Research Trends in Organic Waste Management in Municipal Marketplaces: A Bibliometric Analysis

Nicolas Noreña -Toro; Stiven Loaiza-Castro; Lina Maria Londoño-Giraldo; Duverney Gaviria-Arias

doi:10.12688/f1000research.163513.2

Home Browse Research Trends in Organic Waste Management in Municipal Marketplaces:...

ALL Metrics

-

Views

-

Downloads

Get PDF

Get XML

Export

▬

✚

Research Article

Revised

Research Trends in Organic Waste Management in Municipal Marketplaces: A Bibliometric Analysis

[version 2; peer review: 2 approved with reservations]

Nicolas Noreña -Toro¹, Stiven Loaiza-Castro¹, Lina Maria Londoño-Giraldo ¹, Duverney Gaviria-Arias¹

PUBLISHED 28 May 2026

Author details Author details

¹ Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Exactas y Naturales, Universidad Libre - Campus Pereira, Comuna Oriente, Risaralda, 660001, Colombia

Nicolas Noreña -Toro
Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Stiven Loaiza-Castro
Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Lina Maria Londoño-Giraldo
Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing

Duverney Gaviria-Arias
Roles: Funding Acquisition, Project Administration, Resources, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing

OPEN PEER REVIEW

REVIEWER STATUS

Abstract

Background

The management of organic waste generated in municipal marketplaces has gained increasing prominence due to its implications for urban sustainability, environmental protection, and public health. Municipal markets produce large volumes of biodegradable waste, including food scraps and vegetable residues, which contribute to greenhouse gas emissions if poorly managed. This study presents a bibliometric analysis of research trends in this field, based on 206 publications indexed in the Scopus database between 2000 and 2023, aiming to identify patterns in scientific production, thematic development, and collaboration networks.

Methods

A structured bibliometric approach combining quantitative and network analysis was applied. Publications were retrieved from Scopus using a search equation with keywords related to organic waste, municipal markets, and waste management. After applying inclusion criteria and a PRISMA-based screening process, 206 publications were selected. Data were analyzed using Bibliometrix for productivity indicators and VOSviewer for network visualization. The analysis included publication trends, author productivity, journal distribution, and geographical patterns. Keyword co-occurrence and a strategic diagram were used to identify thematic clusters and assess their relevance and development.

Results

The results show a significant increase in publications after 2015, with a peak around 2021, reflecting growing interest in circular economy and sustainable waste management. The United States, China, and India are leading contributors, while Latin America and Africa remain underrepresented. Three main research areas were identified: composting and biological treatment, technological valorization such as anaerobic digestion and bioenergy, and system-oriented approaches based on sustainability and circular economy. Despite this growth, collaboration networks remain fragmented.

Conclusions

The study highlights expanding research activity and emphasizes the need to strengthen collaboration and develop context-specific solutions to support sustainable waste management in municipal markets worldwide.

Keywords

Organic waste management, Municipal marketplaces, Circular economy, Sustainability, Composting

Corresponding author: Lina Maria Londoño-Giraldo

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information: Supported by Sistema General de Regalías de Colombia (SGR) BPIN 2022000100035.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Copyright: © 2026 Noreña -Toro N et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite: Noreña -Toro N, Loaiza-Castro S, Londoño-Giraldo LM and Gaviria-Arias D. Research Trends in Organic Waste Management in Municipal Marketplaces: A Bibliometric Analysis [version 2; peer review: 2 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2026, 14:540 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.163513.2) First published: 30 May 2025, 14:540 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.163513.1) Latest published: 28 May 2026, 14:540 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.163513.2)

Revised Amendments from Version 1

The revised manuscript incorporates substantial improvements in structure, clarity, and methodological rigor compared to Version 1. The Introduction was refined to reduce redundancy, clarify key concepts, and incorporate concrete examples such as compost, biogas, and bio-based materials. Definitions were standardized, particularly for “municipal markets,” and the practical implications of bibliometric analysis were explicitly added to strengthen the applied relevance of the study.
The Methods section was significantly enhanced. A PRISMA-based screening process was introduced to improve transparency and reproducibility, clearly describing identification, screening, and inclusion stages. The dataset was corrected from 260 to 206 publications, and this change was consistently updated throughout the manuscript. Additional methodological detail was incorporated, including keyword normalization procedures, handling of non-English terms, and explicit parameters used in Bibliometrix and VOSviewer (e.g., normalization method, clustering algorithm, and visualization settings). The justification for using Scopus as the sole database was also clarified.
In the Results section, figure quality and consistency were improved, and all figures were updated to reflect the revised dataset. The interpretation of results was expanded to include more quantitative descriptions, particularly in the collaboration network analysis. Errors such as incorrect peak publication year were corrected. Author and journal analyses were strengthened with more comparative insights.
The Discussion was expanded to include emerging technologies such as IoT and data-driven systems, as well as clearer identification of research gaps, especially in developing regions. Greater emphasis was placed on linking findings to sustainability frameworks and practical implementation challenges.
The Conclusion was rewritten to include quantitative findings, stronger synthesis of results, and explicit reference to key stakeholders such as policymakers, municipal authorities, and informal sector actors. Overall, the revised version improves coherence, scientific depth, and alignment with reviewer expectations.

To read any peer review reports and author responses for this article, follow the "read" links in the Open Peer Review table.

Introduction

The management of organic waste generated in municipal marketplaces has become a topic of growing relevance for researchers, public managers, and environmental professionals. This interest arises from the considerable impact that these wastes have on urban management, public health, and the environment.¹ Market places, as centers of local commerce, generate large volumes of organic waste daily that, without proper management, contribute to soil and water pollution, in addition to being a major source of greenhouse gas emissions, such as methane, which intensify climate change.² The highly biodegradable nature of these wastes presents both challenges and opportunities in their management, demanding sustainable and effective approaches.

Organic waste management is a crucial component of global efforts to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) and SDG 12 (Responsible Production and Consumption).^3,4 According to the World Bank, organic waste constitutes more than 50% of municipal solid waste in low- and middle-income countries, underscoring the urgency of addressing this problem on a global scale.⁵

Over the past 15 years, scientific production on organic waste management in municipal marketplaces has increased significantly, reflecting the growing urgency to develop innovative and sustainable waste management strategies. Research has explored both conventional biological treatment approaches, such as composting and anaerobic digestion,⁶ and the implementation of advanced technologies aimed at improving operational efficiency and decision-making processes. Geographic information systems (GIS) have been applied to optimize waste collection routes and identify suitable locations for treatment facilities, while Internet of Things (IoT) technologies have enabled real-time monitoring of waste generation, storage conditions, and treatment processes.⁷ These technological approaches contribute to improving resource recovery, reducing environmental impacts, and supporting sustainable urban waste management systems.

Due to their rapid decomposition, organic residues generated in municipal markets can create significant environmental and public health problems when inadequately managed. However, these residues also represent a valuable resource for the production of compost, biogas, and other value-added products, supporting circular economy strategies and sustainable resource recovery approaches.⁸ Globally, multiple initiatives have been implemented to address these challenges. In the European Union, the Waste Framework Directive promotes the separate collection and valorization of biowaste, encouraging innovation in sustainable waste management systems.⁹ In developing countries, where informal markets play a central role in food distribution, locally adapted solutions such as community composting and decentralized waste management systems have gained increasing attention.¹⁰ Despite these advances, important challenges remain regarding the adaptation of technologies to different socioeconomic contexts and the integration of informal actors into formal waste management systems.¹¹

This study presents a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of research trends in organic waste management in municipal marketplaces between 2000 and 2023. The analysis aims to identify the evolution of scientific production, the most influential authors, journals, and countries, as well as the principal thematic areas and collaboration networks that have shaped the development of the field. Through the combined application of quantitative bibliometric indicators and network visualization techniques, this study provides a systematic overview of the intellectual structure and emerging research trends related to organic waste valorization, sustainability, and circular economy approaches in municipal market systems. Furthermore, the findings contribute to identifying knowledge gaps and future research opportunities, particularly in the context of developing regions and sustainable urban waste management strategies.^12,13

Methods

Selection of the database

For the bibliometric analysis, Scopus was selected as the main database due to its broad multidisciplinary coverage, encompassing areas such as physical sciences, health sciences, biological sciences, social sciences, and humanities.¹⁴ Scopus is particularly suitable for bibliometric studies because of its extensive repository of indexed publications and standardized metadata structure, which facilitates citation analysis, co-authorship mapping, keyword co-occurrence analysis, and other bibliometric indicators essential for comprehensive scientific evaluation.^13,15 In addition, Scopus offers strong compatibility with bibliometric tools such as Bibliometrix and VOSviewer, supporting reproducible quantitative and network-based analyses. Although other scientific databases, including Web of Science and Google Scholar, also contain relevant literature on waste management research, Scopus was selected to ensure consistency in citation indexing and reduce duplication during network analysis. Nevertheless, the exclusive use of Scopus may have limited the inclusion of some regional or non-indexed publications, particularly from developing countries.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

To ensure the relevance and quality of the articles included in this bibliometric analysis, specific inclusion and exclusion criteria were established. Original research articles, systematic reviews, book chapters and conference proceedings published between 2000 and 2023, written in English, Spanish or Portuguese, were included. Papers had to explicitly address organic waste management in the context of municipal markets or similar urban areas. Editorials, letters to the editor, brief notes, and articles that did not undergo peer review were excluded. In addition, studies that focused exclusively on industrial or agricultural waste were discarded, as well as those that dealt with waste management in general without a specific focus on organic waste from markets. Results were exported in.CSV format for further analysis, and included key data such as titles, authors, affiliations, keywords, abstracts, number of citations, countries of publication and journals.

A PRISMA-based screening framework was applied to improve transparency and reproducibility in the study selection process. The identification stage included records retrieved from the Scopus database using the predefined search equation. Duplicate records and studies not directly related to organic waste management in municipal marketplaces were removed during the screening stage through title and abstract evaluation. Full-text assessment was subsequently performed to verify eligibility according to the established inclusion and exclusion criteria. The final dataset consisted of 206 publications included for bibliometric analysis. The complete study selection process is presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram of the study selection process.

Creation of the search equation

The design of the search algorithm followed the best practices in the construction of equations for bibliometric analysis.¹⁶ This algorithm was developed to capture relevant literature on organic waste management in urban and municipal settings, including key terms related to organic waste, urban markets, and management strategies. The search included international terms and covered both traditional and innovative technological solutions such as composting, bioconversion and circular economy. The search equation implemented in Scopus was as follows:

(“organic waste” OR “food waste” OR “biodegradable waste” OR “organic residues” OR “municipal solid organic waste” OR “green waste” OR “compostable waste”) AND (“marketplaces” OR “markets” OR “farmer’s market” OR “bazaar” OR “public market” OR “local market” OR “street market”) AND (“valorization” OR “waste management” OR “composting” OR “recycling” OR “waste utilization” OR “resource recovery” OR “bioconversion” OR “circular economy” OR “sustainability” OR “environmental impact” OR “waste-to-energy” OR “upcycling” OR “material recovery”) AND (“municipal” OR “city” OR “urban” OR “local government” OR “civic” OR “metropolitan” OR “town” OR “municipality”) AND NOT (“wastewater” OR “agricultural waste” OR “industrial waste”).

Bibliometric analysis and visualization

For the processing and analysis of bibliometric data, two main tools were used: Bibliometrix and VOSviewer. Bibliometrix, an open-source package for R, was employed to perform quantitative analyses of scientific production, including annual publication trends, author productivity, journal distribution, and country contributions.¹⁷ In addition, keyword normalization procedures were applied to standardize synonymous terms and translate non-English keywords into English, reducing fragmentation during co-occurrence analysis. Bibliometric networks were constructed using co-occurrence and co-authorship matrices generated within Bibliometrix.¹³

VOSviewer was used for network visualization and mapping of bibliometric relationships, including co-authorship networks, keyword co-occurrence, and international collaboration patterns.¹⁸ Association strength normalization and clustering algorithms implemented in VOSviewer were used to identify thematic structures and research clusters.¹⁶ Network visualizations were generated using distance-based mapping techniques to improve the interpretation of relationships between authors, countries, and research themes. The combined use of Bibliometrix and VOSviewer provided both quantitative and visual insights into trends and patterns in organic waste management research in municipal marketplaces.

Productivity analysis

Productivity by year: The number of publications per year was analyzed to identify temporal trends in research on organic waste management in municipal markets. This analysis allowed us to observe peaks in research activity and influences of global events or policies.

Productivity by author: The most prolific authors in the field were identified and ranked, evaluating their contribution in terms of number of publications. This metric allows us to measure the influence of key researchers in the development of waste management solutions.

Productivity by journal: The productivity of the main scientific journals that have published on organic waste management was analyzed, highlighting the most influential publications by number of articles and their impact on the scientific community.

Network analysis

Geographical distribution: This analysis evaluated the global distribution of scientific production, allowing the identification of the most active countries in research on organic waste management in municipal markets. The visualization of these data showed the main research centers and their growth over time.

Keywords: Keyword co-occurrence analysis was used to identify the most researched thematic areas and emerging trends in the field. The clusters identified reflect the main lines of research, such as composting, circular economy and environmental impact of waste.

Strategic diagram: The strategic diagram was used to classify research themes according to their degree of development (density) and their relevance within the research field (centrality). Themes with high centrality and high density were considered motor themes, representing well-developed and influential research areas. Themes with high centrality but low density were categorized as basic themes, reflecting important but less developed topics. Conversely, themes with low centrality and high density were identified as niche themes, characterized by specialized but isolated development. Finally, themes with low centrality and low density were considered emerging or declining themes, representing either newly developing topics or areas with decreasing research interest. This analysis provided a conceptual overview of the thematic structure and evolution of research on organic waste management in municipal marketplaces.^13,16

Analysis of co-authorship patterns

Cross-country collaboration: International collaboration was evaluated, identifying the most active networks of interaction between countries. This analysis revealed the global research dynamics and how countries have collaborated to solve common problems related to organic waste.

Collaboration between authors: Co-authorship networks were analyzed to identify connections between key researchers. This analysis showed collaboration clusters, highlighting networks of researchers who have led significant advances in the field.

Methodology – Research Trends in Organic Waste Management in Municipal Marketplaces: A Bibliometric Analysis.

Results and discussion

This bibliometric study provides a comprehensive and systematic evaluation of research trends in the management of organic waste generated in municipal marketplaces. Through a detailed analysis of the scientific literature,¹³ a comprehensive perspective of the current state and evolution of this field of study is presented. The research covered 206 publications indexed in reputable scientific databases, covering a period of 23 years (2000-2023). This broad time range was selected to capture both the historical evolution and the most current trends, providing a comprehensive overview of the advances in research on organic waste management in municipal markets.

The bibliometric analysis made it possible to identify the main trends in various areas, such as the temporal evolution of publications, the leading countries and institutions in the field, the most frequent and emerging thematic areas, as well as the most used methodologies and approaches. In addition, it highlights the most prolific authors, the most significant international collaborations and the scientific journals that have published the largest number of relevant articles on the subject. Overall, this analysis offers a detailed and critical overview of the dynamics of research in this field, providing valuable insights into its development and future projection.

Productivity analysis

Productivity per year

The sustained growth of annual scientific publications reflects an increased interest in organic waste management in municipal markets. Respect to the Figure 2 in fact, in the early years (between 2000 and 2015), the number of publications can be considered low, which could be interpreted as a first period of exploration of the topic in environmental sciences and waste management¹⁹; gradually growing in step with a first focus linked to sustainability and proper management of resources in urban areas, particularly in municipal markets.²⁰

Figure 2. Publications by year related to urban waste management.

From 2015 onwards, the number of existing publications is considerably higher, which could be associated with the already consolidated concern for the circular economy and the SDGs as global goals.¹⁹ In this period, everyone starts to become aware of the need to reuse, recycle and valorize waste as part of an urban sustainability agenda, especially in local and urban markets.²¹ This boom may also be the result of stricter environmental policies and increased funding for innovative research.²⁰

The most significant increase in scientific production was observed around 2021, reflecting the growing global interest in circular economy strategies, sustainable waste management, and urban resilience. This increase was also influenced by broader environmental policies and international sustainability agendas that promoted research on waste valorization and resource recovery. Although the COVID-19 pandemic temporarily redirected part of the scientific focus toward healthcare-related waste management, research on organic waste management in municipal marketplaces continued to expand due to its relevance for urban sustainability and circular economy initiatives.^19–21

Following this period of accelerated scientific growth, a slight decrease in publication output after 2021 was observed, which may reflect changes in research priorities and funding dynamics following the COVID-19 pandemic. Previous studies have suggested that part of the scientific attention during this period shifted toward healthcare and medical waste management topics.²⁰ Nevertheless, continued scientific production in organic waste management indicates that the field remains highly relevant within global sustainability and circular economy agendas.¹⁹

Productivity by author

Figure 3a presents the most productive authors in the field of organic waste management in municipal marketplaces and related urban waste systems. The results indicate a relatively dispersed authorship structure, characterized by a limited number of highly productive researchers and a broader group of authors with fewer contributions. Zurbrügg and Tilley emerged as the most influential authors, with four and three publications, respectively, mainly associated with research on sanitation systems, composting, and resource recovery in developing regions. The remaining authors presented two publications each, suggesting that research in this field is still developing through geographically distributed and interdisciplinary contributions rather than through highly consolidated research groups. This pattern reflects the emerging and collaborative nature of research on sustainable organic waste management in municipal market systems.

Figure 3. Scientific production related to urban waste management.

(a) Most relevant authors in the field of organic waste management research. (b) Most relevant scientific journals related to organic waste management in municipal marketplaces.

Zurbrügg and Tilley emerged as the most influential authors in the dataset, contributing significantly to research on composting systems, sanitation technologies, waste valorization, and resource recovery, particularly in developing regions. Their studies have emphasized sustainable and low-cost approaches for organic waste treatment, including composting and black soldier fly-based bioconversion systems, while also highlighting the importance of integrating sanitation and public health perspectives into waste management strategies.^22–26

Mpanang’ombe has contributed to the understanding of waste management challenges in rapidly urbanizing African regions, emphasizing the need for context-specific policies and improved waste management systems adapted to local socioeconomic conditions.^27,28

Zhang and Wang have focused on technological valorization approaches, including sustainable composting, refuse-derived fuel production, bioenergy generation, and the use of black soldier fly larvae in organic waste treatment processes. Their contributions reinforce the growing interest in circular economy strategies and resource recovery technologies for urban organic waste management.^29–32

The temporal evolution of scientific production among these authors reflects the increasing global interest in sustainable organic waste management solutions. The geographic and thematic diversity represented by these contributions highlights the multidisciplinary nature of the field, encompassing environmental engineering, urban sustainability, public health, and circular economy approaches. Collectively, these studies provide an important scientific foundation for future research and policy development aimed at improving waste management systems in municipal marketplaces and other urban environments.^5,33

Productivity per journal

Figure 3b presents the scientific journals with the highest publication output related to organic waste management in municipal marketplaces. Journal of Cleaner Production emerged as the leading publication source with 10 articles, followed by Sustainability with 9 publications and Waste Management with 7 publications. The predominance of these journals reflects the growing integration of organic waste management research with broader themes such as sustainability, circular economy, environmental management, and resource recovery.⁸ The strong presence of interdisciplinary journals indicates that organic waste management is increasingly being addressed not only as a technical issue but also as a critical component of sustainable urban development and environmental policy.

The presence of journals such as Bioresource Technology, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, and Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management highlights the increasing scientific interest in technological valorization processes, including composting, anaerobic digestion, recycling technologies, and bioenergy production. In contrast, journals such as Biocycle provide a more applied perspective focused on practical waste treatment and composting systems. Together, these publication sources demonstrate the interdisciplinary and applied nature of research on organic waste management in municipal marketplaces.^34–36

Overall, the distribution of publications across both high-impact interdisciplinary journals and specialized waste management journals reflects the growing global relevance of organic waste management within sustainability and circular economy agendas. This diversity of publication outlets also highlights the need for integrated approaches combining technological innovation, environmental policy, and practical waste management strategies to address the challenges associated with municipal organic waste systems.

Network analysis

Geographical distribution

Figure 4 presents the country collaboration map for research on organic waste management in municipal marketplaces and related urban waste systems. The results show a geographically diverse but unevenly distributed research landscape. The United States, India, and China appear as prominent contributors, as indicated by the higher publication intensity observed in these countries. This pattern suggests that research activity is concentrated in countries with strong scientific infrastructure, large urban populations, and increasing pressure to develop sustainable waste management systems.^37,38

Figure 4. Country collaboration map in research on organic waste management in municipal marketplaces and related urban waste systems.

European countries, including the United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, Germany, and the Netherlands, also show relevant participation and act as important nodes in international collaboration. These connections may be associated with the strong policy emphasis on circular economy, resource efficiency, and sustainable waste management within the European context.⁹ In Asia, India and China stand out not only because of their publication output but also because of their links with other regions, reflecting their growing role in global research on urban sustainability and waste valorization.

In Latin America, Brazil appears as the most visible contributor, while participation from other countries in the region remains limited. Similarly, in Africa, countries such as Ghana, Nigeria, and South Africa are represented but appear less integrated into the global collaboration network. This underrepresentation may reflect limitations related to research funding, institutional capacity, and access to international scientific networks.¹⁰

Taken together, the collaboration map highlights the global relevance of organic waste management while also revealing persistent geographical disparities. Strengthening North–South and South–South collaboration is essential to promote knowledge transfer, improve regional research capacity, and develop context-specific solutions for municipal organic waste management in underrepresented regions.

Keywords

Figure 5 presents the keyword co-occurrence map which illustrates the conceptual structure of research on organic waste management in municipal marketplaces and related urban waste systems. The network reveals three main thematic clusters indicating that the field is organized around biological treatment technological valorization and sustainability-oriented management approaches.

Figure 5. Keyword co-occurrence map of research on organic waste management in municipal marketplaces and related urban waste systems.

The red cluster is mainly associated with composting and practical organic waste management. It includes terms such as compost, organic wastes, municipal solid waste, markets, developing countries, and waste composition. This cluster reflects the importance of composting as a widely used and accessible strategy for stabilizing biodegradable residues and recovering nutrients, particularly in contexts where municipal markets generate heterogeneous organic waste streams.^29–31

The green cluster is centered on anaerobic digestion and includes related terms such as biogas, methane, digestate, bioenergy, waste-to-energy, life cycle assessment, biochar, and biorefinery. This thematic group highlights the growing interest in technological valorization and energy recovery from organic waste. The presence of life cycle assessment within this cluster also suggests increasing attention to the environmental evaluation of waste treatment alternatives.^23,32,35,39

The blue cluster is structured around food wastes, organic waste management, and circular economy, together with terms such as sustainability, resource recovery, and economic feasibility. This cluster represents a broader systems-oriented perspective, linking organic waste management with circular economy principles, sustainability assessment, and the economic viability of waste valorization strategies.^19,34

These thematic connections suggest that research in this field has evolved from conventional waste treatment approaches toward more integrated frameworks that combine composting, anaerobic digestion, resource recovery, and circular economy strategies. The central position of terms such as food wastes, organic waste management, compost, and anaerobic digestion indicates that these concepts act as bridges between practical waste management, technological innovation, and sustainability-oriented research.

Strategic diagram

Figure 6 presents the strategic diagram of research themes related to organic waste management in municipal marketplaces and related urban waste systems. The diagram classifies themes according to their relevance degree (centrality) and development degree (density), allowing the identification of motor, basic, niche, and emerging or declining themes.

Figure 6. Strategic diagram of the most relevant issues related to research in urban organic waste management.

The motor themes quadrant includes anaerobic digestion, bio gas, and market waste. These themes show both high centrality and high density, indicating that they are well-developed and strongly connected to the overall research field. Their position reflects the growing importance of energy recovery and biological conversion processes in organic waste valorization, particularly in the context of municipal market waste streams.^23,32,35

The basic themes quadrant includes compost, organic wastes, and organic waste management. These themes show high relevance but lower development, suggesting that they represent foundational topics within the field. Composting remains a central and widely applied strategy for stabilizing biodegradable residues and recovering nutrients, especially in contexts where low-cost and locally adaptable solutions are required.^29–31

The niche themes quadrant includes life cycle assessment, biochar, and landfill. These themes are relatively well developed internally but less connected to the broader conceptual structure of the field. This suggests that environmental assessment tools and alternative treatment pathways are gaining specialized attention, although they remain more peripheral compared with composting and anaerobic digestion.

Themes such as bioenergy, waste to energy, and municipal solid wastes appear close to the lower central area of the diagram, indicating transitional or emerging relevance. Their position suggests that energy recovery from organic waste is becoming increasingly important but may still require stronger integration with broader sustainability and circular economy frameworks. Similarly, food wastes, circular bioeconomy, and sustainability appear near the center of the diagram, reflecting their role as cross-cutting concepts that connect biological treatment, technological valorization, and systems-oriented approaches.^19,34

The strategic diagram suggests that research in this field is structured around a dual focus: practical organic waste management strategies, represented by composting and organic waste management, and more technologically oriented valorization pathways, represented by anaerobic digestion, biogas, and waste-to-energy approaches. This thematic structure confirms the transition from conventional waste treatment toward integrated circular economy and resource recovery frameworks.^19,34

Analysis of co-authorship patterns

Collaboration between countries

Figure 7a presents the international co-authorship network among countries contributing to research on organic waste management in municipal marketplaces and related urban waste systems. The network shows a centralized structure in which the United States, India, and the United Kingdom occupy prominent positions, both in terms of node size and number of collaborative links. This indicates that these countries play an important role in connecting different research groups and facilitating international knowledge exchange in the field.

Figure 7. Co-authorship collaboration networks in research on organic waste management in municipal marketplaces and related urban waste systems.

(a) Country collaboration network. (b) Author collaboration network.

India appears as one of the most relevant contributors, with strong collaborative connections involving countries such as the United States, China, Spain, Switzerland, and Denmark. This pattern reflects the growing participation of rapidly urbanizing countries in research on sustainable waste management, resource recovery, and circular economy strategies.³⁸ China and Italy also appear as relevant nodes, although their collaboration patterns are more closely connected to specific regional or thematic clusters.

The network also shows participation from African countries, including Ghana, Nigeria, Malawi, and Uganda. Their presence is particularly relevant because organic waste management remains a critical issue in many rapidly growing urban areas in developing regions.^10,40 However, these countries appear as smaller and more peripheral nodes, suggesting that their integration into global collaboration networks remains limited.

A separate collaboration group involving the Netherlands, Mexico, Colombia, and Indonesia can also be observed, indicating the existence of more specialized or regionally focused research connections. This distribution suggests that, although international collaboration is present, the field remains fragmented, with most connections concentrated around a limited number of central countries.

These findings suggest the need to strengthen North–South and South–South scientific collaboration to promote knowledge transfer, improve research capacity, and support locally adapted solutions for sustainable organic waste management in municipal marketplaces.^10,33

Collaboration between authors

Complementing the country-level analysis, Figure 7b presents the co-authorship network among authors contributing to research on organic waste management in municipal marketplaces and related urban waste systems. The network reveals a fragmented collaborative structure composed of several relatively small and disconnected clusters, suggesting that research in this field is still organized around localized or topic-specific collaborations rather than a single, highly integrated international research community.

One of the most cohesive clusters includes authors such as Gavilanes-Terán, Paredes, López, Bustamante, Jara-Samaniego, and Morat, whose collaboration pattern is strongly associated with composting strategies and practical organic waste management in Latin American contexts.⁴¹ Another relevant cluster includes Liu, Zhang, Awasthi, Chen, and Pandey, reflecting a collaborative focus on technological valorization processes such as composting optimization, biochar, and other resource recovery approaches.^29–31

A smaller but clearly connected cluster is formed by Zurbrügg, Tilley, and Rajabu, whose work has been particularly influential in sanitation, low-cost biowaste treatment, and sustainable resource recovery in developing regions.^23,25,28 Additional smaller groups, such as those involving Debnath and Ghosh, or De Oliveira and De Medeiros, indicate the presence of specialized research partnerships with more limited integration into the broader collaboration network.

The structure of the network suggests that, although the field has developed multiple active lines of research, co-authorship remains dispersed across thematic and regional groups. This pattern may reflect differences in research priorities, institutional partnerships, methodological approaches, and regional contexts.³³ In this context, strengthening collaboration across clusters could facilitate greater knowledge exchange, improve methodological integration, and support the development of more comprehensive and globally relevant solutions for organic waste management in municipal marketplaces.

Conclusion

This bibliometric analysis examined 206 publications indexed in Scopus between 2000 and 2023, providing an updated overview of research trends in organic waste management in municipal marketplaces and related urban waste systems. The results show a progressive increase in scientific production, particularly after 2015, with a peak around 2021. This growth reflects the increasing relevance of sustainable waste management, circular economy strategies, and resource recovery within urban environmental research.

The productivity analysis revealed a relatively dispersed authorship structure, with Zurbrügg and Tilley emerging as the most productive authors, while Journal of Cleaner Production, Sustainability, and Waste Management were identified as the leading publication sources. Geographically, the United States, India, China, and the United Kingdom appeared as major contributors, although participation from Latin America and Africa remains comparatively limited.

The thematic analyses showed that the field is structured around three main research directions: biological treatment approaches, especially composting; technological valorization processes, including anaerobic digestion, biogas, bioenergy, and waste-to-energy systems; and broader sustainability-oriented frameworks linked to circular economy, resource recovery, and environmental assessment. The strategic diagram further confirmed the central role of composting and organic waste management as basic themes, while anaerobic digestion and biogas appeared as motor themes driving innovation in the field.

Despite this progress, the collaboration networks remain fragmented, particularly at the author level, where research is organized into small and weakly connected clusters. These findings highlight the need to strengthen international and interdisciplinary collaboration, especially through North–South and South–South partnerships. Future research should prioritize context-specific solutions, greater inclusion of developing regions, integration of informal waste actors, and stronger links between technological innovation, policy design, and practical implementation in municipal market waste management.

Ethics and consent

Ethical approval and consent were not required.

Data availability

Zenodo: Research Trends in Organic Waste Management in Municipal Marketplaces: A Bibliometric Analysis https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19712593⁴²

Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0).

References

1. Sharma S, Basu S, Shetti NP, et al.: Waste-to-energy nexus for circular economy and environmental protection: Recent trends in hydrogen energy. Sci. Total Environ. Apr. 2020; 713: 136633. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
2. Garcia-Garcia G, Stone J, Rahimifard S: Opportunities for waste valorisation in the food industry – A case study with four UK food manufacturers. J. Clean. Prod. Feb. 2019; 211: 1339–1356. Publisher Full Text
3. United Nations: Climate Change Around The World: A View From The UN Regional Commissions|United Nations.Reference Source
4. Naciones Unidas: Transformar nuestro mundo: la Agenda 2030 para el Desarrollo Sostenible.2015.
5. Kaza S, et al.: What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050. Urban Development Series. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group; 2018. Reference Source
6. Li R: Integrating the composition of food waste into the techno-economic analysis of waste biorefineries for biodiesel production. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 2022; 20: 101254. Publisher Full Text
7. Sosunova I, Porras J: IoT-Enabled Smart Waste Management Systems for Smart Cities: A Systematic Review. IEEE Access. 2022; 10: 73326–73363. Publisher Full Text
8. Ferronato N, Torretta V: Waste Mismanagement in Developing Countries: A Review of Global Issues. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. Mar. 2019; 16(6): 1060. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
9. European Commission: A European Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy. Brussels: European Commission; 2019.
10. Rodić L, Wilson D: Resolving Governance Issues to Achieve Priority Sustainable Development Goals Related to Solid Waste Management in Developing Countries. Sustainability. Mar. 2017; 9(3): 404. Publisher Full Text
11. Seadon JK: Sustainable waste management systems. J. Clean. Prod. Nov. 2010; 18(16): 1639–1651. Publisher Full Text
12. Donthu N, Kumar S, Mukherjee D, et al.: How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. J. Bus. Res. Sep. 2021; 133: 285–296. Publisher Full Text
13. Zupic I, Čater T: Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization. Organ. Res. Methods. Jul. 2015; 18(3): 429–472. Publisher Full Text
14. Mongeon P, Paul-Hus A: The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics. Jan. 2016; 106(1): 213–228. Publisher Full Text
15. Hallinger P: Science mapping the knowledge base on educational leadership and management from the emerging regions of Asia, Africa and Latin America, 1965–2018. Educ. Manag. Adm. Leadersh. 2020; 48(2): 209–230. Publisher Full Text
16. Cobo M, López-Herrera AG, Herrera-Viedma E, et al.: Science Mapping Software Tools: Review, Analysis, and Cooperative Study Among Tools. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. Jul. 2011; 62: 1382–1402. Publisher Full Text
17. Aria M, Cuccurullo C: bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J. Informetr. Nov. 2017; 11(4): 959–975. Publisher Full Text
18. van Eck NJ , Waltman L: Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics. Aug. 2010; 84(2): 523–538. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
19. Reis WF, Barreto CG, Capelari MGM: Circular Economy and Solid Waste Management: Connections from a Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability. Jan. 2023; vol. 15(22). Art. no. 22. Publisher Full Text
20. Shmelev SE, Shmeleva IA: Smart and sustainable benchmarking of cities and regions in Europe: The application of multicriteria assessment. Cities. Jan. 2025; 156: 105533. Publisher Full Text
21. Sharifi A, Allam Z, Bibri SE, et al.: Smart cities and sustainable development goals (SDGs): A systematic literature review of co-benefits and trade-offs. Cities. Mar. 2024; 146: 104659. Publisher Full Text
22. Grau MGP, Dortmans BMA, Egger J, et al.: Modelling the financial viability of centralised and decentralised black soldier fly larvae waste processing units in Surabaya, Indonesia. J. Insects Food Feed. 2023; 9(3): 303–316. Publisher Full Text
23. Lohri CR, Rajabu HM, Sweeney DJ, et al.: Char fuel production in developing countries - A review of urban biowaste carbonization. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2016; 59: 1514–1530. Publisher Full Text
24. Matter A, Ahsan M, Marbach M, et al.: Impacts of policy and market incentives for solid waste recycling in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Waste Manag. 2015; 39: 321–328. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
25. Tilley E, Ulrich L, Luthi C, et al.: Compendium of Sanitation Systems and Technologies.2014.
26. Yesaya M, Mpanang’ombe W, Tilley E: The Cost of Plastics in Compost. Front. Sustain. 2021; 2. Publisher Full Text
27. Mpanang’ombe W, Mallory A, Tilley E: Poverty, politics and plastic: Organic waste sorting in Blantyre’s public markets. J. Urban Manag. 2021; 10(3): 192–204. Publisher Full Text
28. Mpanang’ombe W, Tilley E, Zabaleta I, et al.: A biowaste treatment technology assessment in Malawi. Recycling. 2018; 3(4). Publisher Full Text
29. Liu T, et al.: Composting as a sustainable technology for integrated municipal solid waste management. Biomass, Biofuels, Biochemicals: Circular Bioeconomy: Technologies for Waste Remediation. 2022; 23–39. Publisher Full Text
30. Liu T, et al.: Sustainability analysis of large-scale food waste composting. Current Developments in Biotechnology and Bioengineering: Sustainable Bioresources for the Emerging Bioeconomy. 2020; 301–322. Publisher Full Text
31. Liu T, Awasthi MK, Awasthi SK, et al.: Effects of black soldier fly larvae (Diptera: Stratiomyidae) on food waste and sewage sludge composting. J. Environ. Manag. 2020; 256: 109967. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
32. Li W, Yuan Z, Chen X, et al.: Green refuse derived fuel preparation and combustion performance from the solid residues to build the zero-waste city. Energy. 2021; 225: 120252. Publisher Full Text
33. Wilson DC, Velis CA: Waste management – still a global challenge in the 21st century: An evidence-based call for action. Waste Manag. Res. Dec. 2015; 33(12): 1049–1051. Publisher Full Text
34. Ghisellini P, Cialani C, Ulgiati S: A review on circular economy: The expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. J. Clean. Prod. Feb. 2016; 114: 11–32. Publisher Full Text
35. Khan S, Anjum R, Raza ST, et al.: Technologies for municipal solid waste management: Current status, challenges, and future perspectives. Chemosphere. Feb. 2022; 288: 132403. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
36. Papargyropoulou E, Steinberger JK, Wright N, et al.: Patterns and Causes of Food Waste in the Hospitality and Food Service Sector: Food Waste Prevention Insights from Malaysia. Sustainability. Jan. 2019; vol. 11(21). Art. no. 21. Publisher Full Text
37. Zhang J, Qin Q, Li G, et al.: Sustainable municipal waste management strategies through life cycle assessment method: A review. J. Environ. Manag. Jun. 2021; 287: 112238. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
38. Chen C, et al.: China and India lead in greening of the world through land-use management. Nat. Sustain. Feb. 2019; 2(2): 122–129. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
39. Campos-Montiel RG, et al.: Bioconversion of vegetable wastes to biogas from rumenmicroorganisms. Rev. Int. Contam. Ambient. 2018; 34(1): 149–155. Publisher Full Text
40. El Bari H , Trois C: Waste Management in Developing Countries. Waste as a Resource. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2023. Publisher Full Text
41. Jara-Samaniego J, et al.: Composting as sustainable strategy for municipal solid waste management in the Chimborazo Region, Ecuador: Suitability of the obtained composts for seedling production. J. Clean. Prod. 2017; 141: 1349–1358. Publisher Full Text
42. Norena-Toro N, Loiza-Castro S, Londono-Giraldo LM, et al.: Bibliometric Data for Study on Organic Waste Management in Municipal Marketplaces. Zenodo. May 12, 2025. Publisher Full Text

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2

VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 30 May 2025

Author details Author details

¹ Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Exactas y Naturales, Universidad Libre - Campus Pereira, Comuna Oriente, Risaralda, 660001, Colombia

Nicolas Noreña -Toro
Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Stiven Loaiza-Castro
Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Lina Maria Londoño-Giraldo
Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing

Duverney Gaviria-Arias
Roles: Funding Acquisition, Project Administration, Resources, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

Supported by Sistema General de Regalías de Colombia (SGR) BPIN 2022000100035.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Article Versions (2)

version 2

Revised

Published: 28 May 2026, 14:540

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.163513.2

version 1

Published: 30 May 2025, 14:540

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.163513.1

Copyright

© 2026 Noreña -Toro N et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Download

Export To

metrics

	Views	Downloads
F1000Research	-	-
PubMed Central Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.	-	-

Citations

0

SEE MORE DETAILS

CITE

how to cite this article

Noreña -Toro N, Loaiza-Castro S, Londoño-Giraldo LM and Gaviria-Arias D. Research Trends in Organic Waste Management in Municipal Marketplaces: A Bibliometric Analysis [version 2; peer review: 2 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2026, 14:540 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.163513.2)

NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

track

receive updates on this article

Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Version 1

VERSION 1

PUBLISHED 30 May 2025

Views

16

Reviewer Report 25 Jul 2025

Atinuke Chineme, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.179875.r389142

Manuscript Feedback :

The bibliometric study offers a comprehensive overview of the progression of research concerning market-generated organic waste over the past twenty years. The objectives include identifying prevalent research topics, methodologies, leading countries, and collaborative networks, ... Continue reading

Manuscript Feedback :

The bibliometric study offers a comprehensive overview of the progression of research concerning market-generated organic waste over the past twenty years. The objectives include identifying prevalent research topics, methodologies, leading countries, and collaborative networks, thereby facilitating an understanding of the field's development, pinpointing gaps in knowledge, and guiding future research towards more effective solutions for sustainable organic waste management in municipal markets. The study effectively accomplishes these aims, particularly when evaluated against its stated objective: “provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of research.”

However, the study could benefit from some improvements. Some recommendations are outlined below and arranged according to the respective sections of the research.

Introduction

The introduction should clearly specify the source of the organic waste, especially considering global locations with different terms for “marketplace.” Additionally, the authors should choose a consistent one- or two-word term. "Municipal markets" may serve as a more appropriate reference.
Methods

Excellent breakdown of your methods. Your detailed description facilitates the replication of your process by readers. Nonetheless, a standardized framework is recommended for a bibliometric study. Implementing such a framework will facilitate the missing discussions, such as the categorization of the 260 cited publications.
The screening process is absent and should be incorporated into the section.

Result and Discussion

Categorizing your results by the conducted analysis facilitated a better understanding of your study's outcomes. Please resize the fonts in Figure 1, as it is currently difficult to read.
In Figure 1, the "remarkable peak” referenced at the start of page 6 seems to occur in 2021, not 2020 as originally noted.
Based on this, review your literature sources and attempt to find additional references that support your deduction. The two citations currently cited are insufficient for a definitive conclusion.
The author productivity assessment is valuable; conclude this section by sharing your observations regarding the differences, similarities, or connections among their studies, or any other insights gained.
The first mention of Figure 4 does not match the actual diagram, which is titled a "co-occurrence map" on page 9.
Your keywords assessment requires revision; specifically, the red cluster does not include anaerobic digestion or biogas production.
Zurbrugg and Lohri have played key roles in advancing BSF technology. It would be useful to compare how their research aligns or differs from Tilley's, whose BSF work you currently mention.
Revisit the Strategic diagram section. Your descriptions are unclear and may confuse readers. Clarify whether these themes are derived from literature or directly from the authors. If they are author-derived, explain how they were developed. Also, note that some themes, like organic waste and compost, are not “motor themes,” and similar issues exist with other themes. The diagram should be reconsidered.
Your analysis of international collaboration is excellent and adds meaningful insight to the literature.
Separate Figures 6a and 6b for better clarity.
Include Nigeria in your comment about under-represented countries, since it appears in the diagram ie.; "On the other hand, the under-representation of countries from Africa and Latin America, except for Brazil, Ecuador, and Ghana, is of concern."
Your breakdown of "Collaboration between authors" is very thorough; however, incorporating a co-citation analysis could offer additional value by illustrating how researchers are related through shared references, thus highlighting the interdisciplinary nature of the field.

Conclusion
The conclusion should be expanded to incorporate key elements from the subsections, like the keywords and strategic diagram. Reconsidering some issues mentioned in this feedback could provide valuable insights, enhancing the overall conclusion.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

No source data required
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: My areas of research include Biowaste management, BSF treatment, circularity, Municipal waste management in low-income countries.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Views

21

Reviewer Report 25 Jun 2025

Abu Duguma Debele, Energy and Environment Research Centre, Dilla University, Dilla, Ethiopia

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.179875.r389140

F1000Resarch
Manuscript Number:
Full Title: Research Trends in Organic Waste Management in Municipal Marketplaces: A Bibliometric Analysis
If the authors address the following major comments, this work will be timely and relevant. Here are some suggestions to ... Continue reading

F1000Resarch
Manuscript Number:
Full Title: Research Trends in Organic Waste Management in Municipal Marketplaces: A Bibliometric Analysis
If the authors address the following major comments, this work will be timely and relevant. Here are some suggestions to improve the work.

My Comments, Authors:

Introduction section Page 3… "Highly biodegradable nature" of organic waste presents both challenges and opportunities (mentioned twice in the second and fourth paragraphs.
Introduction section Page 3… Terms like "highly biodegradable nature" and "value-added products" are used without specific examples or explanations.
Page 3, paragraph 3…. The mention of "advanced technologies, such as geographic information systems (GIS) and the Internet of Things (IoT)" [6] is vague. The introduction does not explain how these technologies are applied to organic waste management.
"Conventional techniques, such as composting and anaerobic digestion" [5] are mentioned without explaining their significance or challenges in the context of municipal markets.
The review does not clearly state the practical implications of the bibliometric analysis, such as informing policy or guiding technology adoption…...
In methods section Paragraph 2.. The term "similar urban areas" is not defined, which could lead to inconsistent application of the criteria. For example, does it include urban community gardens or street food stalls? Clarifying this term.
Using only one database may introduce bias, as Scopus may not capture all relevant publications, especially from regional or open-access journals not indexed in Scopus. Adding others' Web of Science or Google Scholar could provide a more comprehensive dataset, particularly for studies from developing countries where informal markets are prevalent.
Page 4…. The section mentions the strategic diagram but doesn’t explain how centrality and density determine categories.
Clarify Inclusion of Languages: Including Spanish and Portuguese is a strength, but if the tools used (Bibliometrix/VOSviewer) handle non-English metadata differently, this should be mentioned. Did you translate keywords or filter language-specific content?
The description of Bibliometrix and VOSviewer is generic, lacking details on specific settings or parameters used.
The methodology section lacked of screening process (removing duplicates, handling incomplete records, and validation). How many studies were initially retrieved from the Scopus dataset? How many studies were included in the Bibliometrix analysis after screening? How many studies were used to prepare the manuscript?
Lack of PRISMA Framework, a standard framework for reporting systematic reviews and bibliometric studies. PRISMA provides a structured approach to document the study selection process, including a flow diagram that visualizes the screening stages and reasons for exclusions.
The figures provided are of poor resolution and need improvement for clarity and readability
In the section results and discussion ….. The section does not reference or provide details on the screening process (e.g., duplicate removal, handling incomplete records, or validation). It states 260 publications were analyzed, but does not explain how this number was derived from the initial dataset.
It also lacks a breakdown of how many studies were retrieved from Scopus and how exclusions were applied to select 260 publications.
Page 10 under….. Analysis of Co-authorship Patterns (Figure 6a). The discussion of country collaboration is brief, but lacks quantitative evidence.
It is better at the end of the discussion section, adding emerging technologies and gaps is a core objective of bibliometric studies, guiding future research and policy.
This review work was a quantitative type of review. The conclusion is qualitative and lacks specific quantitative findings, like the number of publications (260, as in Results), growth rates, or citation metrics.
The conclusion does not address key stakeholders mentioned in the Introduction, such as informal waste actors, municipal authorities, despite their relevance to organic waste management in developing regions.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: As an environmental engineering expert, I specialize in sustainable waste management, urban sustainability, and innovative solutions for organic waste. My research leverages geospatial tools to address global environmental challenges, biowaste recycling, material recycling, waste-to-energy, fostering circular economy principles, and public health advancements.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2

VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 30 May 2025

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

	Invited Reviewers
	1	2
Version 2 (revision) 28 May 26
Version 1 30 May 25	read	read

Abu Duguma Debele, Dilla University, Dilla, Ethiopia
Atinuke Chineme, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada

Comments on this article

All Comments(0)

Add a comment

Sign up for content alerts

Browse by related subjects

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

16 Views

25 Jul 2025 | for Version 1

Atinuke Chineme, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada

16 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved With Reservations

Manuscript Feedback :

The bibliometric study offers a comprehensive overview of the progression of research concerning market-generated organic waste over the past twenty years. The objectives include identifying prevalent research topics, methodologies, leading countries, and collaborative networks, thereby facilitating an understanding of the field's development, pinpointing gaps in knowledge, and guiding future research towards more effective solutions for sustainable organic waste management in municipal markets. The study effectively accomplishes these aims, particularly when evaluated against its stated objective: “provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of research.”

However, the study could benefit from some improvements. Some recommendations are outlined below and arranged according to the respective sections of the research.

Introduction

The introduction should clearly specify the source of the organic waste, especially considering global locations with different terms for “marketplace.” Additionally, the authors should choose a consistent one- or two-word term. "Municipal markets" may serve as a more appropriate reference.
Methods

Excellent breakdown of your methods. Your detailed description facilitates the replication of your process by readers. Nonetheless, a standardized framework is recommended for a bibliometric study. Implementing such a framework will facilitate the missing discussions, such as the categorization of the 260 cited publications.
The screening process is absent and should be incorporated into the section.

Result and Discussion

Categorizing your results by the conducted analysis facilitated a better understanding of your study's outcomes. Please resize the fonts in Figure 1, as it is currently difficult to read.
In Figure 1, the "remarkable peak” referenced at the start of page 6 seems to occur in 2021, not 2020 as originally noted.
Based on this, review your literature sources and attempt to find additional references that support your deduction. The two citations currently cited are insufficient for a definitive conclusion.
The author productivity assessment is valuable; conclude this section by sharing your observations regarding the differences, similarities, or connections among their studies, or any other insights gained.
The first mention of Figure 4 does not match the actual diagram, which is titled a "co-occurrence map" on page 9.
Your keywords assessment requires revision; specifically, the red cluster does not include anaerobic digestion or biogas production.
Zurbrugg and Lohri have played key roles in advancing BSF technology. It would be useful to compare how their research aligns or differs from Tilley's, whose BSF work you currently mention.
Revisit the Strategic diagram section. Your descriptions are unclear and may confuse readers. Clarify whether these themes are derived from literature or directly from the authors. If they are author-derived, explain how they were developed. Also, note that some themes, like organic waste and compost, are not “motor themes,” and similar issues exist with other themes. The diagram should be reconsidered.
Your analysis of international collaboration is excellent and adds meaningful insight to the literature.
Separate Figures 6a and 6b for better clarity.
Include Nigeria in your comment about under-represented countries, since it appears in the diagram ie.; "On the other hand, the under-representation of countries from Africa and Latin America, except for Brazil, Ecuador, and Ghana, is of concern."
Your breakdown of "Collaboration between authors" is very thorough; however, incorporating a co-citation analysis could offer additional value by illustrating how researchers are related through shared references, thus highlighting the interdisciplinary nature of the field.

Conclusion
The conclusion should be expanded to incorporate key elements from the subsections, like the keywords and strategic diagram. Reconsidering some issues mentioned in this feedback could provide valuable insights, enhancing the overall conclusion.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

No source data required
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

My areas of research include Biowaste management, BSF treatment, circularity, Municipal waste management in low-income countries.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

21 Views

25 Jun 2025 | for Version 1

Abu Duguma Debele, Energy and Environment Research Centre, Dilla University, Dilla, Ethiopia

21 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved With Reservations

F1000Resarch
Manuscript Number:
Full Title: Research Trends in Organic Waste Management in Municipal Marketplaces: A Bibliometric Analysis
If the authors address the following major comments, this work will be timely and relevant. Here are some suggestions to improve the work.

My Comments, Authors:

Introduction section Page 3… "Highly biodegradable nature" of organic waste presents both challenges and opportunities (mentioned twice in the second and fourth paragraphs.
Introduction section Page 3… Terms like "highly biodegradable nature" and "value-added products" are used without specific examples or explanations.
Page 3, paragraph 3…. The mention of "advanced technologies, such as geographic information systems (GIS) and the Internet of Things (IoT)" [6] is vague. The introduction does not explain how these technologies are applied to organic waste management.
"Conventional techniques, such as composting and anaerobic digestion" [5] are mentioned without explaining their significance or challenges in the context of municipal markets.
The review does not clearly state the practical implications of the bibliometric analysis, such as informing policy or guiding technology adoption…...
In methods section Paragraph 2.. The term "similar urban areas" is not defined, which could lead to inconsistent application of the criteria. For example, does it include urban community gardens or street food stalls? Clarifying this term.
Using only one database may introduce bias, as Scopus may not capture all relevant publications, especially from regional or open-access journals not indexed in Scopus. Adding others' Web of Science or Google Scholar could provide a more comprehensive dataset, particularly for studies from developing countries where informal markets are prevalent.
Page 4…. The section mentions the strategic diagram but doesn’t explain how centrality and density determine categories.
Clarify Inclusion of Languages: Including Spanish and Portuguese is a strength, but if the tools used (Bibliometrix/VOSviewer) handle non-English metadata differently, this should be mentioned. Did you translate keywords or filter language-specific content?
The description of Bibliometrix and VOSviewer is generic, lacking details on specific settings or parameters used.
The methodology section lacked of screening process (removing duplicates, handling incomplete records, and validation). How many studies were initially retrieved from the Scopus dataset? How many studies were included in the Bibliometrix analysis after screening? How many studies were used to prepare the manuscript?
Lack of PRISMA Framework, a standard framework for reporting systematic reviews and bibliometric studies. PRISMA provides a structured approach to document the study selection process, including a flow diagram that visualizes the screening stages and reasons for exclusions.
The figures provided are of poor resolution and need improvement for clarity and readability
In the section results and discussion ….. The section does not reference or provide details on the screening process (e.g., duplicate removal, handling incomplete records, or validation). It states 260 publications were analyzed, but does not explain how this number was derived from the initial dataset.
It also lacks a breakdown of how many studies were retrieved from Scopus and how exclusions were applied to select 260 publications.
Page 10 under….. Analysis of Co-authorship Patterns (Figure 6a). The discussion of country collaboration is brief, but lacks quantitative evidence.
It is better at the end of the discussion section, adding emerging technologies and gaps is a core objective of bibliometric studies, guiding future research and policy.
This review work was a quantitative type of review. The conclusion is qualitative and lacks specific quantitative findings, like the number of publications (260, as in Results), growth rates, or citation metrics.
The conclusion does not address key stakeholders mentioned in the Introduction, such as informal waste actors, municipal authorities, despite their relevance to organic waste management in developing regions.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

As an environmental engineering expert, I specialize in sustainable waste management, urban sustainability, and innovative solutions for organic waste. My research leverages geospatial tools to address global environmental challenges, biowaste recycling, material recycling, waste-to-energy, fostering circular economy principles, and public health advancements.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

[1] 1. Sharma S, Basu S, Shetti NP, et al.: Waste-to-energy nexus for circular economy and environmental protection: Recent trends in hydrogen energy. Sci. Total Environ. Apr. 2020; 713: 136633. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[2] 2. Garcia-Garcia G, Stone J, Rahimifard S: Opportunities for waste valorisation in the food industry – A case study with four UK food manufacturers. J. Clean. Prod. Feb. 2019; 211: 1339–1356. Publisher Full Text

[3] 3. United Nations: Climate Change Around The World: A View From The UN Regional Commissions|United Nations.Reference Source

[4] 4. Naciones Unidas: Transformar nuestro mundo: la Agenda 2030 para el Desarrollo Sostenible.2015.

[5] 5. Kaza S, et al.: What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050. Urban Development Series. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group; 2018. Reference Source

[6] 6. Li R: Integrating the composition of food waste into the techno-economic analysis of waste biorefineries for biodiesel production. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 2022; 20: 101254. Publisher Full Text

[7] 7. Sosunova I, Porras J: IoT-Enabled Smart Waste Management Systems for Smart Cities: A Systematic Review. IEEE Access. 2022; 10: 73326–73363. Publisher Full Text

[8] 8. Ferronato N, Torretta V: Waste Mismanagement in Developing Countries: A Review of Global Issues. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. Mar. 2019; 16(6): 1060. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[9] 9. European Commission: A European Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy. Brussels: European Commission; 2019.

[10] 10. Rodić L, Wilson D: Resolving Governance Issues to Achieve Priority Sustainable Development Goals Related to Solid Waste Management in Developing Countries. Sustainability. Mar. 2017; 9(3): 404. Publisher Full Text

[11] 11. Seadon JK: Sustainable waste management systems. J. Clean. Prod. Nov. 2010; 18(16): 1639–1651. Publisher Full Text

[12] 12. Donthu N, Kumar S, Mukherjee D, et al.: How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. J. Bus. Res. Sep. 2021; 133: 285–296. Publisher Full Text

[13] 13. Zupic I, Čater T: Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization. Organ. Res. Methods. Jul. 2015; 18(3): 429–472. Publisher Full Text

[14] 14. Mongeon P, Paul-Hus A: The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics. Jan. 2016; 106(1): 213–228. Publisher Full Text

[15] 15. Hallinger P: Science mapping the knowledge base on educational leadership and management from the emerging regions of Asia, Africa and Latin America, 1965–2018. Educ. Manag. Adm. Leadersh. 2020; 48(2): 209–230. Publisher Full Text

[16] 16. Cobo M, López-Herrera AG, Herrera-Viedma E, et al.: Science Mapping Software Tools: Review, Analysis, and Cooperative Study Among Tools. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. Jul. 2011; 62: 1382–1402. Publisher Full Text

[17] 17. Aria M, Cuccurullo C: bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J. Informetr. Nov. 2017; 11(4): 959–975. Publisher Full Text

[18] 18. van Eck NJ , Waltman L: Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics. Aug. 2010; 84(2): 523–538. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[19] 19. Reis WF, Barreto CG, Capelari MGM: Circular Economy and Solid Waste Management: Connections from a Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability. Jan. 2023; vol. 15(22). Art. no. 22. Publisher Full Text

[20] 20. Shmelev SE, Shmeleva IA: Smart and sustainable benchmarking of cities and regions in Europe: The application of multicriteria assessment. Cities. Jan. 2025; 156: 105533. Publisher Full Text

[21] 21. Sharifi A, Allam Z, Bibri SE, et al.: Smart cities and sustainable development goals (SDGs): A systematic literature review of co-benefits and trade-offs. Cities. Mar. 2024; 146: 104659. Publisher Full Text

[22] 22. Grau MGP, Dortmans BMA, Egger J, et al.: Modelling the financial viability of centralised and decentralised black soldier fly larvae waste processing units in Surabaya, Indonesia. J. Insects Food Feed. 2023; 9(3): 303–316. Publisher Full Text

[23] 23. Lohri CR, Rajabu HM, Sweeney DJ, et al.: Char fuel production in developing countries - A review of urban biowaste carbonization. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2016; 59: 1514–1530. Publisher Full Text

[24] 24. Matter A, Ahsan M, Marbach M, et al.: Impacts of policy and market incentives for solid waste recycling in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Waste Manag. 2015; 39: 321–328. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[25] 25. Tilley E, Ulrich L, Luthi C, et al.: Compendium of Sanitation Systems and Technologies.2014.

[26] 26. Yesaya M, Mpanang’ombe W, Tilley E: The Cost of Plastics in Compost. Front. Sustain. 2021; 2. Publisher Full Text

[27] 27. Mpanang’ombe W, Mallory A, Tilley E: Poverty, politics and plastic: Organic waste sorting in Blantyre’s public markets. J. Urban Manag. 2021; 10(3): 192–204. Publisher Full Text

[28] 28. Mpanang’ombe W, Tilley E, Zabaleta I, et al.: A biowaste treatment technology assessment in Malawi. Recycling. 2018; 3(4). Publisher Full Text

[29] 29. Liu T, et al.: Composting as a sustainable technology for integrated municipal solid waste management. Biomass, Biofuels, Biochemicals: Circular Bioeconomy: Technologies for Waste Remediation. 2022; 23–39. Publisher Full Text

[30] 30. Liu T, et al.: Sustainability analysis of large-scale food waste composting. Current Developments in Biotechnology and Bioengineering: Sustainable Bioresources for the Emerging Bioeconomy. 2020; 301–322. Publisher Full Text

[31] 31. Liu T, Awasthi MK, Awasthi SK, et al.: Effects of black soldier fly larvae (Diptera: Stratiomyidae) on food waste and sewage sludge composting. J. Environ. Manag. 2020; 256: 109967. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[32] 32. Li W, Yuan Z, Chen X, et al.: Green refuse derived fuel preparation and combustion performance from the solid residues to build the zero-waste city. Energy. 2021; 225: 120252. Publisher Full Text

[33] 33. Wilson DC, Velis CA: Waste management – still a global challenge in the 21st century: An evidence-based call for action. Waste Manag. Res. Dec. 2015; 33(12): 1049–1051. Publisher Full Text

[34] 34. Ghisellini P, Cialani C, Ulgiati S: A review on circular economy: The expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. J. Clean. Prod. Feb. 2016; 114: 11–32. Publisher Full Text

[35] 35. Khan S, Anjum R, Raza ST, et al.: Technologies for municipal solid waste management: Current status, challenges, and future perspectives. Chemosphere. Feb. 2022; 288: 132403. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[36] 36. Papargyropoulou E, Steinberger JK, Wright N, et al.: Patterns and Causes of Food Waste in the Hospitality and Food Service Sector: Food Waste Prevention Insights from Malaysia. Sustainability. Jan. 2019; vol. 11(21). Art. no. 21. Publisher Full Text

[37] 37. Zhang J, Qin Q, Li G, et al.: Sustainable municipal waste management strategies through life cycle assessment method: A review. J. Environ. Manag. Jun. 2021; 287: 112238. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[38] 38. Chen C, et al.: China and India lead in greening of the world through land-use management. Nat. Sustain. Feb. 2019; 2(2): 122–129. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[39] 39. Campos-Montiel RG, et al.: Bioconversion of vegetable wastes to biogas from rumenmicroorganisms. Rev. Int. Contam. Ambient. 2018; 34(1): 149–155. Publisher Full Text

[40] 40. El Bari H , Trois C: Waste Management in Developing Countries. Waste as a Resource. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2023. Publisher Full Text

[41] 41. Jara-Samaniego J, et al.: Composting as sustainable strategy for municipal solid waste management in the Chimborazo Region, Ecuador: Suitability of the obtained composts for seedling production. J. Clean. Prod. 2017; 141: 1349–1358. Publisher Full Text

[42] 42. Norena-Toro N, Loiza-Castro S, Londono-Giraldo LM, et al.: Bibliometric Data for Study on Organic Waste Management in Municipal Marketplaces. Zenodo. May 12, 2025. Publisher Full Text

Research Trends in Organic Waste Management in Municipal Marketplaces: A Bibliometric Analysis

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keywords

Revised Amendments from Version 1

Introduction

Methods

Selection of the database

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram of the study selection process.

Creation of the search equation

Bibliometric analysis and visualization

Productivity analysis

Network analysis

Analysis of co-authorship patterns

Results and discussion

Productivity analysis

Figure 2. Publications by year related to urban waste management.

Figure 3. Scientific production related to urban waste management.

Network analysis

Figure 4. Country collaboration map in research on organic waste management in municipal marketplaces and related urban waste systems.

Figure 5. Keyword co-occurrence map of research on organic waste management in municipal marketplaces and related urban waste systems.

Figure 6. Strategic diagram of the most relevant issues related to research in urban organic waste management.

Analysis of co-authorship patterns

Figure 7. Co-authorship collaboration networks in research on organic waste management in municipal marketplaces and related urban waste systems.

Conclusion

Ethics and consent

Data availability

References

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

Comments on this article

Browse by related subjects

Competing Interests Policy

Stay Updated