This map shows the geographic impact of David W. Lime'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 David W. Lime with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites David W. Lime more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by David W. Lime. 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 David W. Lime. The network helps show where David W. Lime may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of David W. Lime
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of David W. Lime.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of David W. Lime 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 David W. Lime. David W. Lime is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Lime, David W., et al.. (2001). Place attachment in Canyonlands National Park: visitors' assessment of setting attributes on the Colorado and Green Rivers.. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration. 19(1). 59–78.129 indexed citations
2.
Manning, Robert E. & David W. Lime. (2000). Defining and Managing the Quality of Wilderness Recreation Experiences. 15. 13–52.30 indexed citations
3.
Lime, David W., et al.. (2000). Visitors' relationship to the resource: comparing place attachment in wildland and developed settings.. 15. 181–184.6 indexed citations
4.
Fulton, David C., et al.. (2000). Human dimensions of natural resource management: emerging issues and practical applications.9 indexed citations
5.
Lime, David W., et al.. (1997). Visitor experience and resource protection framework in the National Park System: rationale, current status, and future direction. 371.30 indexed citations
6.
Manning, Robert E., et al.. (1996). Social carrying capacity of natural areas: theory and application in the U.S. National Parks. Natural Areas Journal. 16(2). 118–127.40 indexed citations
Lime, David W., et al.. (1996). Use of visitor encounter norms in natural area management.. 16(2). 128–133.1 indexed citations
9.
Lime, David W., et al.. (1993). Recreation, tourism, and the local residents: partnership or co-existence?. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration. 11(4). 78–91.22 indexed citations
10.
McAvoy, Leo H., et al.. (1991). Cooperation in Resource Management: A Model Planning Process for Promoting Partnerships between Resource Managers and Private Service Providers. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration. 9(4). 42–58.5 indexed citations
11.
Lime, David W.. (1990). Managing America's Enduring Wilderness Resource. University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy (University of Minnesota).31 indexed citations
Lime, David W.. (1981). Forest and river recreation : research update.38 indexed citations
16.
Lime, David W.. (1981). Outfitted and nonoutfitted river runners -- who are they and what do they think? In: Recreation use allocation. Proceedings of a national conference sponsored by USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management, USDI National Park Service, and University of Nevada, Reno.. 51–58.2 indexed citations
Stankey, George H., Robert Lucas, & David W. Lime. (1976). Crowding in Parks and Wilderness..14 indexed citations
20.
Lime, David W.. (1972). Large Groups in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area - Their Numbers, Characteristics, and Impact. 142.16 indexed citations
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.