Green agriculture represents the future of agricultural transformation in developing countries, such as China. Identifying an effective resource combination path is vital for enhancing the green quality of agriculture in these nations. This study draws on the resource spatial mismatch theory from New Economic Geography, using a “multisource heterogeneous” approach that combines qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) with the EBM-GML index measurement model. Using panel data from 2005 to 2021, the study investigated the effects and mechanisms of spatial resource combinations on improving green agricultural quality. The key findings are as follows: (1) While improving spatial resource misallocation helps boost green agricultural quality, the diversity of resource combination patterns has diminished, decreasing from five modes in 2005 to four in 2021. (2) In terms of mechanisms, reducing externalities, such as pollutant emissions, while strengthening material and human capital offers a potential pathway for improvement. (3) Negative externalities, including emissions from fertilizers and petroleum, significantly hinder improvements in green agricultural quality. (4) The absence of sufficient pesticide and fertilizer resources is a critical factor influencing the outcome. These findings provide practical insights for developing countries seeking to enhance regional resource allocation efficiency and improve agricultural green quality. Additionally, they contribute theoretical support to the enrichment of theories on resource allocation and sustainable agricultural development.

Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (IAHS), as a new type of heritage, has received extensive attention from the international scientific communities. With the increase of IAHS research, reviews on it have been conducted by many scholars. However, visualized research to show future research trends of IAHS are lacking. Therefore, using metrology analysis methods, this study aims at presenting the progress of research and the general development trends of Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS) in the world from 2006 to 2020 to provide ideas for the development of countries or regions in the future. This study mapped 292 literatures from Web of Science core collections from 2006 to 2020 by CiteSpace software. The results show that research on IAHS from 2006 to 2020 experienced two stages: the fluctuating increase stage, and the steady growth stage. Author groups from China, Italy, the USA, Japan, etc., contributed many papers on IAHS. Institutions including the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the University of Florence and the University of Padua in Italy, etc., have a relatively high influence on international IAHS research. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment is the most cited journal. Agricultural Heritage Systems, regeneration, agriculture, agroforestry, dry-stone wall, social capital, instability, and agricultural biodiversity have been hotspots in the past 15 years. The research themes mainly focus on GIAHS, tourism, livelihood assets, and direct georeferencing. Authors in different regions concern different research themes. In the future, the fields of applications and microscopic views, social sciences, applications of standardized quantitative research methods, and broadened international cooperation should be paid more attention.

The identity of community residents is the basis for passing on the GIAHS (globally important agricultural heritage system) and promoting the sustainable development of heritage sites. However, there is a lack of discussion in the existent literature on its composition and effective mechanisms. Based on the theory of the ABC (Affect–Behavior–Cognition) model, we collected 482 questionnaires from residents of tea communities of the GIAHS. We construct a model of multiple effects of identity on willingness to co-create values based on the perspective of host–guest interaction. The results show that identity has both social identity and self-identity dimensions. It has a valuable effect on the process of host–guest interaction. It stimulates residents’ willingness to co-create value for the GIAHS through the chain-mediating effect of welcoming nature and emotional closeness. The study results reveal the theoretical mechanisms by which the identity of residents influences the multiple behaviors of guests. It also provides an interactive perspective for the study of the participation of the community in the GIAHS. At the same time, it promotes the local practice of value mining and development research in the GIAHS. In addition, it expands the research framework of value co-creation in heritage tourism.

Cell-cultured meat holds significant environmental value as an alternative protein source. Throughout the 21st century, cell-cultured meat has progressively penetrated commercial markets. However, a systematic review encompassing the entire field needs improvement. Employing Citespace, Vosviewer, and R-Bibliometrix software, a bibliometric analysis was used to present the research progress and general development trends of 484 articles on cell-cultured meat from 2000 to 2022 based on countries, authors, institutions, and keywords. This analysis provides ideas for the future development of cell-cultured meat in different countries or regions worldwide. Research on cell-cultured meat from 2000 to 2022 has undergone two phases: fluctuating growth (2000–2013) and rapid growth (2013–2022). Noteworthy contributions to cell-cultured meat studies emerge from author groups in the United States of America, the United Kingdom, and China, with influential institutions like the University of Bath significantly impacting pertinent research. Furthermore, over the past two decades, research has leaned towards exploring topics such as “biomaterials”, “cultured”, “land use”, “public opinion”, “animal welfare”, and “food safety”. Furthermore, this study reveals differences in nomenclature between regions and institutions. “Cultured meat” is more popular in some countries than in other forms. Institutions in Asia use “cultured meat” more frequently; however, institutions in the Americas adopt “cultivated meat” and rarely adopt “in vitro meat”, and institutions in the European region have no particularly prominent tendency towards a specific nomenclature. Future research should emphasize aligning the labeling of cell-cultured meat with effective management strategies and referencing regulatory policies across various countries. For the first time, we use three different bibliometric methods to analyze temporal and spatial variation in research on cellular meat. The results of this study have a multiplier effect. We provide a theoretical basis and a practical reference for the identification of alternatives in the dual context of “food crisis and food security” and “climate crisis”. At the same time, we also provide a reference for the sustainable development of the food system.

There was an error in the original publication