World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Bo Pedersen Weidema

Bo Pedersen Weidema

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
49
Citations
21440
World Ranking
5117
National Ranking
69

Bo Pedersen Weidema publication distribution in Environmental Sciences in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Environmental Sciences in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Bo Pedersen Weidema sits on this spectrum.

41–50 publications: 21 scientists 51–60 publications: 62 scientists 61–70 publications: 133 scientists 71–80 publications: 257 scientists 81–90 publications: 361 scientists 91–100 publications: 440 scientists 101–110 publications: 492 scientists 111–120 publications: 541 scientists 121–130 publications: 617 scientists 131–140 publications: 544 scientists 141–150 publications: 541 scientists 151–160 publications: 539 scientists 161–170 publications: 444 scientists 171–180 publications: 444 scientists 181–190 publications: 400 scientists 191–200 publications: 377 scientists 201–210 publications: 318 scientists 211–220 publications: 283 scientists 221–230 publications: 263 scientists 231–240 publications: 220 scientists 241–250 publications: 217 scientists 251–260 publications: 180 scientists 261–270 publications: 181 scientists 271–280 publications: 155 scientists 281–290 publications: 130 scientists 291–300 publications: 127 scientists 301–310 publications: 130 scientists 311–320 publications: 85 scientists 321–330 publications: 106 scientists 331–340 publications: 80 scientists 341–350 publications: 83 scientists 351–360 publications: 75 scientists 361–370 publications: 69 scientists 371–380 publications: 52 scientists 381–390 publications: 54 scientists 391–400 publications: 56 scientists 401–410 publications: 44 scientists 411–420 publications: 40 scientists 421–430 publications: 36 scientists 431–440 publications: 25 scientists 441–450 publications: 25 scientists 451–460 publications: 32 scientists 461–470 publications: 29 scientists 471–480 publications: 21 scientists 481–490 publications: 26 scientists 491–500 publications: 25 scientists 501–510 publications: 17 scientists 511–520 publications: 18 scientists 521–530 publications: 15 scientists 531–540 publications: 22 scientists 541–550 publications: 12 scientists 551–560 publications: 15 scientists 561–570 publications: 11 scientists 571–580 publications: 19 scientists 581–590 publications: 9 scientists 591–600 publications: 9 scientists 601–610 publications: 7 scientists 611–620 publications: 11 scientists 621–630 publications: 5 scientists 631–640 publications: 5 scientists 641–650 publications: 6 scientists 651–660 publications: 3 scientists 661–670 publications: 3 scientists 671–680 publications: 4 scientists 681–686 publications: 3 scientists 687+ publications: 100 scientists
41 publications 687+

This scientist: 108 publications — 17th percentile

17% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 687 publications or more.

Bo Pedersen Weidema D-index placement in Environmental Sciences in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Environmental Sciences scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Bo Pedersen Weidema sits on this spectrum.

30 D-Index: 12 scientists 31 D-Index: 26 scientists 32 D-Index: 51 scientists 33 D-Index: 88 scientists 34 D-Index: 123 scientists 35 D-Index: 163 scientists 36 D-Index: 206 scientists 37 D-Index: 267 scientists 38 D-Index: 265 scientists 39 D-Index: 275 scientists 40 D-Index: 321 scientists 41 D-Index: 343 scientists 42 D-Index: 305 scientists 43 D-Index: 336 scientists 44 D-Index: 330 scientists 45 D-Index: 348 scientists 46 D-Index: 291 scientists 47 D-Index: 275 scientists 48 D-Index: 272 scientists 49 D-Index: 273 scientists 50 D-Index: 263 scientists 51 D-Index: 232 scientists 52 D-Index: 266 scientists 53 D-Index: 217 scientists 54 D-Index: 199 scientists 55 D-Index: 177 scientists 56 D-Index: 202 scientists 57 D-Index: 204 scientists 58 D-Index: 166 scientists 59 D-Index: 177 scientists 60 D-Index: 166 scientists 61 D-Index: 152 scientists 62 D-Index: 143 scientists 63 D-Index: 150 scientists 64 D-Index: 124 scientists 65 D-Index: 119 scientists 66 D-Index: 120 scientists 67 D-Index: 118 scientists 68 D-Index: 82 scientists 69 D-Index: 98 scientists 70 D-Index: 94 scientists 71 D-Index: 105 scientists 72 D-Index: 74 scientists 73 D-Index: 84 scientists 74 D-Index: 70 scientists 75 D-Index: 67 scientists 76 D-Index: 78 scientists 77 D-Index: 60 scientists 78 D-Index: 59 scientists 79 D-Index: 52 scientists 80 D-Index: 47 scientists 81 D-Index: 38 scientists 82 D-Index: 48 scientists 83 D-Index: 42 scientists 84 D-Index: 42 scientists 85 D-Index: 43 scientists 86 D-Index: 29 scientists 87 D-Index: 37 scientists 88 D-Index: 29 scientists 89 D-Index: 30 scientists 90 D-Index: 34 scientists 91 D-Index: 20 scientists 92 D-Index: 22 scientists 93 D-Index: 17 scientists 94 D-Index: 19 scientists 95 D-Index: 24 scientists 96 D-Index: 21 scientists 97 D-Index: 20 scientists 98 D-Index: 24 scientists 99 D-Index: 17 scientists 100 D-Index: 17 scientists 101 D-Index: 21 scientists 102 D-Index: 25 scientists 103 D-Index: 18 scientists 104 D-Index: 26 scientists 105 D-Index: 19 scientists 106 D-Index: 15 scientists 107 D-Index: 10 scientists 108 D-Index: 13 scientists 109 D-Index: 15 scientists 110 D-Index: 12 scientists 111 D-Index: 8 scientists 112 D-Index: 7 scientists 113 D-Index: 9 scientists 114 D-Index: 6 scientists 115 D-Index: 12 scientists 116 D-Index: 7 scientists 117 D-Index: 8 scientists 118 D-Index: 3 scientists 119 D-Index: 5 scientists 120 D-Index: 7 scientists 121 D-Index: 2 scientists 122 D-Index: 4 scientists 123 D-Index: 8 scientists 124 D-Index: 7 scientists 125+ D-Index: 99 scientists
30 D-Index 125+

This scientist: 49 D-Index — 47th percentile

47% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 125 D-Index or more.

Best Publications

  • The ecoinvent database version 3 (part I): overview and methodology

    Gregor Wernet;Christian Bauer;Bernhard Steubing;Bernhard Steubing;Jürgen Reinhard

  • Life cycle assessment: Part 1: Framework, goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, and applications

    G Rebitzer;Tomas Ekvall;R Frischknecht;D Hunkeler

  • Data quality management for life cycle inventories—an example of using data quality indicators☆

    Bo Pedersen Weidema;Marianne Suhr Wesnæs

  • System boundaries and input data in consequential life cycle inventory analysis

    Tomas Ekvall;Bo P. Weidema

  • Overview and methodology: Data quality guideline for the ecoinvent database version 3

    Bo Pedersen Weidema;C. Bauer;R. Hischier;C. Mutel

  • Carbon Footprint: A Catalyst for Life Cycle Assessment?

    Bo Pedersen Weidema;Mikkel Thrane;Per Christensen;Jannick Hoejrup Schmidt

  • Harmonisation of Environmental Life Cycle Assessment for Agriculture

    R Clift;A Audsley;S Alber;S Cowell

  • Avoiding Co-Product Allocation in Life-Cycle Assessment

    Bo Weidema

  • Market information in life cycle assessment

    Bo Weidema

  • The Integration of Economic and Social Aspects in Life Cycle Impact Assessment

    Bo P. Weidema

  • Key issues and options in accounting for carbon sequestration and temporary storage in life cycle assessment and carbon footprinting

    Miguel Brandao;Annie Levasseur;Miko U. F. Kirschbaum;Bo P. Weidema

  • Marginal production technologies for life cycle inventories

    Bo P. Weidema;Niels Frees;Anne-Merete Nielsen

  • Framework for modelling data uncertainty in life cycle inventories

    Mark A. J. Huijbregts;Gregory Norris;Rolf Bretz;Andreas Ciroth

  • The LCIA midpoint-damage framework of the UNEP/SETAC life cycle initiative

    Unknown

  • Implementation of Life Cycle Impact Assessment Methods. ecoinvent report No. 3, v2.2

    R. Hischier;B. P. Weidema;H. J. Althaus;C. Bauer

  • Normalisation and weighting in life cycle assessment: quo vadis?

    Massimo Pizzol;Alexis Laurent;Serenella Sala;Bo Pedersen Weidema

  • Monetary valuation in Life Cycle Assessment: a review

    Massimo Pizzol;Bo Pedersen Weidema;Miguel Brandão;Philippe Osset

  • C balance, carbon dioxide emissions and global warming potentials in LCA-modelling of waste management systems:

    Thomas H. Christensen;Emmanuel Christophe Gentil;Alessio Boldrin;Anna W. Larsen

  • Framework for scenario development in LCA

    Hanna Leena Pesonen;Tomas Ekvall;Günter Fleischer;Gjalt Huppes

  • Using Life Cycle Assessment to achieve a circular economy

    Claudia Peña;Bárbara Civit;Alejandro Gallego-Schmid;Angela Druckman

Frequent Co-Authors

Guido Sonnemann
Guido Sonnemann University of Bordeaux
Miguel Brandão
Miguel Brandão Riga Technical University
Olivier Jolliet
Olivier Jolliet University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Sangwon Suh
Sangwon Suh University of California, Santa Barbara
Jo Dewulf
Jo Dewulf Ghent University
Alexis Laurent
Alexis Laurent Technical University of Denmark
Peter Fantke
Peter Fantke Technical University of Denmark
Jeroen B. Guinée
Jeroen B. Guinée Leiden University
Manuele Margni
Manuele Margni Polytechnique Montréal

If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.

Report an issue

We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below:

Related Online Degrees & Career Pathways

For those interested in expanding their knowledge beyond Environmental Sciences, exploring interdisciplinary online degrees can open diverse career opportunities. Programs such as 1 year phd programs online no dissertation offer accelerated paths for professionals seeking advanced qualifications without lengthy research commitments.

Educators and practitioners can also benefit from specialized options like eds to edd bridge programs online, which facilitate a smooth transition from education master’s degrees to doctoral levels. This can be especially useful for leadership roles in environmental education and policy advocacy.

For those interested in social aspects, affordable and flexible dsw programs focus on advanced social work practice, equipping graduates to address community and ecological wellbeing effectively.

Lastly, students looking for broader academic foundations might consider an affordable online general studies degree. These programs provide versatile skills applicable to environmental consulting, management, and sustainability roles.

Best Scientists Citing Bo Pedersen Weidema

Recently Published Articles