Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
Mind the Gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior?
This map shows the geographic impact of Anja Kollmuss's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Anja Kollmuss with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Anja Kollmuss more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Anja Kollmuss. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Anja Kollmuss. The network helps show where Anja Kollmuss may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Anja Kollmuss
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Anja Kollmuss.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Anja Kollmuss based on the total number of
citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges
represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together.
Node borders
signify the number of papers an author published with Anja Kollmuss. Anja Kollmuss is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
19 of 19 papers shown
1.
Kollmuss, Anja, et al.. (2017). International transfers under Article 6 in the context of diverse ambition of NDCs.5 indexed citations
2.
Schneider, Lambert, et al.. (2016). Ensuring the environmental integrity of market mechanisms under the Paris Agreement.1 indexed citations
Kollmuss, Anja, et al.. (2015). Has Joint Implementation reduced GHG emissions? Lessons learned for the design of carbon market mechanisms (brief).12 indexed citations
6.
Kollmuss, Anja, Michael Lazarus, & Lambert Schneider. (2014). Single-year mitigation targets: Uncharted territory for emissions trading and unit transfers.6 indexed citations
7.
Lazarus, Michael, Peter Erickson, Lambert Schneider, & Anja Kollmuss. (2013). Potential for International Offsets to Provide a Net Decrease of GHG Emissions.7 indexed citations
8.
Kollmuss, Anja, et al.. (2011). GHG schemes addressing climate change – How ISO standards help.7 indexed citations
Kollmuss, Anja & Michael Lazarus. (2010). Industrial N 2 O Projects Under the CDM: The Case of Nitric Acid Production.5 indexed citations
13.
Kollmuss, Anja, Michael Lazarus, & Lambert Schneider. (2010). Industrial N 2 O Projects Under the CDM: Adipic Acid - A Case of Carbon Leakage?.19 indexed citations
Kollmuss, Anja. (2009). Evaluating and Improving Carbon Offsetting Programs.
16.
Kollmuss, Anja, et al.. (2008). A Review of Offset Programs: Trading Systems, Funds, Protocols, Standards and Retailers.13 indexed citations
17.
Kollmuss, Anja, et al.. (2008). Making Sense of the Voluntary Carbon Market: A Comparison of Carbon Offset Standards..143 indexed citations
18.
Kollmuss, Anja & Charles Heaps. (2008). UNFCCC Resource Guide for Preparing the National Communications of non-Annex I Parties. Module 4: Measures to Mitigate Climate Change.8 indexed citations
19.
Kollmuss, Anja & Julian Agyeman. (2002). Mind the Gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior?. Environmental Education Research. 8(3). 239–260.5711 indexed citations breakdown →
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive
bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global
research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include
incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and
delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in
Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.