject
Earth Sciences; Natural Hazards; Geography, general; Agriculture; Civil Engineering
ISSN
1612-510X
eISSN
1612-5118
D.O.I.
10.1007/s10346-018-1019-8
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Review Article Landslides (2018) 15:1459–1482 DOI 10.1007/s10346-018-1019-8 Matjaž Mikoš Received: 23 February 2018 Accepted: 18 May 2018 The bibliometric impact of books published Published online: 6 June 2018 © The Author(s) 2018 by the International Consortium on Landslides Abstract Dissemination of research results is an important part Introduction of basic as well as applied research if not the most important After years of roaring success for Open Access journals and one. A large part of research results is published in scientific article-level metrics, there is now a new wave of innovation literature, and since there are many forms of it, the question from publishers, funding agencies, and universities assessment arises which form is the most visible and attractive to the world around books. For those in disciplines where the majority of scientific community. The International Consortium on Land- research output is published as monographs, this likely comes slides (ICL), based in Kyoto, Japan, is one of the leading as a relief. An increased number of books are annually indexed institutions in the field of landslide research and landslide risk in citation databases, where we can gain insight into the cita- reduction. On behalf of ICL, Springer Nature has published the tion behavior and longevity of books. All of these new devel- journal Landslides: Journal of the International Consortium on opments give book authors and editors more credit for their Landslides since 2004. It is a very successful scientific journal hard work and offer new metrics for research assessments with regard to its scientometric parameters. Since January 2018, (Academic Book Week 2016). it has been a monthly journal published in full color in elec- Until 2004, there was only one widely used, comprehensive tronic as well as printed form. Another form of dissemination citation database, namely the ISI’s (Institute for Scientific of the ICL scientific and professional activities are published Information—later Thomson Reuters—now Clarivate Analytics) books in the form of monographs and proceedings from trien- Web of Science (WoS). In fall of 2004, two new and therefore rival nial World Landslide Forums. This paper discusses the impact citation databases entered the bibliometric world: Elsevier’s of 52 books with 3426 chapters taken from the field of landslide Scopus and the freely available Google Scholar (GS). Many studies science and published by Springer Nature from 2005 to 2018 in have revealed differences between them, taking into account the the earth sciences category, using different scientometric param- coverage and the number of citations, and the differences were not eters, such as Bookmetrix downloads and citations, Scopus the same for different scientific disciplines. For example, Kousha citations, Scopus h-index, Google citations, and Google h-index. and Thelwall (2008) compared four science disciplines and found The analysis was performed on the book chapter level (using that GS might exhibit a certain advantage by securing wider mainly citations as the main scientometric parameter) as well as coverage of non-journal documents especially a wider range of on the book level (using book h-index and percentage of cited open access scholarly documents. Remarkable differences between chapters). Out of the selected 52 titles, 22 were published on the three aforementioned citation databases were confirmed by behalf of the ICL, with 1419 chapters. The differences among taking one book as a case study (Bar-Ilan 2010); the differences landslide-related books can be quite large; only a few chapters between WoS and Scopus were visible due to a fact that citations in from analyzed book titles were found to be cited frequently Scopus are limited to the period of 1996 and onward. compared to highly cited scientific journal articles. On average, Torre-Salinas et al. (2014) analyzed the disciplinary coverage of the analyzed 3426 book chapters from 52 landslide-related Thomson Reuters’ Book Citation Index (BCI) database focusing books have been downloaded since publication over 53,000 on publisher presence, impact, and specialization. They have ex- times each; 1092 chapters (32%) received 2932 citations (2.68 amined coverage by discipline, publisher distribution by field and citations per cited chapter and 0.86 citations per published country of publication, and publisher impact. For this purpose, the chapter). The analysis shows that the books published on behalf Thomson Reuters’ subject categories were aggregated into 15 dis- of the ICL are, together with other landslide-related book titles, ciplines. Only a very few publishers mainly from the UK and USA on the forefront in the Springer eBook collection Earth and covered three quarters of these 15 disciplines, and 80.5% of the Environmental Science (EES). The selected 52 landslide-related books and chapters remained uncited. In addition, two serious book titles are above the average metrics for the whole EES errors were found in this database: the Book Citation Index does with regard to the total number of downloads per book, the not retrieve all citations for books and chapters and book citations total number of citations per book, and the total number of do not include citations to their chapters. readers per book. The ICL-related books are getting more The International Consortium on Landslides (ICL) as one of the downloads but less readers and citations (so far) as the selected leading international and non-governmental societies in the field non-ICL-related books. A way in raising the visibility and im- of landslide research and landslide risk reduction was established pact of the ICL books on landslide research community would in 2002 and is located in Kyoto, Japan. Since 2004, the ICL has be to support their open access publication in the form of e- been publishing the international Journal Landslides: Journal of Books as much as possible, and inclusion of ICL books into International Consortium on Landslides (Sassa 2018). The journal Web of Science. Landslides was analyzed several times for its impact on the world landslide community, using selected scientometric (bibliometric) . . Keywords Landslides Risk dialog Impact parameters (Sassa et al. 2009, 2015; Mikoš 2011, 2017)—the journal . . . Factor International Collaboration Citations Book metrics has been proved to be very successful, read by many stakeholders Landslides 15 & (2018) Review Article from the world landslide research society studying periodical in a given year for the documents published in the previous literature. 3 years (note that a 2-year window is used for the ISI Impact An important contribution of the ICL to capacity building Factor computation). for landslide risk reduction in the world are triennial World Landslide Forums (WLF): WLF1 in Tokyo 2008, WLF2 in Rome in 2011, WLF3 in Beijing in 2014, WLF4 in Ljubljana Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Knowledge database (WoK) in 2017, and forthcoming WLF5 in Kyoto in 2020—see http:// Web of Knowledge (Clarivate Analytics, 2018a) offers several web wlf5.iplhq.org/ for details. In the last few years, a debate tools for bibliometric research. One of them is Web of Science and started among the ICL community whether to publish accept- its Core Collection that covers different citation indices with ex- ed and reviewed papers at the world landslide forums in the tended coverage of international literature: classical printed book form, or to move to electronic book format only, combining it with open access for all papers and – peer-reviewed journals in Science Citation Index Expanded occasional customers’ tailored printing-on-demand. This paper (SCI_EXPANDED, since 1900), Social Sciences Citation Index has been originated from such discussions and was stimulated (SSCI, since 1900), Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI, by questions about the impact of the ICL book chapters since 1975), and in Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI, compared to journal Landslides papers and/or to other non- since 2015); ICL book chapters and books in the field of landslide re- – conference proceedings in Conference Proceedings Citation search. The main aim of the paper is to analyze between the Index—Science (CPCI-S, since 2011) and in Conference Pro- ICL monographs and proceedings of the World Landslide ceedings Citation Index—Social Sciences & Humanities (CPCI- Forums printed as books by Springer Nature, and selected SSH, since 2011) (Clarivate Analytics, 2018b); landslide-related book titles, not published by the ICL, in – books in Book Citation Index—Science (BKCI-S, since 2011) order to measure relative impact and reputation of the ICL and in Book Citation Index—Social Sciences and Humanities books. We will start with a short description of the most (BKCI-SSH, since 2011) (Clarivate Analytics, 2018c); widely used citation databases. Material and methods The coverage of WoS for books and conference proceedings The main databases used in the last two decades for journal since 2011 is not ideal, and for the purpose of this study, WoS only bibliometric analyses are the Web of Science (WoS) by Clarivate partially covers the ICL-related books published by Springer Na- Analytics (formerly Thomson Scientific, ISI—Institute for Scien- ture publisher. tific Information) and Elsevier’s Scopus database. Questions arise, Springer Nature web tools, Bookmetrix, and eBook collections can they also be used for book bibliometric analyses? Are there new web tools available to perform a bibliometric analysis of The Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB) has been offered at books, specifically books related to landslide science? the end of 2017 for over 10,000 academic peer-reviewed books and chapters from close to 250 publishers (DOAB 2018). Springer Nature is a sponsor of DOAB, and all SpringerOpen books Elsevier’s Scopus database (Springer 2018a) are freely available online at SpringerLink (Springer 2018b) and listed in the Directory of Open Access Books Developing its own Scopus database, Elsevier offers different jour- nal metrics, among others (Elsevier 2018): (DOAB 2018) since 2010. The Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY) license is the default license for SpringerOpen books. Although ICL publishes its books with Springer Nature, only one – SJR—SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) takes into account both the number of citations received by a journal and the prestige of book title has been published so far as an open access book (Sassa the journal based on where those citations come from. et al. 2017), all of which are electronically accessible per subscrip- tion using Springer Books platform (Springer 2018c). – SNIP—Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) measures contextual citation impact by weighting citations based on the This database offers data on selected book metrics using a web total number of citations in a subject field. It helps to compare tool called Bookmetrix (2018). Bookmetrix was developed by Springer Nature in partnership with Altmetric (2018), and it brings a journal with competing journals in a subject area. together a collection of performance metrics to measure how – New as of December 2016, the metric called CiteScore measures average citations received per document published in the books are being discussed, cited, and used around the world. It offers a comprehensive overview of the reach, usage, and serial—citations are taken into account that have been received Table 1 Correlation between four selected SCOPUS metrics for the period 2011–2016 (Elsevier 2018) Pearson coefficient All serials Journals Trade journals Book series Conference proceedings (49,145) (46,774) (663) (1245) (463) CiteScore—Percent 0.682 0.692 0.851 0.665 0.787 Cited CiteScore—SNIP 0.820 0.825 0.893 0.763 0.898 CiteScore—SJR 0.838 0.831 0.863 0.909 0.871 1460 Landslides 15 & (2018) Landslides 15 & (2018) 1461 Table 2 Springer eBook Package Earth and Environmental Science (data retrieved in May, 2018; Springer, 2018a) Year Nr. of Monographs Contributed Proceedings Others Subject collection Collection citation Total Total books volume performance performance downloads citations 5 and 2 years 1918–89 912 29% 34% 25% 16% 63% n. a. 0.27M 7.10K 1990–99 1099 22% 46% 13% 19% 63% n. a. 0.27K 6.10K 2000–04 654 27% 43% 7% 23% 37% n. a. 0.67M 4.45K 2005 150 45% 16% 15% 24% 59% 1.21 and 0.00 3.89M 6.77K 2006 167 49% 14% 19% 18% 59% 1.58 and 1.58 3.17M 6.29K 2007 164 51% 14% 19% 16% 45% 1.39 and 1.39 3.15M 6.09K 2008 209 56% 15% 13% 16% 48% 1.98 and 1.66 4.39M 7.48K 2009 206 51% 22% 12% 15% 68% 1.89 and 1.69 4.80M 7.15K 2010 223 56% 20% 7% 17% 46% 2.29 and 1.91 4.86M 6.75K 2011 225 55% 23% 9% 13% 72% 2.51 and 2.09 4.94M 7.36K 2012 221 52% 22% 8% 18% 31% 3.05 and 2.66 5.11M 4.70K 2013 343 55% 23% 3% 19% 51% 3.31 and 2.80 7.54M 6.01K 2014 412 49% 23% 4% 23% 45% 3.29 and 2.43 8.98M 5.45K 2015 391 55% 17% 4% 24% 33% 3.51 and 2.69 5.81M 3.45K 2016 421 55% 12% 3% 30% 23% 4.10 and 3.16 4.25M 2.70K 2017 409 56% 13% 4% 24% 3% 3.93 and 3.10 3.36M 1.37K Average per 6207 41% 28% 11% 20% 47% n. a. 3.14M 5.44K year Year Total Total Total Downloads Citations Reviews Mentions Readers reviews mentions readers per book per book per book per book per book 1918–89 17 18 2.43K 0.29K 8 0.0 0.0 3 1990–99 24 11 1.93K 0.25K 6 0.0 0.0 2 2000–04 94 48 4.70K 0.93K 7 0.1 0.1 7 2005 127 155 23.2K 25.9K 45 0.8 1.0 155 2006 103 125 20.6K 19.0K 38 0.6 0.7 123 2007 133 103 21.6K 19.2K 37 0.8 0.6 132 2008 119 128 23.5K 21.0K 36 0.6 0.6 112 2009 107 254 24.5K 23.3K 35 0.5 1.2 119 2010 118 219 22.5K 21.8K 30 0.5 1.0 101 2011 63 457 23.7K 22.0K 33 0.3 2.0 105 Review Article readership of books or book chapters by providing various book- level and chapter-level metrics all in one place. Now its full capacity can be used only within the Springer community, but free data are available via book pages on SpringerLink (Springer 2018b). Everyone can use these free pages to retrieve metrics for Springer books and chapters (Springer 2018d). Apart from classic metrics such as the number of downloads (using SpringerLink as the data source) and the number of citations (using CrossRef as the data source), alternative metrics are introduced, such as Men- tions (online mentions provided by Altmetric based on variety of online sources including blogs and social media among others) and Readers (using Mendeley as the data source). In its latest version, Bookmetrix is extending its scope by providing better insights into the reach and impact of Spring- er Nature’s various eBook collections. With these new, inno- vative features, Bookmetrix is adding value by offering detailed information for authors and readers as well as li- brarians. Especially interesting is a new book metric called Collection Citation Performance (CCP). The CCP for a select- ed year is calculated as the number of citations in this year of books published in two previous years (respectively 5 years for a 5-year indicator), divided by the total number of books published in this eBook collection in the same time period—similar to the well-established journal metrics, such as Impact Factor, as an example. Therefore, for the bibliometric analysis of the impact of the ICL books within the Springer environment, Springer-developed web tools and their selected subscription databases were used. As the ICL books are related to earth sciences, they are offered electron- ically as a part of the Springer eBook package Earth and Environ- mental Science (EES); hence, this specific book collection was used. Google Scholar Much larger than the abovementioned databases is the web database used by the Google Scholar (GS) search engine (Google 2018). In last years, Google Scholar with its wide coverage is starting to be used widely, especially as it is free of charge (free software Publish or Perish—www.harzing.com/ pop.htm was used) and while it yields higher bibliometric values due to its wide coverage of literature and documents. The application retrieves citations for books and/or book chapters using titles, ISBN resp. ISSN number, or authors’ names. Using these citation data, the application computes different metrics, such as h-index and g-index. Given a set of published articles, ranked in decreasing order of the number of citations that they received, the g-index is the (unique) largest number such that the top g articles received (together) at least g citations (Egghe 2006). Results and discussion In our analysis, we will present results starting from a wider perspective and then going into a more detailed presentation, focusing on the landslide-related books published by the ICL since As a proxy to estimate coverage of landslide science by a database, we used the word “landslide” as the search term in titles covered by Web of Science and SCOPUS. The latter generally gives a better coverage of the topic. 1462 Landslides 15 & (2018) Table 2 (continued) Year Total Total Total Downloads Citations Reviews Mentions Readers re- men- read- per book per per per per views tions ers book book book book 2012 72 355 18.6K 23.1K 21 0.3 1.6 84 2013 84 1740 23.3K 22.0K 18 0.2 5.1 68 2014 99 741 27.3K 21.8K 13 0.2 1.8 66 2015 78 1470 23.1K 14.9K 9 0.2 3.8 59 2016 69 2320 16.4K 10.1K 6 0.2 5.5 39 2017 31 3180 11.2K 8.20K 3 0.1 7.8 27 Average per 66 675 13.2K 10.5K 14.4 0.2 1.8 46 year Subject Collection Performance—Percentage of books from Subject Collection EES that are cited more than the discipline average; n. a.—not available Table 3 Springer eBook Package Earth and Environmental Science—landslide science-related top books in the period 2005–2018 and their rank no. (data retrieved in May 2018; Springer 2018a) Year No. of books Rank in Bookmetrix downloads Rank in Bookmetrix citations 2005 150 – No. 2—Jakob and Hungr (2005): Debris-Flow Hazards and Related Phenomena (489 citations) 2006 167 No. 3—Evans et al. (2006): Landslides – from Massive Rock Slope Failure (105K) 2007 164 No. 9—Sassa et al. (2007): Progress – in landslide Science (50.2K) 2008 209 –– 2009 206 No. 4—Sassa et al. (2009): Landslides—Disaster – Risk Reduction (116K) 2010 223 –– 2011 225 –– 2012 221 –– 2013 343 No. 1—Margottini et al. (2013b): Landslide – Science and Practice—Vol. 2 (257K) No. 3—Margottini et al. (2013a): Landslide Science and Practice—Vol. 1 (186K) 2014 412 – No. 1—Sassa et al. (2014b): Landslide Science for a Safer Geoenvironment—Vol. 2 (131 citations) 2015 391 – No. 1—Lollino et al. (2015b): Engineering Geology for Society and Territory—Vol. 2 (196 citations) 2016 421 –– 2017 409 No. 1—Sassa et al. (2017): Advancing Culture No. 3—Mikoš et al. (2017a): Advancing Culture of of Living with Landslides—Vol. 1 (196K) Living with Landslides—Vol. 2 (60 citations) 2018 445 –– WoS and SCOPUS coverage of landslide research 20% conference proceedings, and finally roughly 10% book titles. As of May 6, 2018, in Web of Science Core Collection, 8.080 titles Highly cited papers cannot be determined in SCOPUS. were found that have the word “landslide*” in its title. Out of these The three most productive organizations with regard to the 8.080 titles, there were 6.151 articles, 1.582 proceedings papers, 194 total number of publications among the 14.144 titles were the editorial material, 95 review papers, 85 book chapters, 66 book Chinese Academy of Sciences (602 publications, 4.3%), followed reviews, … More than three quarters of all item in WoS are journal by CNR (Italy) with 479 publications (3.4%), and Chinese Univer- articles. Out of 8.080 titles, 1.455 were open access items. sity of Geosciences, Wuhan (465 publications, 3.3%). Among 8.080 titles, 67 papers were recognized as Highly Cited The top cited papers received the following number of citations: in Field (top 1% with regard to citation), out of them 63 articles 1565, 1130, 1000, 791, 733, and so on—their h-index was 179. The and 4 review papers—one proceedings paper among them, but percentage of cited items cannot be determined, since SCOPUS published in a journal. allows only the first 2000 items to be displayed. The three most productive organizations with regard to the total number of publications among the 8.080 titles were CNR Scopus metrics (Italy) with 361 publications (4.5%), followed by the Chinese Acad- Only Scopus data for 2016 (given in Table 1) was used, and the CiteScore metrics were calculated using data available from emy of Sciences (330 publications, 4.1%), and Chinese University of Geosciences, Wuhan (242 publications, 3.0%). May 31, 2017. In the CiteScore database, there were 49,145 serials: The top cited papers received the following number of citations: 46,774 journals, 663 trade journals, 1245 book series, and 463 conference proceedings. The aim of the analysis was to find a 937, 799, 698, 622, 563, and so on—their h-index was 137, and 72% of them were cited at least once. correlation between metrics for different types of serials using As of May 6, 2018, in SCOPUS database, 14.144 titles were found Scopus data. For this purpose, Pearson correlation coefficient of linear correlation was determined for different pairs of metrics. that have the word “landslide*” in its title. Out of these 14.144 titles, there were 9.436 articles, 3.255 conference papers, 753 book The overall Pearson coefficient for all 49,145 serials is quite high chapters, 216 reviews, 150 articles in press, … or with regard to the (p = 0.682) and shows good linear correlation between the CiteScore of a serial and the Percent Cited (the proportion of the source type, there were 9.774 papers from journals, 2.683 confer- ence proceedings, 1.052 books, 565 book series, …. The share of the documents in the serials published in 2013–2015 that have received journals in SCOPUS database is roughly 70%, followed by roughly at least 1 citations in 2016). The Pearson correlation between Landslides 15 & (2018) 1463 Review Article Table 4 Selected 52 book titles from the Springer eBook collection Earth and Environmental Science (EES) No. Authors Book title ICL/IPL Publication Discipline Type activity year 1 Sassa et al. 2005 Landslides—Risk Analysis and WLF0 2005 GEOG M Sustainable Disaster Management 2 Sassa and Canuti 2009 Landslides—Disaster Risk Reduction WLF1 2009 ES M 3 Margottini et al. 2013a Landslide Science and Practice—Vol. 1 WLF2 2013 ES M 4 Margottini et al. 2013b Landslide Science and Practice—Vol. 2 WLF2 2013 ES M 5 Margottini et al. 2013c Landslide Science and Practice—Vol. 3 WLF2 2013 ES M 6 Margottini et al. 2013d Landslide Science and Practice—Vol. 4 WLF2 2013 ES M 7 Margottini et al. 2013e Landslide Science and Practice—Vol. 5 WLF2 2013 ES M 8 Margottini et al. 2013f Landslide Science and Practice—Vol. 6 WLF2 2013 ES M 9 Margottini et al. 2013g Landslide Science and Practice—Vol. 7 WLF2 2013 ES M 10 Sassa et al. 2014a Landslide Science for a Safer WLF3 2014 ENV P Geoenvironment—Vol. 1 11 Sassa et al. 2014b Landslide Science for a Safer WLF3 2014 ENV P Geoenvironment—Vol. 2 12 Sassa et al. 2014c Landslide Science for a Safer WLF3 2014 ENV P Geoenvironment—Vol. 3 13 Sassa et al. 2017 Advancing Culture of Living with WLF4 2017 ES P Landslides—Vol. 1 14 Mikoš et al. 2017a Advancing Culture of Living with WLF4 2017 ES P Landslides—Vol. 2 15 Mikoš et al. 2017b Advancing Culture of Living with WLF4 2017 ES P Landslides—Vol. 3 16 Mikoš et al. 2017c Advancing Culture of Living with WLF4 2017 ES P Landslides—Vol. 4 17 Mikoš et al. 2017d Advancing Culture of Living with WLF4 2017 ES P Landslides—Vol. 5 18 Sassa et al. 2007 Progress in Landslide Science IPL 2007 GEOG M 19 Sassa et al. 2013 Landslides: Global Risk Preparedness IPL 2013 ES M 20 Shan et al. 2014 Landslides in Cold Regions in the IPL 2014 ES M Context of Climate Change 21 Sassa et al. 2018a Landslide Dynamics: ISDR-ICL Landslide IPL 2018 ES M Interactive Teaching Tools, Vol. 1 22 Sassa et al. 2018b Landslide Dynamics: ISDR-ICL Landslide IPL 2018 ES M Interactive Teaching Tools, Vol. 2 23 Lollino et al. 2015a Engineering Geology for Society IAEG 2015 ES P and Territory—Vol. 1 24 Lollino et al. 2015b Engineering Geology for Society IAEG 2015 ES P and Territory—Vol. 2 25 Lollino et al. 2015c Engineering Geology for Society IAEG 2015 ES P and Territory—Vol. 3 26 Lollino et al. 2015d Engineering Geology for Society IAEG 2015 ES P and Territory—Vol. 4 27 Lollino et al. 2015e Engineering Geology for Society IAEG 2015 ES P and Territory—Vol. 5 28 Lollino et al. 2015f Engineering Geology for Society IAEG 2015 ES P and Territory—Vol. 6 29 Lollino et al. 2015g Engineering Geology for Society IAEG 2015 ES P and Territory—Vol. 7 30 Lollino et al. 2015h Engineering Geology for Society IAEG 2015 ES P and Territory—Vol. 8 1464 Landslides 15 & (2018) Table 4 (continued) No. Authors Book title ICL/IPL Publication Discipline Type activi- year ty 31 Locat and Mienert 2003 Submarine Mass Movements and No 2003 ES P Their Consequences—1st Int. Symp. 32 Lykousis et al. 2007 Submarine Mass Movements and No 2007 ES P Their Consequences—3rd Int. Symp. 33 Mosher et al. 2010 Submarine Mass Movements and No 2010 ES P Their Consequences—4th Int. Symp. 34 Yamada et al. 2012 Submarine Mass Movements and No 2012 ES P Their Consequences—5th Int. Symp. 35 Krastel et al. 2014 Submarine Mass Movements and No 2014 ES P Their Consequences—6th Int. Symp. 36 Lamarche et al. 2016 Submarine Mass Movements and No 2016 ES P Their Consequences—7th Int. Symp. 37 Erismann and Abele 2001 Dynamics of Rockslides and Rockfalls No 2001 ES M 38 Jakob and Hungr 2005 Debris-flow Hazards and Related No 2005 ES M Phenomena 39 Evans et al. 2006 Landslides from Massive Rock Slope No 2006 ES P Failure 40 L'Heureux et al. 2014 Landslides in Sensitive Clays: From No 2014 ES M Geosciences to Risk Management 41 Thakur et al. 2017 Landslides in Sensitive Clays: From No 2017 ES M Research to Implementation 42 Thiebes 2012 Landslide Analysis and Early Warning No 2012 ES PhD Systems 43 Pradhan and Buchroithner Terrigenous Mass Movements No 2012 ES M 44 Ugai et al. 2013 Earthquake-Induced Landslides No 2013 ES P 45 Ren 2015 Storm-triggered Landslides in Warmer No 2015 ES M Climates 46 Scaioni 2015 Modern Technologies for Landslide No 2015 ES M Monitoring and Prediction 47 Mandal and Maiti 2015 Semi-quantitative Approaches for No 2015 ES M Landslide Assessment and Prediction 48 Klose 2015 Landslide Databases as Tools for No 2015 ES PhD Integrated Assessment of Landslide Risk 49 Wu 2015 Recent Advances in Modeling Landslides No 2015 ENG M and Debris Flows 50 Pradhan 2017 Laser Scanning Applications in No 2017 ES M Landslide Assessment 51 Zhao 2017 Coupled DEM-CFD Analyses of No 2017 ENG M Landslide-Induced Debris Flows 52 Yamagishi and Bhandari GIS Landslide No 2017 ES M Discipline: ES Earth Sciences, ENV Environment, GEOG Geography; Type: M Monograph, P Proceedings, PhD Doctoral Thesis CiteScore and SNIP (p = 0.820) and CiteScore and SJR (p = 0.838) exhibiting higher linear correlation between CiteScore and each are even higher. This shows a good potential of CiteScore as a new of the other three metrics when compared to journals (46,774 metric for serials. Conference proceedings (463 titles) are titles, leaving out trade journals with only 663 titles). In addition, Landslides 15 & (2018) 1465 Review Article 1466 Landslides 15 & (2018) Table 5 Bookmetrics data for the selected 52 eBooks from the Springer package Earth and Environmental Science (EES) (data retrieved in May, 2018; Springer 2018a) Selected eBooks Bookmetrix No. Authors Chapters Downloads Citations Citations Book Journal h-index % cited Mentions Readers per item citations citations chapters 1 Sassa et al. 2005 46 87.9K 51 1.11 8 43 3 46 0 132 2 Sassa and Canuti 33 116K 119 3.61 23 96 5 79 5 154 3 Margottini et al. 79 186K 101 1.28 17 84 5 43 0 67 2013a 4 Margottini et al. 89 257K 49 0.55 10 39 3 30 0 446 2013b 5 Margottini et al. 60 109K 48 0.80 12 36 3 47 1 19 2013c 6 Margottini et al. 55 78.1K 38 0.69 10 28 3 40 0 47 2013d 7 Margottini et al. 45 60.7K 28 0.62 3 25 3 33 2 14 2013e 8 Margottini et al. 101 23.1K 65 0.64 10 55 3 35 1 42 2013f 9 Margottini et al. 44 50.4K 34 0.77 8 26 3 30 3 11 2013g 10 Sassa et al. 2014a 67 78.9K 67 1.00 25 42 4 46 1 289 11 Sassa et al. 2014b 129 61.4K 131 1.02 47 84 4 46 0 254 12 Sassa et al. 2014c 106 37.9K 45 0.42 10 35 2 32 1 169 13 Sassa et al. 2017 51 196K 5 0.10 0 5 1 8 1 23 14 Mikoš et al. 2017a 133 80.4K 61 0.46 53 8 2 40 5 61 15 Mikoš et al. 2017b 70 45.2K 25 0.36 12 13 2 29 1 17 16 Mikoš et al. 2017c 79 37.0K 8 0.10 0 8 1 10 3 29 17 Mikoš et al. 2017d 63 22.1K 12 0.19 2 10 1 16 15 217 18 Sassa et al. 2007 26 54.2K 64 2.46 6 58 3 62 0 301 19 Sassa et al. 2013 26 43.3K 18 0.69 9 9 3 31 1 97 20 Shan et al. 2014 21 14.0K 25 1.19 4 21 2 38 0 36 21 Sassa et al. 2018a 42 14.5K 0 0.00 0 0 0 0% 2 85 22 Sassa et al. 2018b 54 7.62K 0 0.00 0 0 0 0% 0 3 23 Lollino et al. 2015a 105 29.3K 32 0.30 2 30 2 22 15 316 24 Lollino et al. 2015b 388 36.5K 196 0.51 33 166 4 28 9 1060 25 Lollino et al. 2015c 129 71.4K 44 0.34 5 39 3 22 2 449 Landslides 15 & (2018) 1467 Table 5 (continued) Selected eBooks Bookmetrix No. Authors Chapters Downloads Citations Citations Book Journal h-index % cited Mentions Readers per item cita- cita- chap- tions tions ters 26 Lollino et al. 2015d 43 27.5K 13 0.30 1 12 2 21 5 254 27 Lollino et al. 2015e 265 18.2K 62 0.23 6 56 3 17 20 576 28 Lollino et al. 2015f 195 83.7K 18 0.09 0 18 1 9 4 389 29 Lollino et al. 2015g 54 26.6K 5 0.09 3 2 1 7 3 100 30 Lollino et al. 2015h 103 36.1K 22 0.21 3 19 2 17 6 286 31 Locat and Mienert 58 14.7K 185 3.19 16 169 7 71 0 382 32 Lykousis et al. 2007 43 45.6K 99 2.30 13 86 5 74 0 161 33 Mosher et al. 2010 62 76.5K 65 1.05 6 59 3 56 0 1170 34 Yamada et al. 2012 66 109K 130 1.97 26 104 6 73 7 665 35 Krastel et al. 2014 61 74.6K 94 1.54 15 79 3 61 3 184 36 Lamarche et al. 61 63.3K 36 0.59 8 28 3 38 15 338 37 Erismann and Abele 7 1.09K 73 10.43 5 68 0 0 0 38 38 Jakob and Hungr 27 77.2K 489 18.11 51 438 12 93 3 760 39 Evans et al. 2006 32 105K 138 4.31 12 126 6 88 2 164 40 L'Heureux et al. 31 40.1K 57 1.84 40 17 4 77 0 112 41 Thakur et al. 2017 50 17.3K 24 0.48 20 4 2 28 10 23 42 Thiebes 2012 11 11.0K 11 1.00 1 10 1 9 0 59 43 Pradhan and 12 11.5K 52 4.33 4 48 3 75 0 207 Buchroithner 44 Ugai et al. 2013 107 61.6K 49 0.46 5 44 3 28 2 69 45 Ren 2015 11 8.45K 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 18 46 Scaioni 2015 12 14.7K 11 0.92 3 8 2 50 3 19 47 Mandal and Maiti 8 5.56K 7 0.88 0 7 1 25 0 30 48 Klose 2015 6 2.65K 3 0.50 3 0 1 17 0 40 49 Wu 2015 25 35.5K 10 0.40 0 10 1 32 1 129 Review Article book series with 1245 titles exhibit comparable Pearson coeffi- cients to those for journals. These results show that the proposed Scopus journal metrics may be used for different types of serials, also for book series and conference proceedings. It is therefore important for a book to be included into the Scopus database. Springer Nature eBook package Earth and Environmental Science (EES) Springer’s Earth and Environmental Science eBook Package brings together up-to-date resources from trusted authors work- ing around the world on topics such as water management, ecol- ogy, geology, environmental biotechnology, and sustainable development. The data for the period from 2005 to 2017 is shown in Table 2. In Table 2, a steady growth of book titles covered by the collection can be observed in the period from 2004 onward. The prevailing type of periodicals covered in the EES collection by the number of titles are monographs (41%), followed by contributed volumes (28%), and other types (20%)—the proceedings are mak- ing 11% out of all 6207 book titles. Looking at the Subject Collec- tion Performance (i.e., percentage of books from Subject Collection EES that are cited more than the discipline average—i.- e., 50%), the performance is very good. The EES Collection Cita- tion Performance (CCP) for 2 years grew over years steadily to over 3 in 2017, and for the 5 years, it is close to 4. The values of CCP are comparable to the journals’ Impact Factor. From Altmetric point of view, the number of Reviews and Mentions per package and year are rather small, and the impact of eBooks in this respect is limited as measured by Bookmetrix. The number of chapter downloads per package and year has roughly doubled from 4 to 8 million per year since mid-2000s, mainly due to the growth in number of titles per package, as shown by a stable average downloads per book in a year. Average number of citations per book in this period is ~ 14, but close to half of the book titles are not monographs (having individual chapters); this citation rate is not very high compared to journals. Searching for the top ranked book titles in the EES Package for the period 2005–2017 with respect to the number of downloads per book and the number of citations per book, some landslide re- search and landslide risk reduction-related book titles can be found, some of which are produced by the ICL (Table 3). This confirms the importance of landslide science within the earth and environmental sciences as covered by Springer books. Furthermore, looking at the highlights in Earth Sciences in 2017, prepared by Springer Nature (Springer 2018e), among 10 most downloaded journal articles, there is no article from the ICL journal Landslides, and among top downloaded new books in Earth Sciences, the title Landslides in Sensitive Clays (Thakur et al. 2017) is mentioned. Selected landslide-related book titles from Springer EES package For the analysis, we have selected 52 book titles from the Springer eBook package Earth and Environmental Science (EES), related to landslide science (Table 4). The distribution of 52 selected book titles to disciplines within the package is as follows: Earth Sciences (45 titles), Environment (3 titles), Geography (2 titles), and Engi- neering (2 titles). A similar distribution to the serial type is as follows: monographs (26 titles), proceedings (24), and PhD theses (2 titles). Overall, 22 book titles are related to the ICL activities, and the rest are not. The 52 selected books have together 3426 1468 Landslides 15 & (2018) Table 5 (continued) Selected eBooks Bookmetrix No. Authors Chapters Downloads Citations Citations Book Journal h-index % cited Mentions Readers per item cita- cita- chap- tions tions ters 50 Pradhan 2017 16 5.24K 12 0.75 2 10 2 56 0 41 51 Zhao 2017 6 1.90K 1 0.17 0 1 1 17 0 15 52 Yamagishi and 13 5.05K 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 2 33 Bhandari 2017 Average 65.9 53.4K 56.4 – 10.6 45.8 3 32 3 204 Sum 3426 2.78M 2932 – 552 2383 –– 154 10.6K Fig. 1 Bookmetrics chapter downloads and citations for the selected 28 book titles (data retrieved in May, 2018; Springer 2018a) chapters, or nearly 66 chapters per book on average. The total Downloads and Citations per book, as well as the number of number of downloads of all 52 books is over 2.778 million or 53,415 Mentions and Readers. on average per title. The total number of citations is 2932, and the Comparing the ICL-related books with the rest of the analyzed average number of citations per book title is 56.4, and per book books, we have taken the following two titles as the benchmark: chapter is 2.67, since only 1098 out of 3426 chapters have been Debris-flow Hazards and Related Phenomena by Jakob and Hungr cited so far—i.e., 32% chapters from the analyzed 52 books. Out of (2005) with 93% cited chapters and h-index = 12 and Landslides 56.4 received citations on average per 52 analyzed books, on from Massive Rock Slope Failure by Evans et al. (2006) with 88% average, 10.6 are from books and 45.8 are from journals—an cited chapters and h-index = 6. The ICL-related titles important conclusion that books are not cited only in other books. Landslides—Disaster Risk Reduction by Sassa and Canuti (2009) The average h-index of books is (only) 3—i.e., only 3 chapters, on with 79% cited chapters and h-index = 5 and Landslides—Risk average, received 3 or more citations (the average number of Analysis and Sustainable Disaster Management by Sassa et al. chapters per book is nearly 66). Comparing the selected (2005) with 46% cited chapters and h-index = 3 is not on pair with landslide-related 52 books (Table 5) with the whole eBook package these two highly cited books. Comparing the impact of, e.g., WLF2 EES (Table 2), the books in landslide science and landslide risk in Rome (Margottini et al. 2013a-2013g) and WLF3 in Beijing (Sassa reduction are above average with respect to the average number of et al. 2014a-2014c) with the XII IAEG Congress in Turin (Lollino Table 6 Comparison of the 52 landslide-related books and the whole Springer eBook Package Earth and Environmental Science (EES) (data retrieved in May, 2018; Springer 2018a) Book selection No. of Total Total Total Total Total Total books downloads citations readers downloads citations readers per book per book per book ICL-related books 22 1.660.720 994 2.513 75.487 45.2 114 Non-ICL-related 30 1.116.840 1.938 8.087 37.228 64.6 270 books Landslide-related books 52 2.777.560 2.932 10.600 53.415 56.4 204 2001–2017 EES 2000–2017 4196 64.857.000 76.020 284.200 15.457 18.1 68 EES 1918–2017 6207 65.392.000 89.220 288.560 10.535 14.4 46 Landslides 15 & (2018) 1469 Review Article Table 7 Correlation between the selected metrics for the 52 landslide-related books from the Springer eBook Package Earth and Environmental Science (EES) (data retrieved in May, 2018; Springer 2018a) Pearson Publication Number Total Total Citations Total Book % cited coefficient r year of downloads citations per Readers h-index chapters chapters chapter Publication 0.19 −0.13 −0.57 −0.67 −0.23 −0.57 −0.53 year Number of 0.13 0.20 −0.21 0.55 0.10 −0.14 chapters Total 0.22 0.04 0.19 0.35 0.26 down- loads Total 0.80 0.54 0.89 0.62 citations Citations per 0.25 0.63 0.46 chapter Total readers 0.47 0.29 Book 0.81 h-index % cited chapters The Pearson cofficient values in italics represent strong and moderate positive and negative linear correlations, respectively et al. 2015a-2015h) shows that the variability in the total number of Book metrics in Web of Science, Google Scholar, and SCOPUS citations among volumes of the same scientific event are larger We searched for the data on book metrics for the selected 52 book than between the events (WLF2, WLF3, and XII IAEG). This titles from Table 4 in the following three databases: Web of Science confirms that it is not easy for scientific committees and volume (WoS by Clarivate Analytics), Google Scholar (by Google Inc.), and editors to prepare a set of equally “important” volumes for a single in SCOPUS (by Elsevier). Not all book titles are covered by all scientific event that will be approximately equally cited in the three databases. The obtained results are shown in Table 8. Only 16 future, since some topics are “hot,” attract more researchers, and book titles are covered by WoS, among them only Landslides in are later more cited than other topics from the same scientific Cold Regions in the Context of Climate Change by Shan et al. (2014) event. is an ICL-related title. All 52 book titles are covered by Google The differences in the number of chapter downloads and the Scholar, only that separate volumes (book titles) from the same number of cited chapters are also shown graphically in Fig. 1 for event cannot be easily distinguished, and therefore, GS data are selected 28 book titles from the Springer eBook Package EES. For presented in this case for all volumes only. The SCOPUS database the whole package, the average number of downloads per book is has not covered 11 book titles; for 5 further book titles, no data was 10.5 K, and the average number of citations per book is 14.4—both available on the chapter level (% cited chapters, chapter h-index). metrics are taken from Table 2. Overall, the ICL-related books, Google Scholar (GS) achieves the highest metric values due to analyzed in this paper, are among well-cited book titles in the field its wide coverage of literature. The average number of citations per of earth sciences. book chapter is as follows: 79 in WoS, 207 in GS, and 139 in Scopus Furthermore, we have compared the selected 52 landslide- (for computation in GS, the total number of citations for a few related book titles (ICL- and non-ICL-related titles) and the whole books integrating all volumes (book titles) was divided by the Springer eBook package EES (Table 6). The selected 52 landslide- number of volumes, i.e., WLF2, WLF3, WLF4, ISDR-ICL Interac- related book titles are above the average metrics for the whole EES tive Teaching Tools, XII IAEG). The average (maximum) h-index is with regard to the total number of downloads per book, the total as follows: 3 (10) in WoS, 6 (19) in GS, and 5 (17) in Scopus. A direct number of citations per book, and the total number of readers per title-to-title comparison shows higher h-index values for GS for all book. The ICL-related books are getting more downloads but less book titles compared to Scopus. The annual growth of h-index is readers and citations (so far) as the selected non-ICL-related rarely over 1 (h-I,norm in Table 8). The GS data also show that books. typically the average number of authors per book chapter is close We also looked at the linear correlation using Pearson coeffi- to 3 (between 2 and 4). cient p between selected metrics for the 52 landslide-related Jakob and Hungr (2005) gets h-index = 19 (Bookmetrix: h-in- books—strong positive linear correlation (0.8 < p < 1), moderate dex = 12), and Evans et al. (2006) gets h-index = 16 (Bookmetrix: h- positive linear correlation (0.5 < p < 0.8), and moderate negative index = 6). The GS compound h-index for the ICL-related books is linear correlation (−0.8 < p < −0.5) are given in italics in Table 7. also higher as for the Bookmetrix data: Margottini et al. (2013a- To expand the comparison and to strengthen the bibliometric 2013g) from WLF2 in Rome 2011 gets h-index = 13 with ~60% cited analysis, further book metrics, made available by other widely chapters, comparable to Lollino et al. (2015a-2015h) from XII IAEG used databases, were used. in Turin 2014 that gets h-index = 10 with a bit over 40% cited 1470 Landslides 15 & (2018) Table 8 Web of Science, Google Scholar and Scopus data for the selected 52 eBooks from the Springer package Earth and Environmental Science (EES) (data retrieved in December 2017) Selected eBooks Web of Science Google No. Authors Citations h-index Average citations Authors per cited Citations h-index per chapter chapter 1 Sassa et al. 2005 n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.93 134 7 2 Sassa and Canuti 2009 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.48 420 11 3 Margottini et al. n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.41 1422 13 2013a 4 Margottini et al. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2013b 5 Margottini et al. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2013c 6 Margottini et al. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2013d 7 Margottini et al. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2013e 8 Margottini et al. 2013f n.a. n.a. n.a. 9 Margottini et al. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2013g 10 Sassa et al. 2014a n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.39 597 9 11 Sassa et al. 2014b n.a. n.a. n.a. 12 Sassa et al. 2014c n.a. n.a. n.a. 13 Sassa et al. 2017 n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.55 226 3 14 Mikoš et al. 2017a n.a. n.a. n.a. 15 Mikoš et al. 2017b n.a. n.a. n.a. 16 Mikoš et al. 2017c n.a. n.a. n.a. 17 Mikoš et al. 2017d n.a. n.a. n.a. 18 Sassa et al. 2007 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.50 175 6 19 Sassa et al. 2013 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.85 80 4 20 Shan et al. 2014 37 4 1.54 3.67 63 4 21 Sassa et al. 2018a n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.20 18 2 22 Sassa et al. 2018b n.a. n.a. n.a. 23 Lollino et al. 2015a 65 4 0.63 3.48 1524 10 24 Lollino et al. 2015b 206 4 0.53 25 Lollino et al. 2015c 106 4 0.82 26 Lollino et al. 2015d 11 1 0.26 27 Lollino et al. 2015e 101 3 0.38 28 Lollino et al. 2015f 27 1 0.14 29 Lollino et al. 2015g 15 2 0.30 30 Lollino et al. 2015h 46 3 0.45 31 Locat and Mienert n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.00 55 1 32 Lykousis et al. 2007 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.50 7 1 33 Mosher et al. 2010 n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.39 711 14 34 Yamada et al. 2012 335 10 5.08 3.52 592 14 35 Krastel et al. 2014 158 6 2.63 4.03 311 9 36 Lamarche et al. 2016 85 4 1.39 3.59 157 6 Landslides 15 & (2018) 1471 Review Article Table 8 (continued) Selected eBooks Web of Science Google No. Authors Citations h-index Average citations Authors per cited Citations h-index per chapter chapter 37 Erismann and Abele n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.00 0 0 38 Jakob and Hungr 2005 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.74 1790 19 39 Evans et al. 2006 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.97 809 16 40 L'Heureux et al. 2014 25 2 0.76 3.43 162 6 41 Thakur et al. 2017 n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.71 41 3 42 Thiebes 2012 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.00 3 1 43 Pradhan and n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.80 148 4 Buchroithner 2012 44 Ugai et al. 2013 n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.55 212 7 45 Ren 2015 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.00 4 1 46 Scaioni 2015 17 2 1.42 4.09 54 5 47 Mandal and Maiti n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.00 9 1 48 Klose 2015 3 1 0.50 1.00 0 0 49 Wu 2015 26 3 1.04 3.04 43 3 50 Pradhan 2017 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.29 7 2 51 Zhao 2017 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.00 0 0 52 Yamagishi and n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.23 0 0 Bhandari 2017 Selected eBooks Google Scopus No. h-I,norm h-I,annual g-index Citations % cited chapters Chapter h-index 1 3 0.23 10 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2 8 0.89 19 282 94% 10 3 6 1.20 18 179 61% 7 4 142 58% 6 5 81 60% 4 6 69 60% 4 7 45 51% 3 8 159 63% 5 9 53 48% 3 10 4 1.00 12 72 49% 4 11 207 61% 6 12 87 45% 4 13 1 1.00 3 n.a. n.a. n.a. 14 n.a. n.a. n.a. 15 n.a. n.a. n.a. 16 n.a. n.a. n.a. 17 3 5% 1 18 4 0.36 12 138 85% 5 19 2 0.40 8 44 73% 4 20 3 0.75 7 n.a. n.a. n.a. 21 1 0.50 4 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1472 Landslides 15 & (2018) Table 8 (continued) Selected eBooks Google Scopus No. h-I,norm h-I,annual g-index Citations % cited chapters Chapter h-index 22 n.a. n.a. n.a. 23 5 1.67 12 123 46% 5 24 337 43% 6 25 172 49% 6 26 29 42% 3 27 221 42% 5 28 76 28% 3 29 26 35% 2 30 81 44% 4 31 1 0.17 1 n.a. n.a. n.a. 32 1 0.09 2 246 89% 10 33 7 0.88 22 492 95% 11 34 6 0.86 19 477 91% 13 35 3 0.60 13 142 74% 6 36 2 0.67 7 123 73% 5 37 0 0 0 195 n.a. n.a. 38 16 1.14 39 1254 96% 17 39 14 1.17 28 n.a. n.a. n.a. 40 4 0.80 10 15 29% 1 41 1 1.00 3 3 4% 1 42 1 0.17 1 26 n.a. n.a. 43 3 0.50 10 56 58% 3 44 4 0.80 10 n.a. n.a. n.a. 45 1 0.33 2 1 n.a. n.a. 46 2 0.67 6 15 50% 2 47 1 0.33 2 3 n.a. n.a. 48 0 0 0 5 n.a. n.a. 49 2 0.67 4 0 0% 0 50 1 1.00 2 3 13% 1 51 0 0 0 0 0% 0 52 0 0 0 0 0% 0 n.a. data not available chapters. From the analyzed book titles, some older proceedings of higher than in Bookmetrix database of Springer. If we measure the international symposium on Submarine Mass Movements and impact of a scientific book using chapter citations, we must be Their Consequences are also highly cited—exhibiting h-index of 14 careful which database we use. (Mosher et al. 2010; Yamada et al. 2012) with over 90% of cited The number of Bookmetrix downloads is more or less the chapters. The average was 50% cited chapters for all book titles in same for all chapters in the same volume (book title), Scopus. reaching from 2000 to 3000 downloads per chapter in older The relation of citations to book chapters between Springer book titles. Bookmetrix data, GS, and Scopus is also shown on the sample of The Bookmetrix chapter citations are concentrated to only a selected chapters from 20 ICL-related eBooks from the Springer few best chapters in a book title; the best ones from each analyzed package EES with the highest Bookmetrix citations or Google book title has achieved until early 2018 between close to 10 and not Scholar citations or both (Table 9). The number of chapter cita- more than 20 Bookmetrix citations. The majority of those citations tions in Scopus is, in average, lower than in Google Scholar and came from journals and not from books. Landslides 15 & (2018) 1473 Review Article 1474 Landslides 15 & (2018) Table 9 Selected chapters from 20 ICL-related eBooks from the Springer collection Earth and Environmental Science (EES) with the highest number of Bookmetrix citations or Google citations or both (book titles Sassa et al. 2018a, b are too new to be included into this table) Type Book Chapter Title Bookmetrix Bookmetrix citations (in Google Scopus downloads books & journals) Scholar citations citations WLF0 Sassa et al. Tommasi et al. The Landslide Sequence Induced by the 2002 1.71K 5 (0 + 5) 32 n.a. 2005 2005 Eruption at Stromboli Volcano Boldini et al. 2005 Mechanism of Landslide Causing the December 1.72K 1 (0 + 1) 13 n.a. 2002 Tsunami at Stromboli Volcano (Italy) Sassa 2005 ICL History and Activities 1.82K 0 11 n.a. WLF1 Sassa and Lacasse and Nadim Landslide Risk Assessment and Mitigation 3.15K 16 (3 + 13) 62 37 Canuti 2009 Strategy Hervas and Mapping: inventories, susceptibility, hazard 2.96K 12 (0 + 12) 52 33 Bobrowsky 2009 and risk Cannon and The Increasing Wildfire and Post-Fire 2.67K 10 (2 + 8) 38 25 DeGraff 2009 Debris-Flow Threat in Western USA, and Implications for Consequences of Climate Change WLF2–1 Margottini Raspini et al. 2013 Landslide Mapping Using SqueeSAR Data: 2.22K 10 (1 + 9) 19 14 et al. Giampilieri (Italy) Case Study 2013a Tsangaratos et al. Case event system for landslide susceptibility 2.18K 6 (0 + 6) 19 12 2013 analysis Trigila et al. 2013 Landslide susceptibility mapping at national 2.24K 6 (1 + 5) 14 11 scale: The Italian case study Devoto et al. 2013 Landslides along the north-west coast of the 2.17K 4 (1 + 3) 12 10 island of Malta Ardizzone et al. Very high-resolution stereoscopic satellite 2.30K 7 (1 + 6) 13 10 2013 images for landslide mapping Hermanns et al. Systematic Mapping of Large Unstable Rock 2.26K 2 (1 + 1) 23 9 2013a Slopes in Norway WLF2–2 Margottini Antronico et al. Conventional and Innovative Techniques for the 2.75K 6 (1 + 5) 9 7 et al. 2013 Monitoring of Displacements in Landslide 2013b Affected Area Tapete et al. 2013 Radar interferometry for early stage warning on 2.74K 2 (0 + 2) 11 10 monuments at risk Arosio et al. 2013 Freeze-thaw cycle and rockfall monitoring 2.77K 4 (2 + 2) 13 8 WLF2–3 Margottini Scheidl et al. 2013 Runout Prediction of Debris Flows and Similar 1.72K 7 (5 + 2) 14 5 et al. 2013c Mass Movements Crosta et al. 2013b On controls of flow-like landslide evolution by 1.65K 2 (0 + 2) 9 6 an erodible layer Salvati et al. 2013 1.66K 0 3 6 Landslides 15 & (2018) 1475 Table 9 (continued) Type Book Chapter Title Bookmetrix Bookmetrix citations (in Google Scopus downloads books & journals) Scholar cita- citations tions A new digital catalog of harmful landslides and floods in Italy WLF2–4 Margottini Avelar et al. 2013 Mechanisms of the Recent Catastrophic 1.36K 4 (1 + 3) 31 2 et al. Landslides in the Mountainous Range 2013d of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Deline et al. 2013 The December 2008 Crammont Rock Avalanche, 1.34K 0 36 1 Mont Blanc Massif Area, Italy Springman et al. Rock glacier degradation and instabilities 1.33K 3 (0 + 3) 12 9 2013 in the European Alps: A characterization and monitoring experiment in the Turtmanntal, CH Damiano and Potential effects of climate change on slope 1.34K 4 (1 + 3) 9 6 Mercogliano stability in unsaturated pyroclastic soils WLF2–5 Margottini Harp et al. 2013 The Effect of Complex Fault Rupture on the 1.38K 3 (0 + 3) 21 5 et al. Distribution of Landslides Triggered by the 2013e 12 January 2010, Haiti Earthquake Crosta et al. 2013a Interaction of landslide mass and water 1.31K 3 (0 + 3) 9 7 resulting in impulse waves WLF2–6 Margottini Roberts et al. 2013 Impacts of the 2007 Landslide-Generated 0.29K 8 (0 + 8) 13 9 et al. 2013f Tsunami in Chehalis Lake, Canada Coelho Netto et al. January 2011: The Extreme Landslide Disaster 0.20K 2 (0 + 2) 32 3 2013 in Brazil Benedetti et al. San Leo: Centuries of coexistence with 0.15K 2 (0 + 2) 10 11 2013 landslides Hermanns et al. Rockslide dams in Møre og Romsdal County, 0.38K 0 11 9 2013b Norway WLF2–7 Margottini Schaub et al. 2013 Landslides and New Lakes in Deglaciating 1.16K 10 (1 + 9) 23 17 et al. Areas: A Risk Management Framework 2013g Trezzini et al. 2013 Landslide and flood: Economic and social 1.17K 3 (1 + 2) 8 5 impacts in Italy WLF3–1 Sassa et al. Sassa et al. 2014d Plenary: Progress in Landslide Dyanmics 1.14K 6 (2 + 4) 17 3 2014a Pennington et al. Antecedent precipitation as a potential proxy 1.13K 4 (2 + 2) 11 7 2014 for landslide incidence in South West United Kingdom Huntley et al. 2014 Fiber optic strain monitoring and evaluation 1.16K 1 (0 + 1) 11 5 of a slow-moving landslide near Ashcroft, British Columbia, Canada Review Article 1476 Landslides 15 & (2018) Table 9 (continued) Type Book Chapter Title Bookmetrix Bookmetrix citations (in Google Scopus downloads books & journals) Scholar cita- citations tions WLF3–2 Sassa et al. Dou et al. 2014 GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping 0.32K 15 (2 + 13) 30 20 2014b using a certainty factor model and its validation in the Chuetsu area, central Japan Zizioli et al. 2014 Rainfall-triggered shallow landslides mapping 0.29K 2 (1 + 1) 9 9 through Pleiades images Klose et al. 2014b Estimation of direct landslide costs in 0.29K 2 (1 + 1) 11 8 industrialized countries: Challenges, concepts, and case study WLF3–3 Sassa et al. Xu et al. 2014b Did the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake lead to 0.18K 1 (0 + 1) 7 7 2014c a net volume loss? Hermanns et al. Approach for systematic rockslide mapping of 0.18K 1 (1 + 0) 11 5 2014 unstable rock slopes in Norway Crosta et al. 2014 Large slope instabilities in northern Chile: 0.18K 1 (0 + 1) 7 5 Inventory, characterization and possible triggers WLF4–1 Sassa et al. Klose et al. 2014a Landslide Hazards and Climate Change 0.87K 0 3 n.a. 2017 Adaptation of Transport Infrastructures in Germany WLF4–2 Mikoš et al. Tanteri et al. 2014 Multitemporal UAV Survey for Mass Movement 0.35K 3 (2 + 1) 5 n.a. 2017a Detection and Monitoring WLF4–3 Mikoš et al. Hiraoka et al. 2014 A Full-Scale Model Test for Predicting Collapse 0.40K 0 3 n.a. 2017b Time Using Displacement of Slope Surface During Slope Cutting Work WLF4–4 Mikoš et al. Baczynski and Bar Landslide Monitoring and Management 0.24K 1 (0 + 1) 1 n.a. 2017c 2014 Challenge in Remote Papua New Guinea WLF4–5 Mikoš et al. Emmer and Inventory and Typology of Landslide-Dammed 0.12K 2 (0 + 2) 3 3 2017d Juřicová 2014 Lakes of the Cordillera Blanca (Peru) ICL Sassa et al. McSaveney and Rockslides and Their Motion 1.94K 17 (1 + 16) 52 46 Mono- 2007 Davis 2007 graph Hungr 2007 Dynamics of Rapid Landslides 1.99K 10 (0 + 10) 33 18 Picarelli 2007 Considerations about the Mechanics of Slow 1.94K 2 (0 + 2) 17 10 Active Landslides in Clay ICL Sassa et al. Mihalić and The Croatian-Japanese joint research project 1.54K 3 (3 + 0) 31 12 Mono- 2013 Arbanas 2013 on landslides: Activities and public benefits graph Nadim et al. 2013 Assessment of Global Landslide Hazard Hotspots 1.66K 3 (1 + 2) 8 5 Petkovšek et al. Mechanism of Active Landslides in Flysch 1.57K 3 (1 + 2) 8 5 Emmer et al. 2014 0.60K 8 (1 + 7) 23 n.a. Comparing the number of chapter citations from the 52 ana- lyzed books related to landslide science, we may conclude that their maximum numbers of citations are far below highly cited journal papers, e.g., from the ICL journal Landslides. Sassa et al. (2009) found that after 5 years of the journal Landslides (2004– 2008), the most cited journal articles received a few tens of Google Scholar citations, and up to 20 ISI WoS citations (Sassa et al. 2009; Table 1). This situation improved a lot in the second 5 years of the journal Landslides (2009–2013) since the most cited journal arti- cles received already close to and over 100 Google Scholar cita- tions, and several tens of WoS citations (Sassa et al. 2015, Table 4). The average number of journal article citations is much higher as for book chapters, even though the total number of article downloads is of the order of several hundred or a few thousand downloads, and not several ten thousand as is the case for book chapters. The rate between journal article citations to their num- ber of downloads is for the journal Landslides for the most cited articles up to 1:10. For example, 11 Highly Cited Papers in the journal Landslides are given in Table 10. The number of down- loads per citable item has no significant impact on its total number of received citations. Landslide-related scientific events The results so far have shown that articles in conference proceed- ings are not cited as often as journal articles, and that there are large differences between single chapters in the same conference proceedings and between chapters in different books. However, can we compare series of landslide-related scientific events with regard to their bibliometric impact? In Google Scholar, we compared selected metrics for the pro- ceedings of World Landslide Forums (ICL), congresses of the International Association for Engineering Geology and the Envi- ronment (IAEG), and proceedings of the International Sympo- sium on Landslides (ISL). The results are as follows: – WLF (2009–2017) reveals 999 papers with on average 3.45 authors per paper, h-index = 15 and g-index = 21 (query words “world landslide forum” plus all WLF proceedings titles); – IAEG (1970–2016) reveals 696 papers with on average 2.35 authors per paper, h-index = 21, and g-index = 27 (query words “IAEG, NOT conference bulletin bull. conf.”); – ISL (from third ISL on, 1980–2016) reveals 799 papers with on average 2.73 authors per paper, h-index = 29, and g-index = 64 (query words “international symposium on landslides OR landslides and engineered slopes”). On the basis of this rough estimation using Google Scholar data, we may conclude that ICL World Landslide Forums are “young” events (since 2009) and cannot compete yet with “established” events such as mature and large IAEG congress (since 1970) or mature and specialized International Symposium on Landslides (since 1972). A re- analysis in a due time will show whether ICL is catching up with these two well-known series of landslide-related events. Alternative metrics The bibliometric (scientometric) parameters, presented in this study, are only one part of the story. Alternative metrics are Landslides 15 & (2018) 1477 Table 9 (continued) Type Book Chapter Title Bookmetrix Bookmetrix citations (in Google Scopus downloads books & journals) Scholar cita- citations tions ICL Shan et al. Glacier Retreat, Lakes Development and Mono- 2014 Associated Natural Hazards in Cordilera graph Blanca, Peru Khomutov and Assessment of Landslide Zahards in a Typical 0.61K 3 (0 + 3) 9 n.a. Leibman 2014 Tundra of Central Yamal, Russia Leibman et al. 2014 Cryogenic Landslides in the West-Siberian Plain 0.61K 1 (0 + 1) 6 n.a. of Russia: Classification, Mechanisms, and Landforms n.a. data not available Review Article currently one of the most popular research topics in scientometric journal articles. On average, the analyzed 3426 book chapters research, and different services (such as, e.g., Altmetric.com) give from 52 landslide-related books have been downloaded over insight about how and where books are discussed online, i.e., in 53,000 times each; 1092 chapters (32%) received 2932 citations social media, but also in news articles, blogs, and policy (2.68 citations per cited chapter and 0.86 citations per pub- documents. Bornmann (2015) prepared an overview of three of lished chapter). the most important altmetrics: microblogging (Twitter), online – The selected 52 landslide-related book titles are above the average reference managers (Mendeley, CiteULike), and blogging—the metrics for the whole Springer eBook Package Earth and Environ- correlation with traditional citations for microblogging counts mental Science with regard to the total number of downloads per was negligible, for blog counts was small, and for bookmark book, the total number of citations per book, and the total number counts from online reference managers, medium to large. The of readers per book. The ICL-related books are getting more down- presence and density of social media altmetric counts are still very loadsbut lessreadersand citations(so far) astheselectednon-ICL- low and not very frequent among scientific publications, which related books. was shown by Costas et al. (2015). Altmetric measurements derived – The number of chapter downloads is more or less equal for all from the social web are increasingly advocated and used as early chapters in one book and the chapter citations in different citation indicators of article impact and usefulness, as discussed by databases are rather strictly limited to only a small fraction of a few Thelwall et al. (2013). The increasing popularity and usage of some highly cited chapters—many chapters are downloaded as a whole e- social media, e.g., LinkedIn or Researchgate, may well rise research Book but are not receiving any attention in the form of a chapter efforts in the field of alternative metrics for scientific impact of citation. This resembles in a way the situation in journals, where in published research papers and book chapters, including those many cases the journal Impact Factor is produced mainly by a produced by the ICL. fraction of highly cited papers, and not all journal articles get cited. – The h-index of the ICL monographs, using chapter citations, is Conclusions around 10 or less, and therefore much less than the most cited We analyzed selected landslide-related 52 books with 3426 chapters journals in the category geological engineering in the Web of published by Springer Nature in the period 2005–2018, using three Science (h-index around 50 or more). citation databases: Scopus (by Elsevier), Web of Science (by Clarivate – The ICL World Landslide Forum proceedings (since 2009) are Analytics), and Google Scholar. Out of the selected book titles, 22 were with regard to the total amount of citations (h-index, g-index) published on behalf of the ICL, with 1419 chapters. The bibliometric still behind the more established landslide-related scientific analysis was performed as well as on the book level, and as far as events, such as IAEG congresses (since 1970) and International possible, on the book chapter level. Based on results of this study, we Symposia on Landslides (since 1970). can draw the following conclusions: – Additional research on the impact of printed and electronic scientific books (scientific and technical monographs and pro- – Web of Science covers less than a third of the selected 52 book titles ceedings of scientific meetings) on world scientific community in the field of landslide science. For the analyzed 22 ICL-related book in the fields of landslide research and landslide risk reduction titles, WoS covers only one title. On the contrary, Google Scholar using different altmetrics can be a further step in evaluation of covers all selected book titles, and Scopus covers more than a half of books published by the International Consortium on Land- the analyzed book titles. In the future, more efforts should be slides (and any other international associations and societies). invested into bringing more ICL-related book titles to WoS. – The differences among landslide-related books can be quite large; only a few chapters from analyzed book titles were found A way in raising the visibility and impact of the ICL books on to be cited frequently compared to highly cited scientific landslide research community would be to support their open Table 10 Highly cited papers from the journal Landslides—comparison between WoS and Bookmetrix citations with Bookmetrix downloads No. Authors WoS citations Bookmetrix citations Bookmetrix downloads 1. Guzzetti et al. 2008 360 341 6.0K 2. Lee and Pradhan 2007 271 275 2.7K 3. Yin et al. 2008 202 204 3.7K 4. Pradhan and Lee 2010 147 157 1.8K 5. Akgun 2012 127 139 1.5K 6. Hungr et al. 2014 229 253 9.0K 7. Xu et al. 2014a 74 83 4.5K 8. Bui et al. 2016 54 80 2.5K 9. Li et al. 2016 23 21 1.9K 10. Yavari-Ramshe and Ataie-Asjtiani 2017 8 9 451 11. Bui et al. 2017 7 11 542 1478 Landslides 15 & (2018) living with landslides – volume 4: diversity of landslide forms. Springer, Cham, pp access publishing in the form of e-Books as much as possible, and 343–354 to strengthen the ICL presence in social media networks, such as Bar-Ilan J (2010) Citations to the “Introduction to informetrics” indexed by WOS, Scopus Researchgate or LindkedIn. and Google Scholar. Scientometrics 82:495–506 For libraries and promotional activities, printed books might be Benedetti G, Bernardi M, Bonaga G, Borgatti L, Continelli F, Ghirotti M, Guerra C, Landuzzi important, but it seems that the impact of published books in the A, Lucente CC, Marchi G (2013) San Leo: Centuries of coexistence with landslides. in: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume 6: risk field of landslide science relates much more to the potential of assessment, management and mitigation. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 529–537 open access and wide distribution of electronic databases than to Boldini D, Wang F, Sassa K, Tommasi P (2005) Mechanism of landslide causing the the number of printed books, distributed to participants at scien- December 2002 tsunami at stromboli volcano (Italy). In: Sassa K, Fukuoka H, Wang F, tific events, sold in bookstores, or available in libraries. Wang G (eds) landslides – risk analysis and sustainable disaster management. Springer, p 173–180 Acknowledgments Bookmetrix (2018) http://www.bookmetrix.com/ Bornmann L (2015) Alternative metrics in scientometrics: a meta-analysis of research into This paper was stimulated by discussions inside the ICL commu- three altmetrics. Scientometrics 103:1123–1144 nity about the future form of the ICL World Landslide Forum’s Bui DT, Tuan TA, Klempe H, Pradhan B, Revhaug I (2016) Spatial prediction models for proceedings and landslide-related books published by ICL. These shallow landslide hazards: a comparative assessment of the efficacy of support vector discussions were part of the preparation for the 5th World Land- machines, artificial neural networks, kernel logistic regression, and logistic model tree. slide Forum to be held in Kyoto in 2020. The research undertaken Landslides 13(2):361–378 Bui DT, Nguyen QP, Hoang ND, Klempe H (2017) A novel fuzzy K-nearest neighbor to prepare this paper was partially funded by the Slovenian Re- inference model with differential evolution for spatial prediction of rainfall-induced search Agency through research core funding P2-0180. The author shallow landslides in a tropical hilly area using GIS. Landslides 14(1):1–17 would especially like to thank Claudio Margottini for his com- Cannon SH, DeGraff J (2009) The increasing wildfire and post-fire debris-flow threat in ments and suggestions that considerably improved the manuscript western USA, and implications for consequences of climate change. In: Sassa K, Canuti in its final form. The proof reading by Binod Tiwari is also P (eds) Landslides – disaster risk reduction. Springer, p 177–190 Clarivate Analytics (2018a) Web of Science. https://apps.webofknowledge.com/ acknowledged. Clarivate Analytics (2018b) Conference Proceedings Index. http://wokinfo.com/ products_tools/multidisciplinary/webofscience/cpci/ Clarivate Analytics (2018c) Book Citation Index. http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/mul- Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the tidisciplinary/bookcitationindex/ Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http:// Costas R, Zahedi Z, Wouters P (2015) Do "altmetrics" correlate with citations? Extensive creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestrict- comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective. ed use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided J Assoc Inf Sci Technol 66(10):2003–2019 you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the Coelho Netto AL, Sato AM, de Souza Avelar A, Vianna LGG, Araújo IS, Ferreira DLC, Lima PH, Silva APA, Silva RP (2013) January 2011) The extreme landslide disaster in Brazil. source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume 6: indicate if changes were made. risk assessment, management and mitigation. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 377– Crosta GB, Imposimato S, Roddeman D (2013a) Interaction of landslide mass and water References resulting in impulse waves. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) (2013) Landslide science and practice – volume 5: complex environment. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, p Academic Book Week (2016) Springer Nature: Emerging Tools and Metrics in the Book 49–56 Impact Space. https://acbookweek.com/2016/12/08/springer-nature-emerging-tools- Crosta GB, Imposimato S, Roddeman D, Frattini P (2013b) Freeze-thaw cycle and rockfall and-metrics-in-the-book-impact-space/ (posted on December 8, 2016; updated on monitoring. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – December 13, 2016) volume 3: spatial analysis and modelling. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 263–270 Akgun A (2012) A comparison of landslide susceptibility maps produced by logistic Crosta GB, Hermanns R, Frattini P, Valbuzzi E, Valagussa A (2014) Large slope instabilities regression, multi-criteria decision, and likelihood ratio methods: a case study at Izmir, In Northern Chile: inventory, characterization and possible triggers. in: Sassa K, Canuti Turkey. Landslides 9(1):93–106 P, Yin Y (eds) Landslide science for a safer geoenvironment – volume 3: targeted Antronico L, Borrelli L, Peduto D, Fornaro G, Gullà G, Paglia L, Zeni G (2013) Conventional landslides. Springer, Cham, pp 175–181 and innovative techniques for the monitoring of displacements in landslide affected Damiano E, Mercogliano P (2013) Potential effects of climate change on slope stability in area. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume unsaturated pyroclastic soils. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide 2: early warning, instrumentation and monitoring. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp science and practice – volume 4: global environmental change. Springer, Berlin 125–131 Heidelberg, pp. 15-25 Altmetric (2018) What does Altmetric do? https://www.altmetric.com/ Deline P, Broccolato M, Noetzli J, Ravanel L, Tamburini A (2013) The December 2008 Ardizzone F, Fiorucci F, Santangelo M, Cardinali M, Mondini AC, Rossi M, Reichenbach P, crammont rock avalanche, mont blanc massif area, Italy. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Guzzetti F (2013) Very-high resolution stereoscopic satellite images for landslide Sassa K (eds) Landslide Science and Practice – Volume 4: Global Environmental mapping. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – Change. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 403–408 volume 1: landslide inventory and susceptibility and hazard zoning. Springer, Berlin Devoto S, Biolchi S, Bruschi VM, González Díez A, Mantovani M, Pasuto A, Piacentini D, Heidelberg, pp 95–101 Schembri JA, Soldati M (2013) Landslides along the north-west coast of the island of Arosio D, Longoni L, Mazza F, Papini M, Zanzi L (2013) Freeze-thaw cycle and rockfall Malta. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – monitoring. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume 1: landslide inventory and susceptibility and hazard zoning. Springer, Berlin volume 2: early warning, instrumentation and monitoring. Springer, Berlin Heidel- Heidelberg, pp 57–63 berg, pp 385–390 Dou J, Oguchi T, Hayakawa YS, Uchiyama S, Saito H, Paudel U (2014) GIS-Based landslide Avelar AS, Coelho Netto AL, Lacerda WA, Becker LB, Mendonça MB (2013) Mechanisms of susceptibility mapping using a certainty factor model and its validation in the Chuetsu the recent catastrophic landslides in the mountainous range of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Area, Central Japan. In: Sassa K, Canuti P, Yin Y (eds) Landslide science for a safer In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume 4: geoenvironment – volume 2: methods of landslide studies. Springer, Cham, pp 419– global environmental change. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 265–270 Baczynski N, Bar N (2014) Landslide monitoring and management challenge in remote DOAB (2018) Directory of Open Access Books. https://www.doabooks.org/ papua New Guinea. In: Mikoš M, Casagli N, Yin Y, Sassa K (eds) Advancing culture of Egghe L (2006) Theory and practice of the g-index. Scientometrics 69(1):131–152 Landslides 15 & (2018) 1479 Review Article Emmer A, Juřicová A (2014) Inventory and typology of landslide-dammed lakes of the Lamarche G, Mountjoy J, Bull S, Hubble T, Krastel S, Lane E, Micallef A, Moscardelli L, Cordillera Blanca (Peru). In: Mikoš M, Vilímek V, Yin Y, Sassa K (eds) Advancing culture Mueller C, Pecher I, Woelz S (Eds.) (2016) Submarine mass movements and their of living with landslides – volume 5: diversity of landslide forms. Springer, Cham, pp consequences: 7th international symposium. Springer, Cham, 621 p 259–266 Lee S, Pradhan B (2007) Landslide hazard mapping at Selangor, Malaysia using Emmer A, Vilímek V, Klimeš J, Cochachin A (2014) Glacier retreat, lakes development and frequency ratio and logistic regression models. Landslides 4(1):33–41 associated natural hazards in Cordilera Blanca, Peru. In: Shan W, Guo Y, Wang F, Leibman M, Khomutov A, Kizyakov A (2014) Cryogenic landslides in the west-siberian Marui H, Strom A (eds) Landslides in cold regions in the context of climate change. plain of Russia: classification, mechanisms, and landforms. In: Shan W, Guo Y, Wang F, Springer International Publishing Switzerland, p 231–255 Marui H, Strom A (eds) Landslides in cold regions in the context of climate change. Elsevier (2018) Scopus journal metrics. https://journalmetrics.scopus.com/ Springer International Publishing Switzerland, p 143–162 Erismann TH, Abele G (2001) Dynamics of rockslides and rockfalls. Springer-Verlag, Berlin L'Heureux J-S, Locat A, Leroueil S, Demers D, Locat J (eds) (2014) Landslides in sensitive Heidelberg 316 p clays: from geosciences to risk management. Springer, Netherlands 418 p Evans SG, Scarascia Mugnozza G, Strom A, Hermanns RL (eds) (2006) Landslides from Li DQ, Xiao T, Cao ZJ, Zhou CB, Zhang LM (2016) Enhancement of random finite element massive rock slope failure. Springer, Netherlands 662 p method in reliability analysis and risk assessment of soil slopes using subset Google (2018) Google Scholar. https://scholar.google.si/ simulation. Landslides 13(2):293–303 st Guzzetti F, Peruccacci S, Rossi M, Stark CP (2008) The rainfall intensity–duration control Locat J, Mienert J (eds) (2003) Submarine mass movements and their consequences: 1 of shallow landslides and debris flows: an update. Landslides 5(1):3–17 international symposium. Springer, Netherlands 542 p Harp EL, Jibson RW, Dart RL (2013) The effect of complex fault rupture on the Lacasse S, Nadim F (2009) Landslide risk assessment and mitigation strategy. In: Sassa K, distribution of landslides triggered by the 12 January 2010, Haiti Earthquake. In: Canuti P (eds) Landslides – disaster risk reduction. Springer, p 31–61 Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) (2013) Landslide science and practice – volume Lollino G, Manconi A, Clague J, Shan W, Chiarle M (eds) (2015a) Engineering geology for 5: complex environment. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 157–161 society and territory—volume 1: Climate change and engineering geology. Springer Hervás J, Bobrowsky P (2009) Mapping: inventories, susceptibility, hazard and risk. In: International Publishing, Switzerland 572 p Sassa K, Canuti P (eds) Landslides – disaster risk reduction. Springer p 321–349 Lollino G, Giordan D, Crosta GB, Corominas J, Azzam R, Wasowski J, Sciarra N (eds) Hermanns RL, Blikra LH, Anda E, Saintot A, Dahle H, Oppikofer T, Fischer L, Bunkholt H, (2015b) Engineering geology for society and territory—volume 2: Landslide process- Böhme M, Dehls JF, Lauknes TR, Redfield TF, Osmundsen PT, Eiken T (2013a) es. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland 2177 p Systematic mapping of large unstable rock slopes in Norway. In: Margottini C, Canuti Lollino G, Arattano M, Rinaldi M, Giustolisi O, Marechal J-C, Grant GE (2015c) Engineering P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume 1: landslide inventory and geology for society and territory—volume 3: River basins, reservoir sedimentation susceptibility and hazard zoning. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 29–34 and water resources. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland 657 p Lollino G, Manconi A, Locat J, Huang Y, Canals Artigas M (eds) (2015d) Engineering Hermanns RL, Dahle H, Bjerke PL, Crosta GB, Anda E, Blikra LH, Saintot A, Longva O (2013b) Rockslide dams in møre og romsdal county, Norway. In: Margottini C, Canuti geology for society and territory—volume 4: Marine and coastal processes. Springer P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume 6: risk assessment, International Publishing, Switzerland 235 p management and mitigation. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 3–12 Lollino G, Manconi A, Guzzetti F, Culshaw M, Bobrosky P, Luino F (eds) (2015e) Hermanns RL, Oppikofer T, Molina FXY, Dehls JF, Böhme M (2014) Approach for Engineering geology for society and territory—volume 5: Urban geology, sustainable systematic rockslide mapping of unstable rock slopes in Norway. In: Sassa K, Canuti planning and landscape exploitation. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland P, Yin Y (eds) Landslide science for a safer geoenvironment – volume 3: targeted 1400 p landslides. Springer, Cham, pp 129–134 Lollino G, Giordan D, Thuro K, Carranza-Torres C, Wu F, Marinos P, Delgado C (eds) Hiraoka N, Kikkawa K, Itoh K, Tamate S (2014) A full-Scale model test for predicting (2015f) Engineering geology for society and territory—volume 6: Applied geology for collapse time using displacement of slope surface during slope cutting work. In: major engineering projects. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland 1082 p Mikoš M, Arbanas Ž, Yin Y, Sassa K (eds) Advancing culture of living with landslides – Lollino G, Arattano M, Giradino M, Oliveira R (2015g) In: Peppoloni SC (ed) Engineering volume 3: advances in landslide technology. Springer, Cham, pp 111–121 geology for society and territory—volume 7: Education, professional ethics and Huntley D, Bobrowsky P, Qing Z, Sladen W, Bunce C, Edwards T, Hendry M, Martin D, public recognition of engineering geology. Springer International Publishing, Swit- Choi E (2014) Fiber optic strain monitoring and evaluation of a slow-moving landslide zerland 274 p near ashcroft, British Columbia, Canada. In: Sassa K, Canuti P, Yin Y (eds) Landslide Lollino G, Giordan D, Marunteanu C, Christaras B, Yoshinori I, Margottini C (eds) (2015h) science for a safer geoenvironment – volume 1: the international programme on Engineering geology for society and territory—volume 8: Preservation of cultural landslides (IPL). Springer, Cham, pp 415–421 heritage. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland 584 p Hungr O, Leroueil S, Picarelli L (2014) The Varnes classification of landslide types, an Lykousis V, Sakellariou D, Locat J (eds) (2007) Submarine mass movements and their update. Landslides 5(1):3–17 consequences: 3rd international symposium. Springer, Netherlands 424 p Hungr O (2007) Dynamics of Rapid Landslides. In: Sassa K, Fukuoka H, Wang F, Wang G Mandal S, Maiti R (2015) Semi-quantitative approaches for landslide assessment and (eds) (2007) Progress in Landslide Science. Springer, p 47–57 prediction. Springer, Singapore 292 p Jakob M, Hungr O (eds) (2005) Debris-flow hazards and related phenomena. Springer- Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) (2013a) Landslide science and practice—volume 1: Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg 739 p Landslide inventory and susceptibility and hazard zoning. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg Khomutov A, Leibman M (2014) Assessment of landslide hazards in a typical tundra of 607 p central Yamal, Russia. In: Shan W, Guo Y, Wang F, Marui H, Strom A (eds) Landslides Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) (2013b) Landslide science and practice—volume 2: in cold regions in the Context of climate change. Springer International Publishing Early warning, instrumentation and monitoring. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg 685 p Switzerland, p 271–290 Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) (2013c) Landslide science and practice—volume 3: Klose M, Auerbach M, Herrmann C, Kumerics C, Gratzki A (2014a) Landslide hazards and Spatial analysis and modelling. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg 440 p climate change adaptation of transport infrastructures in Germany. In: Sassa K, Mikoš Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) (2013d) Landslide science and practice—volume 4: M, Yin Y (eds) Advancing culture of living with landslides – Volume 1: ISDR-ICL sendai Global environmental change. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg 431 p partnerships 2015-2025. Springer, Cham, pp 535–541 Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) (2013e) Landslide science and practice—volume 5: Klose M, Highland L, Damm B, Terhorst B (2014b) Estimation of direct landslide costs in Complex environment. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg 354 p industrialized countries: challenges, concepts, and case study. In: Sassa K, Canuti P, Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) (2013f) Landslide science and practice—volume 6: Yin Y (eds) Landslide science for a safer geoenvironment – volume 2: methods of Risk assessment, management and mitigation. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg 789 p landslide studies. Springer, Cham, pp 661–667 Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) (2013g) Landslide science and practice—volume 7: Klose M (2015) Landslide databases as tools for integrated assessment of landslide risk. Social and economic impact and policies. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg 333 p Springer International Publishing, Switzerland 156 p McSaveney M, Davies T (2007) Rockslides and their motion. In: Sassa K, Fukuoka H, Wang Kousha K, Thelwall M (2008) Sources of Google scholar citations outside the science F, Wang G (eds) (2007) Progress in landslide science. Springer, p 113–133 citation index: a comparison between four science disciplines. Scientometrics Mihalić S, Arbanas Ž (2013) The Croatian–Japanese joint research project on landslides: 74(2):273–294 activities and public benefits. In: Sassa K, Rouhban B, Briceño S, McSaveney M, He B Krastel S, Behrmann J-H, Völker D, Stipp M, Berndt C, Urgeles R, Chaytor J, Huhn K, (eds) Landslides: global risk preparedness. Springer, p 333–349 Strasser M, Harbitz CB (eds) (2014) Submarine mass movements and their conse- Mikoš M (2011) Landslides: a state-of-the art on the current position in the landslide quences: 6th international symposium. Springer International Publishing 683 p research community. Landslides 8:541–551 1480 Landslides 15 & (2018) Mikoš M (2017) Landslides: a top international journal in geological engineering and Sassa K, Canuti P, Yin Y (eds) (2014a) Landslide science for a safer geoenvironment—volume engineering geology? Landslides 14(5):1827–1838 1: The International Programme on Landslides (IPL). Springer, Cham Mikoš M, Tiwari B, Yin Y, Sassa K (eds) (2017a) Advancing culture of living with Sassa K, Canuti P, Yin Y (eds) (2014b) Landslide science for a safer landslides—volume 2: Advances in landslide science. Springer International Publish- geoenvironment—volume 2: The International Programme on Landslides (IPL). ing, Cham 1197 p Springer, Cham Mikoš M, Arbanas Ž, Yin Y, Sassa K (eds) (2017b) Advancing culture of living with Sassa K,CanutiP, Yin Y(eds) (2014c) Landslide Science for a safer landslides—volume 3: Advances in landslide technology. Springer International geoenvironment—volume 3: The International Programme on Landslides (IPL). Publishing, Cham 621 p Springer, Cham Mikoš M, Casagli N, Yin Y, Sassa K (eds) (2017c) Advancing culture of living with Sassa K, Tsuchiya S, Fukuoka H, Mikos M, Doan L (2015) Landslides: review of landslides—volume: 4 Diversity of landslide forms. Springer International Publishing, achievements in the second 5-year period (2009–2013). Landslides 12(2):213–223 Cham 707 p Sassa K, Mikoš M, Yin Y (eds) (2017) Advancing culture of living with landslides—vol. 1. Mikoš M, Vilimek V, Yin Y, Sassa K (eds) (2017d) Advancing culture of living with Springer International Publishing, Cham 586 p landslides—volume 5: Landslides in different environments. Springer International Sassa K, Guzzetti F, Yamagishi H, Arbanas Ž, Casagli N, McSaveney M, Dang K (eds) Publishing, Cham 557 p (2018a) Landslide dynamics: ISDR-ICL landslide interactive teaching tools volume 1: Mosher DC, Shipp C, Moscardelli L, Chaytor J, Baxter C, Lee H, Urgeles R (eds) (2010) Fundamentals, mapping and monitoring. Springer International Publishing, Switzer- Submarine mass movements and their consequences: 4th international symposium. land 604 p Springer, Netherlands 786 p Sassa K, Tiwari B, Liu K-F, McSaveney M, Strom A, Setiawan H (eds) (2018b) Landslide Nadim F, Jaedicke C, Smebye H, Kalsnes B (2013) Assessment of global landslide hazard dynamics: ISDR-icl landslide interactive teaching tools volume 2: Testing, RISK hotspots. In: Sassa K, Rouhban B, Briceño S, McSaveney M, He B (eds): Landslides: management and country practices. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland global risk preparedness. Springer, p 59–71 836 p Petkovšek A, Maček M, Mikoš M, Majes B (2013) Mechanism of active landslides in Scaioni M (ed) (2015) Modern technologies for landslide monitoring and prediction. flysch. In: Sassa K, Rouhban B, Briceño S, McSaveney M, He B (eds) Landslides: global Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg 249 p risk preparedness. Springer, p 149–165 Schaub Y, Haeberli W, Huggel C, Künzler M, Bründl M (2013) Landslides and new lakes in Pennington C, Dijkstra T, Lark M, Dashwood C, Harrison A, Freeborough K (2014) deglaciating areas: A risk management framework. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K Antecedent precipitation as a potential proxy for landslide incidence in South West (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume 7: social and economic impact and United Kingdom. In: Sassa K, Canuti P, Yin Y (eds) Landslide science for a safer policies. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 31–38 geoenvironment – volume 1: the international programme on landslides (IPL). Scheidl C, Rickenmann D, McArdell BW (2013) Runout prediction of debris flows and Springer, Cham, pp 253–259 similar mass movements. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science Picarelli L (2007) Considerations about the mechanics of slow active landslides in clay. In: and practice – volume 3: spatial analysis and modelling. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Sassa K, Fukuoka H, Wang F, Wang G (eds) (2007) progress in landslide science. pp 221–229 Springer, p 27–45 Shan W, Guo Y, Wang F, Marui H, Strom A (eds) (2014) Landslides in cold regions in the Pradhan B (ed) (2017) Laser scanning applications in landslide assessment. Springer context of climate change. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland 310 p International Publishing, Switzerland 359 p Springman SM, Yamamoto Y, Buchli T, Hertrich M, Maurer H, Merz K, Gärtner-Roer I, Pradhan B, Buchroithner M (eds) (2012) Terrigenous mass movements: detection, Seward L (2013) Rock Glacier Degradation and Instabilities in the European Alps: A modelling, early warning and mitigation using geoinformation technology. Spring- Characterisation and Monitoring Experiment in the Turtmanntal, CH. In: Margottini C, er-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg 400 p Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide Science and Practice – Volume 4: Global Environ- Pradhan B, Lee S (2010) Regional landslide susceptibility analysis using back-propagation mental Change. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 5–13 neural network model at Cameron Highland, Malaysia. Landslides 7(1):13–30 Springer (2018a) SpringerOpen. https://www.springeropen.com/books Raspini F, Moretti S, Casagli N (2013) Landslide mapping using squeeSAR Data: Springer (2018b) SpringerLink. https://link.springer.com/ Giampilieri (Italy) Case Study. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide Springer (2018c) Springer Books. http://www.springer.com/gp/products/books science and practice – volume 1: landslide inventory and susceptibility and hazard Springer (2018d) Welcome to Bookmetrix https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/ zoning. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 147–154 book-authors-editors/bookmetrix Ren D (2015) Storm-triggered Landslides in Warmer Climates. Springer International Springer (2018e) Highlights in Earth Sciences in 2017. http://www.springer.com/gp/ Publishing, Switzerland 365 p marketing/highlights-2017/earth-sciences-2017 Roberts NJ, McKillop RJ, Lawrence MS, Psutka JF, Clague JJ, Brideau MA, Ward BC (2013) Tapete D, Casagli N, Fanti R (2013) Radar interferometry for early stage warning on Impacts of the 2007 landslide-generated tsunami in Chehalis Lake, Canada. In: monuments at risk. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume 6: risk practice – volume 2: early warning, instrumentation and monitoring. Springer, Berlin assessment, management and mitigation. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 133–140 Heidelberg, pp 619–625 Salvati P, Marchesini I, Balducci V, Bianchi C, Guzzetti F (2013) A new digital catalogue of Tanteri L, Rossi G, Tofani V, Vannocci P, Moretti S, Casagli N (2014) Multitemporal UAV harmful landslides and floods in Italy. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) survey for mass movement detection and monitoring. In: Mikoš M, Tiwari B, Yin Y, Landslide science and practice – volume 3: spatial analysis and modelling. Springer, Sassa K (eds) Advancing culture of living with landslides – volume 2: advances in Berlin Heidelberg, pp 409–414 landslide Science. Springer, Cham, pp 153–161 Sassa K (2018) Monthly publication of Landslides: journal of international consortium Thakur V, L'Heureux J-S, Locat A (Eds.) (2017) Landslides in sensitive clays: from research on landslides (ICL). Landslides 15(1):1–3 to implementation. Springer, Cham, 603 p Sassa K, Canuti P (eds) (2009) Landslides—disaster risk reduction. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Thelwall M, Haustein S, Lariviere V, Sugimoto CR (2013) Do Altmetrics work? Twitter and Heidelberg 650 p ten other social web services. PLoS One 8(5):e64841 Sassa K (2005) ICL history and activities. In: Sassa K, Fukuoka H, Wang F, Wang G (eds) Thiebes B (2012) Landslide analysis and early warning systems: local and regional case Landslides –risk analysis and sustainable disaster management. Springer. p 3–21 study in the Swabian Alb, Germany. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg 266 p Sassa K, Fukuoka H, Wang F, Wang G (eds) (2005) Landslides—risk analysis and Torre-Salinas D, Robinson-Garcia N, Campanario JM, Lopez-Cozar ED (2014) Coverage, sustainable disaster management. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg 385 p field specialisation and the impact of scientific publishers indexed in the book citation Sassa K, Fukuoka H, Wang F, Wang G (2007) Progress in landslide science. Springer, index. Online Inf Rev 38(1):24–42 Berlin Heidelberg 379 p Tommasi P, Baldi P, Chiocci FL, Coltelli M, Marsella M, Pompilio M, Romagnoli C (2005) Sassa K, Tsuchiya S, Ugai K, Wakai A, Uchimura T (2009) Landslides: a review of The Landslide Sequence Induced by the 2002 Eruption at Stromboli Volcano. In: Sassa achievements in the first 5 years (2004–2009). Landslides 6:275–286 K, Fukuoka H, Wang F, Wang G (eds) Landslides – Risk Analysis and Sustainable Sassa K, Rouhban B, Briceño S, McSaveney M, He B (2013) Landslides: global risk Disaster Management. Springer, p 251–258 preparedness. Springer, Cham Trezzini F, Giannella G, Guida T (2013) Landslide and flood: economic and social impacts Sassa K, He B, Dang K, Nagai O, Takara K (2014d) Plenary: progress in landslide dynamics. in Italy. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – In: Sassa K, Canuti P, Yin Y (eds) Landslide science for a safer geoenvironment – volume 7: social and economic impact and policies. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp volume 1: the international programme on landslides (IPL). Springer, Cham, pp 37–67 171–176 Landslides 15 & (2018) 1481 Review Article Trigila A, Frattini P, Casagli N, Catani F, Crosta G, Esposito C, Iadanza C, Lagomarsino D, Yavari-Ramshe S, Ataie-Asjtiani B (2017) A rigorous finite volume model to simulate Scarascia Mugnozza G, Segoni S, Spizzichino D, Tofani V, Lari S (2013) Landslide subaerial and submarine landslide-generated waves. Landslides 14(1):203–221 susceptibility mapping at national scale: the italian case study. In: Margottini C, Canuti Yin YP, Wang FW, Sun P (2008) Landslide hazards triggered by the 2008 Wenchuan P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – volume 1: landslide inventory and earthquake, Sichuan, China. Landslides 6(2):139–152 susceptibility and hazard zoning. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 287–295 Zhao T (2017) Coeupled DEM-CFD analyses of landslide-induced debris flows. Springer, Tsangaratos P, Ilia I, Rozos D (2013) Case event system for landslide susceptibility Singapore 220 p analysis. In: Margottini C, Canuti P, Sassa K (eds) Landslide science and practice – Zizioli D, Meisina C, Bordoni M, Zucca F (2014) Rainfall-triggered shallow landslides volume 1: landslide inventory and susceptibility and hazard zoning. Springer, Berlin mapping through pleiades images. In: Sassa K, Canuti P, Yin Y (eds) Landslide science Heidelberg, pp 585–593 for a safer geoenvironment – volume 2: methods of landslide studies. Springer, Ugai K, Yagi H, Wakai A (eds) (2013) Earthquake-induced landslides—proceedings of the Cham, pp 325–329 international symposium on earthquake-induced landslides, Kiryu, Japan, 2012. Xu C, Xu X, Gorum T, van Westen CJ, Fan X (2014b) Did the 2008 Wenchuan Earthquake Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg 996 p Lead to a Net Volume Loss? In: Sassa K, Canuti P, Yin Y (eds) Landslide Science for a Wu W (Ed.) (2015) Recent advances in modeling landslides and debris flows. Springer, Safer Geoenvironment – Volume 3: Targeted Landslides. Springer, Cham, pp 191–196 Cham, 323 p Xu C, Xu XW, Yao X, Dai FC (2014a) Three (nearly) complete inventories of landslides triggered by the May 12, 2008 Wenchuan Mw 7.9 earthquake of China and their M. Mikoš ()) spatial distribution statistical analysis. Landslides 11(3):441–461 Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering, Yamada Y, Kawamura K, Ikehara K, Ogawa Y, Urgeles R, Mosher D, Chaytor J, Strasser M University of Ljubljana, (eds) (2012) Submarine mass movements and their consequences: 5th international Jamova cesta 2, SI-1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia symposium. Springer, Netherlands 769 p Email: matjaz.mikos@fgg.uni-lj.si Yamagishi H, Bhandari NP (2017) GIS landslide. Springer, Japan 230 p 1482 Landslides 15 & (2018)

Journal

LandslidesSpringer Journals

Published: Jun 6, 2018

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off