Publication activity
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
Top 5 in the selected collection · Ranked by Crossref lifetime citations. Only articles with at least one known citation are included; source totals are never combined.
2023 · Cemal Zehir · Melike Zehir
2023 · Zhe Yang · Suseela Devi Chandran · Yinliang Zhao
2023 · Peter Silwimba · Olajide Solomon Fadun
Publication activity alongside incoming citations.
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
OpenAlex · year of the citing work
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Leading affiliations and themes in this collection.
Full distributions & methodology ↓Independent sources. Clear time scales.
Crossref and OpenAlex · separate totals for the same publication cohorts
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
Latest lifetime totals, grouped by the cited article’s year. These are not citations received in that year.
OpenAlex · incoming citation links grouped by citing-work year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Select journals to compare the same collection filters. Source totals stay separate. These measures describe research activity, not journal quality.
Articles by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
By year of the citing work · 2017–2026
2026 is year to date. Crossref and OpenAlex lifetime charts share a citation scale. Unknown observations appear as gaps; known zero stays zero. Annual receipts use available OpenAlex histories and may not sum to lifetime totals. 0 undated publications excluded from publication-year charts.
Crossref citation coverage: 4 / 4 publications (100.0%). Latest observation: 21 Oct 2026, 00:01 UTC. Means and percentages use records with known counts.
DOI-matched OpenAlex observations for the same selected publications. These counts are separate from Crossref and are never added together.
Observation range: 22 Oct 2026 02:28 UTC — 27 Oct 2026 19:03 UTC. Missing matches are not zero citations. Previous observations may remain if a refresh fails or a DOI no longer matches.
OpenAlex affiliations and primary-topic classification. Each publication counts once per institution or country; multi-affiliated publications appear in multiple groups, so percentages can sum above 100%. Countries describe author affiliations, not nationality. Topics use one primary topic per publication.
4 / 4 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 4 selected publications.
4 / 4 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 4 selected publications.
4 / 4 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 4 selected publications.
Citations are the latest recorded totals for articles published in each year, not citations received during that year. Crossref and OpenAlex remain separate and share the same citation scale. 2026 is incomplete; newer articles have had less time to receive citations.
0 undated publications excluded. Unknown citation counts are shown as —, never as zero. Partial coverage can understate totals; expand each table for known / total records.
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Publications | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | All selected publications | 4 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | All selected publications | 10 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | All selected publications | 11 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
Incoming citations to the selected publications, grouped by the year of the citing work. This is separate from lifetime citation totals grouped by the cited article’s publication year.
The publication filters above define which articles receive the citations. The citation-year range below only controls this chart and the incoming-citation comparison. Removing publication-year filters includes older articles’ incoming citations too.
Annual history available for 4 / 4 selected publications. Supported display window: 2017–2026; 2026 is incomplete. Within a successfully fetched ten-year window, omitted years mean zero. Missing histories and years beyond a saved observation’s window remain unknown (—); partial coverage can understate totals.
Annual-history observations (UTC): 2026-10-22T02:28:34.473449+00:00 — 2026-10-27T19:03:17.918412+00:00. Older observations may be retained after failed or incomplete refreshes.
| Citation year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex · Citations received by year | Publications | Annual history known |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 3 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 5 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 3 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
Counts represent citation links, not unique citing papers across a journal: one paper citing two selected articles contributes two links. Older citations outside this window are excluded, so annual sums need not equal lifetime totals. OpenAlex methodology ↗
Records with full publication dates only. 2026 is an incomplete year.
| Period | Publications |
|---|---|
| 2023-01 | 4 |
Latest Crossref totals for the selected publications; not citations received in the selected years.
Unknown counts are excluded from the mean, median and cited-publication rate.
Same filters, source and counting rules across journals. Descriptive statistics, not a quality ranking.
| Journal / publisher | Publications | Crossref citations | OpenAlex citations | OpenAlex coverage | Crossref mean | Crossref median | Crossref cited %* | Crossref coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bussecon Review of Social Sciences Bussecon International Academy | 4 | 10 | 11 | 4/4 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 75.0 | 4/4 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
This study aims to identify the most influential blockchain types for potential implementation areas in the transforming mobility ecosystem, considering application area-specific needs such as transparency, transaction speed, scalability, energy usage, security, and operating cost. The study demonstrated the hybrid blockchain suitability for most of the 13 distinguished mobility applications, while private and consortium blockchains are found applicable based on the needs of specific use cases. A public blockchain is only found suitable for two of the use cases. Proof of Authority and Proof of Stake matches well with most use cases, while Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance and Proof of Work could be suitable in particular.
This article analyzes the status quo and cooperation mechanism between ASEAN and China, mainly, the non-traditional security issues in the South China Sea space (SCS). The non-traditional security threats confronting the SCS are complex, diverse and enormous. Amongst those are transnational maritime crimes, marine disaster threat, marine ecological environmental threat, and resource scarcity. Recent trends have demonstrated that the established regimes between ASEAN and China, for non-traditional security cooperation in the SCS, are fragmented mainly due to the absence of integrated and long-term mechanisms. Three reasons hinder the acceleration of the cooperation process: interference from outside powers, insufficient mutual political trust between China and ASEAN members, claimants and divergence of interests in advancing the Code of Conduct (COC) in the SCS. This article aims to analyze the problems and the causes existing between China and ASEAN in dealing with non-traditional security cooperation. It also examines the effectiveness of the rules-based cooperation mechanisms and offers a few recommendations. It is argued that ASEAN and China should take advantage of the low sensitivity of non-traditional security issues and high-quality development of the One Belt and One Road Initiative, to construct an integrated framework based on rules jointly and order for multilateral non-traditional security cooperation in the SCS. Three possible and workable measures are recommended to facilitate non-traditional security cooperation between ASEAN and China in the SCS. Both sides, primarily ASEAN member claimants, pursue an excellent willingness to cooperate and could promote functional cooperation, promote successful maritime cooperation modes as long-term cooperation mechanisms in the SCS, focus on strengthening the capacity-building of marine governance, and comprehensively establish a multilateral cooperation mechanism in marine environmental protection and fishery resources management.
This study evaluates resources allocated for risk management by business organisations (financial and non-financial firms) in developing countries, using Zambia as a case study. Primary data collected from 158 organisations were analysed using MegaStat. The findings revealed that the majority (54.5%) of organisations, especially non-financial institutions, only commit resources to risk mitigation on an Adhoc or post-event basis, while 45.5% showed a budgeted approach. A significant part of the budgeted 45.5% was used for risk management activities, and 54.5% was used for regular daily operations. Despite this variation, all organisations engaged reported a significant expenditure on risk management, at least on Adhoc. At 4 degrees of freedom (df), which was one less than the total number of possible outcomes, a non-parametric test for significance yielded a scientific P-value of 1.57e-0.7, (a numerical magnitude of 0.0014, P< 0.05). This suggests that the correlation and pattern of the findings were not random or by chance, but they carried a statistical significance. The study's main findings demonstrate that some business organisations in Zambia and other developing countries incur significant expenditure with a higher portion of their budgets to respond to risk management needs. Business organisations which do not have formal risk structures do so informally due to pressure from emerging business risks. The findings also indicated that financial institutions in developing countries allocate more resources towards risk management than non-financial institutions. The Phi coefficient (degree of association) was 0.486, showing a moderately significant relationship between the variables (risk management and resource allocation). Business organisations in Zambia and other developing nations must develop sound risk mitigation plans and allocate resources for risk management.
Risk management is defined as the sequential planning and implementation of initiatives and programs to cope with institutions' and individuals' substantial losses and loss exposure and to secure their properties. The study aims to evaluate risk management's role in economic growth. This was executed through the use of a desktop literature review. The use of Google Scholar was utilized to locate seminal references and journal articles that were pertinent to the study. Papers published within the past five years were used to meet the inclusion criteria. One of the principal objectives of a risk management strategy is to identify risks, address risks, and eliminate risk items before they are deemed detrimental to a company's progress or a significant component of expensive modification to a company's processes. According to the study's findings, insurance companies benefit from economic expansion in their roles as institutional investors and as providers of insurance risk management and indemnification. The paper recommends that the government develop better mechanisms to substitute disaster victims for their losses. At the same time, public sentiment would compel the nation to implement ways of reducing the burden of catastrophes on the public treasury. The enactments that would follow would pave the way for the nation's brilliant economic growth and development. Furthermore, insurance companies must also participate in insurance venture that is both environmentally and client-friendly and also formulate insurance initiatives that can cover every segment and section of the economy.
Risk management is defined as the sequential planning and implementation of initiatives and programs to cope with institutions' and individuals' substantial losses and loss exposure and to secure their properties. The study aims to evaluate risk management's role in economic growth. This was executed through the use of a desktop literature review. The use of Google Scholar was utilized to locate seminal references and journal articles that were pertinent to the study. Papers published within the past five years were used to meet the inclusion criteria. One of the principal objectives of a risk management strategy is to identify risks, address risks, and eliminate risk items before they are deemed detrimental to a company's progress or a significant component of expensive modification to a company's processes. According to the study's findings, insurance companies benefit from economic expansion in their roles as institutional investors and as providers of insurance risk management and indemnification. The paper recommends that the government develop better mechanisms to substitute disaster victims for their losses. At the same time, public sentiment would compel the nation to implement ways of reducing the burden of catastrophes on the public treasury. The enactments that would follow would pave the way for the nation's brilliant economic growth and development. Furthermore, insurance companies must also participate in insurance venture that is both environmentally and client-friendly and also formulate insurance initiatives that can cover every segment and section of the economy.
This study evaluates resources allocated for risk management by business organisations (financial and non-financial firms) in developing countries, using Zambia as a case study. Primary data collected from 158 organisations were analysed using MegaStat. The findings revealed that the majority (54.5%) of organisations, especially non-financial institutions, only commit resources to risk mitigation on an Adhoc or post-event basis, while 45.5% showed a budgeted approach. A significant part of the budgeted 45.5% was used for risk management activities, and 54.5% was used for regular daily operations. Despite this variation, all organisations engaged reported a significant expenditure on risk management, at least on Adhoc. At 4 degrees of freedom (df), which was one less than the total number of possible outcomes, a non-parametric test for significance yielded a scientific P-value of 1.57e-0.7, (a numerical magnitude of 0.0014, P< 0.05). This suggests that the correlation and pattern of the findings were not random or by chance, but they carried a statistical significance. The study's main findings demonstrate that some business organisations in Zambia and other developing countries incur significant expenditure with a higher portion of their budgets to respond to risk management needs. Business organisations which do not have formal risk structures do so informally due to pressure from emerging business risks. The findings also indicated that financial institutions in developing countries allocate more resources towards risk management than non-financial institutions. The Phi coefficient (degree of association) was 0.486, showing a moderately significant relationship between the variables (risk management and resource allocation). Business organisations in Zambia and other developing nations must develop sound risk mitigation plans and allocate resources for risk management.
This article analyzes the status quo and cooperation mechanism between ASEAN and China, mainly, the non-traditional security issues in the South China Sea space (SCS). The non-traditional security threats confronting the SCS are complex, diverse and enormous. Amongst those are transnational maritime crimes, marine disaster threat, marine ecological environmental threat, and resource scarcity. Recent trends have demonstrated that the established regimes between ASEAN and China, for non-traditional security cooperation in the SCS, are fragmented mainly due to the absence of integrated and long-term mechanisms. Three reasons hinder the acceleration of the cooperation process: interference from outside powers, insufficient mutual political trust between China and ASEAN members, claimants and divergence of interests in advancing the Code of Conduct (COC) in the SCS. This article aims to analyze the problems and the causes existing between China and ASEAN in dealing with non-traditional security cooperation. It also examines the effectiveness of the rules-based cooperation mechanisms and offers a few recommendations. It is argued that ASEAN and China should take advantage of the low sensitivity of non-traditional security issues and high-quality development of the One Belt and One Road Initiative, to construct an integrated framework based on rules jointly and order for multilateral non-traditional security cooperation in the SCS. Three possible and workable measures are recommended to facilitate non-traditional security cooperation between ASEAN and China in the SCS. Both sides, primarily ASEAN member claimants, pursue an excellent willingness to cooperate and could promote functional cooperation, promote successful maritime cooperation modes as long-term cooperation mechanisms in the SCS, focus on strengthening the capacity-building of marine governance, and comprehensively establish a multilateral cooperation mechanism in marine environmental protection and fishery resources management.
This study aims to identify the most influential blockchain types for potential implementation areas in the transforming mobility ecosystem, considering application area-specific needs such as transparency, transaction speed, scalability, energy usage, security, and operating cost. The study demonstrated the hybrid blockchain suitability for most of the 13 distinguished mobility applications, while private and consortium blockchains are found applicable based on the needs of specific use cases. A public blockchain is only found suitable for two of the use cases. Proof of Authority and Proof of Stake matches well with most use cases, while Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance and Proof of Work could be suitable in particular.
Source coverage refers to this result set; a publication may occur in several sources. Sync times refer to contributing journals.
Missing abstracts: 0 · Missing authors: 0 · Missing publication dates: 0 · Dates without day precision: 0
| Source | Most recent successful journal sync | Latest attempt |
|---|---|---|
| crossref | 21 Oct 2026 00:01 UTC · brss | complete · brss · 21 Oct 2026 00:01 UTC |
| ojs-rest | 21 Oct 2026 00:01 UTC · brss | complete · brss · 21 Oct 2026 00:00 UTC |
| oai-pmh | 20 Oct 2026 19:50 UTC · brss | complete · brss · 20 Oct 2026 19:49 UTC |
| openalex-enrichment | 21 Oct 2026 00:02 UTC · brss | complete · brss · 21 Oct 2026 00:01 UTC |