行政管理居中、法制司法邊陲：國土安全研究知識結構與主題演化的科學計量分析（2001–2026）

Administrative-Managerial Centrality and Legal-Judicial Marginality: A Scientometric Analysis of the Intellectual Structure and Thematic Evolution of Homeland Security Research (2001–2026)

本研究旨在揭示國土安全(homeland security)研究領域之知識結構與主題演化軌跡。資料採自Web of Science核心合輯，以主題詞檢索2001年至2026年3月之論文與綜述，初步檢得3,162筆，經學科與語義之雙軌篩選排除理工技術文獻後，保留884筆核心治理文獻為樣本。研究運用R語言bibliometrix套件，依序進行關鍵字共詞網絡、三域關係、Bradford核心期刊、主題演化與策略坐標等分析。
研究發現可歸納為一項關鍵：在國土安全之學術知識結構中，行政管理視角長期居於中心並趨於穩定，法制與司法視角則持續處於邊陲。其證據有三：在結構上，共詞網絡顯示國土安全與管理為連接全網之中介樞紐，法律(law)與司法(courts)須經由政治議題(politics)之中介，始能接入核心。在動態上，策略坐標分析顯示法律由中期之引擎主題滑向晚期之利基主題，呈現「持續專業化卻與核心治理脫鉤」之軌跡；在場域上，Bradford核心期刊由公共行政與政策社群所界定，法學期刊明顯缺席。主題演化進一步顯示，本領域呈現「穩定核心、邊緣漂移」之型態，行政框架一旦確立即高度延續，主題之新陳代謝主要發生於邊緣。
本研究以科學計量方法，為國土安全研究之知識演化提供整體圖像，並指出深化治理規範基礎所需強化之法制整合方向。

The question we address is whether, within the intellectual structure of homeland security research, the administrative-managerial perspective has remained central while the legal and judicial perspective has remained peripheral. To examine this, we draw data from the Web of Science Core Collection, retrieving articles and reviews published between 2001 and March 2026 through topic-term searches. An initial set of 3,162 records was reduced to 884 core governance documents through a dual-track screening procedure that combines disciplinary and semantic filtering to exclude scientific and technical literature. Using the bibliometrix package in R, we proceed through keyword co-word networks, three-field plots, Bradford's law of core journals, thematic evolution, and strategic diagrams.
Three lines of evidence are consistent with this proposition. Structurally, the co-word network shows homeland security and management as the intermediary hub connecting the entire network, whereas law and courts appear to reach the core only through the mediation of politics. Dynamically, the strategic diagram shows law sliding from a motor theme in the middle period to a niche theme in the later period, a trajectory that suggests continued specialization decoupled from core governance. In terms of publication venues, the Bradford core journals are defined by the public administration and policy communities, with legal journals largely absent. The thematic evolution further indicates a pattern of a stable core with peripheral drift: once the administrative framework is established, it persists, and thematic turnover occurs mainly at the periphery.
Although we cannot be sure these patterns reflect the substantive marginalization of legal scholarship rather than the disciplinary coverage and indexing conventions of the Web of Science, we combine network, temporal, and venue-based evidence to mitigate reliance on any single measure. By applying scientometric methods, this study provides a holistic picture of the knowledge evolution of homeland security research and identifies the direction of legal integration that may strengthen the normative foundations of security governance.