This analysis examines the trends and gaps in ecological remediation for heavy metal pollution in mining areas, suggesting implications for technology adoption.
Based on data from the literature in the Web of Science (WOS) and Scopus databases, this study collected 325 articles published between 2020 and 2025. Using Citespace software (version 6.4) to analyze publication volume, countries, institutions, disciplinary categories, and keywords, we examined research characteristics, hotspots, and bottlenecks in the field of ecological remediation for heavy metal pollution in mining area soils. Results indicate: (1) Publication volume in this field showed an upward trend from 2020 to 2024, accounting for 70.2% of this dataset being from the environmental sciences. Chinese scholars demonstrated significant dominance and high engagement, though interdisciplinary depth remained insufficient; (2) from 2020 to 2025, the research focus shifted from risk identification to precise remediation, forming a complete logical chain of ‘identification–remediation–optimization’. Green technologies (biological/combined remediation) emerged as mainstream approaches in integrated remediation. (3) A significant gap exists between research and practice. Many innovative technologies are costly and difficult for enterprises to bear, while low-cost techniques like ‘waste-to-waste treatment’ lack sufficient research and application, hindering large-scale implementation. This study reveals the current situation of ‘intense research but difficult application’ in the ecological remediation of heavy metal-contaminated soils in mining areas. The findings provide a scientific basis for technological innovation, practical implementation, and policy making.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: