World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Environmental Sciences 50 4921 4712 1812 1673 196 10952

Linda Stalker Prokopy publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Linda Stalker Prokopy between 2003 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Linda Stalker Prokopy published across 23 years, from 2003 to 2025, averaging 9.3 papers a year. Output peaked at 29 publications in 2015. 11 of the 214 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15 20 25
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2003 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 29. Peak 29 publications in 2015. 2003: 2 publications 2004: 1 publication 2005: 1 publication 2006: 0 publications 2007: 0 publications 2008: 6 publications 2009: 13 publications 2010: 4 publications 2011: 12 publications 2012: 9 publications 2013: 14 publications 2014: 16 publications 2015: 29 publications 2016: 11 publications 2017: 14 publications 2018: 14 publications 2019: 17 publications 2020: 17 publications 2021: 11 publications 2022: 9 publications 2023: 3 publications 2024: 4 publications 2025: 7 publications
2003 2025

214 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Linda Stalker Prokopy: publications per year, 2003 to 2025
Year Publications
2003 2
2004 1
2005 1
2006 0
2007 0
2008 6
2009 13
2010 4
2011 12
2012 9
2013 14
2014 16
2015 29
2016 11
2017 14
2018 14
2019 17
2020 17
2021 11
2022 9
2023 3
2024 4
2025 7
Total 214
Download as CSV

Linda Stalker Prokopy 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 Linda Stalker Prokopy sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 66 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 41–50 to 690+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 617. Most scientists, 617, have 121–130 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 690 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 191–200 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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: 282 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: 26 scientists 501–510 publications: 17 scientists 511–520 publications: 19 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 681–689 publications: 4 scientists 690+ publications: 100 scientists
41–50 publications 690+

This scientist: 196 publications — 63rd percentile

63% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 690 publications or more.

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Environmental Sciences scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 9,676 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
41–50 21
51–60 62
61–70 133
71–80 257
81–90 361
91–100 440
101–110 492
111–120 541
121–130 617
131–140 544
141–150 541
151–160 539
161–170 444
171–180 444
181–190 400
191–200 377 196
201–210 318
211–220 282
221–230 263
231–240 220
241–250 217
251–260 180
261–270 181
271–280 155
281–290 130
291–300 127
301–310 130
311–320 85
321–330 106
331–340 80
341–350 83
351–360 75
361–370 69
371–380 52
381–390 54
391–400 56
401–410 44
411–420 40
421–430 36
431–440 25
441–450 25
451–460 32
461–470 29
471–480 21
481–490 26
491–500 26
501–510 17
511–520 19
521–530 15
531–540 22
541–550 12
551–560 15
561–570 11
571–580 19
581–590 9
591–600 9
601–610 7
611–620 11
621–630 5
631–640 5
641–650 6
651–660 3
661–670 3
671–680 4
681–689 4
690+ 100
Download as CSV

Linda Stalker Prokopy 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 Linda Stalker Prokopy sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
100 200 300
Bar chart with 97 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30 to 126+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 348. Most scientists, 348, have 45 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 126 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 50 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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: 198 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: 20 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: 9 scientists 126+ D-Index: 92 scientists
30 D-Index 126+

This scientist: 50 D-Index — 50th percentile

50% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 126 D-Index or more.

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Environmental Sciences scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 9,676 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30 12
31 26
32 51
33 88
34 123
35 163
36 206
37 267
38 265
39 275
40 321
41 343
42 305
43 336
44 330
45 348
46 291
47 275
48 272
49 273
50 263 50
51 232
52 266
53 217
54 198
55 177
56 202
57 204
58 166
59 177
60 166
61 152
62 143
63 150
64 124
65 119
66 120
67 118
68 82
69 98
70 94
71 105
72 74
73 84
74 70
75 67
76 78
77 60
78 59
79 52
80 47
81 38
82 48
83 42
84 42
85 43
86 29
87 37
88 29
89 30
90 34
91 20
92 22
93 17
94 19
95 24
96 21
97 20
98 24
99 17
100 17
101 21
102 25
103 18
104 26
105 20
106 15
107 10
108 13
109 15
110 12
111 8
112 7
113 9
114 6
115 12
116 7
117 8
118 3
119 5
120 7
121 2
122 4
123 8
124 7
125 9
126+ 92
Download as CSV

Overview

Linda Stalker Prokopy is affiliated with Purdue University West Lafayette in the United States. Their research primarily spans the fields of Agricultural and Biological Sciences and Environmental Science, with significant contributions in related subfields including General Agricultural and Biological Sciences, Global and Planetary Change, Sociology and Political Science, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, and Economics and Econometrics.

Their scholarly work addresses a diverse set of topics, notably Agricultural Innovations and Practices, Climate Change Impacts on Agriculture, Climate Change Communication and Perception, Environmental Education and Sustainability, Economic and Environmental Valuation, Forest Management and Policy, and Water Resources Management and Optimization.

Some of the recent papers authored or co-authored by Linda Stalker Prokopy include:

  • The urgency of transforming the Midwestern U.S. landscape into more than corn and soybean (2020, Agriculture and Human Values)
  • The role of systems thinking in cover crop adoption: Implications for conservation communication (2020, Land Use Policy)
  • A meta-analysis of agricultural conservation intentions, behaviors, and practices: Insights from 35 years of quantitative literature in the United States (2022, Journal of Environmental Management)
  • Examining intensity of conservation practice adoption: Evidence from cover crop use on U.S. Midwest farms (2021, Food Policy)
  • Conservation behavior and effects of economic and environmental message frames (2020, Conservation Letters)

Linda Stalker Prokopy frequently collaborates with several other researchers. Their most common co-authors include:

  • Pranay Ranjan
  • Sarah P. Church
  • Jackie M. Getson
  • Ruxandra Popovici
  • Emily M. Usher

Their publications are often found in particular journals and venues where they have multiple contributions. These include:

  • Climatic Change
  • Journal of Soil and Water Conservation
  • Journal of Environmental Management
  • Land Use Policy
  • Society & Natural Resources

Best Publications

  • Determinants of agricultural best management practice adoption: Evidence from the literature

    L.S. Prokopy;K. Floress;D. Klotthor-Weinkauf;A. Baumgart-Getz

  • Why farmers adopt best management practice in the United States: A meta-analysis of the adoption literature

    Adam Baumgart-Getz;Linda Stalker Prokopy;Kristin Floress

  • Adoption of agricultural conservation practices in the United States: Evidence from 35 years of quantitative literature

    L.S. Prokopy;K. Floress;J.G. Arbuckle;S.P. Church

  • Climate change beliefs, risk perceptions, and adaptation behavior among Midwestern U.S. crop farmers

    Amber Saylor Mase;Benjamin M. Gramig;Linda Stalker Prokopy

  • Climate change beliefs, concerns, and attitudes toward adaptation and mitigation among farmers in the Midwestern United States

    J. Gordon Arbuckle;Linda Stalker Prokopy;Tonya Haigh;Jon Hobbs

  • The influence of perceptions of practice characteristics: An examination of agricultural best management practice adoption in two Indiana watersheds

    Adam P. Reimer;Denise Klotthor Weinkauf;Linda Stalker Prokopy

  • How well is the demand-driven, community management model for rural water supply systems doing? Evidence from Bolivia, Peru and Ghana.

    Dale Whittington;Dale Whittington;Jennifer Davis;Linda Prokopy;Kristin Komives

  • The relationship between participation and project outcomes: Evidence from rural water supply projects in India

    Linda Stalker Prokopy

  • The multi-dimensional nature of environmental attitudes among farmers in Indiana: implications for conservation adoption

    Adam P. Reimer;Aaron W. Thompson;Linda S. Prokopy

  • What’s Wrong with the Tap? Examining Perceptions of Tap Water and Bottled Water at Purdue University

    Amber Saylor;Linda Stalker Prokopy;Shannon Amberg

  • Synthesizing Conservation Motivations and Barriers: What Have We Learned from Qualitative Studies of Farmers’ Behaviors in the United States?

    Pranay Ranjan;Sarah P. Church;Kristin Floress;Linda S. Prokopy

  • The effects of extreme drought on climate change beliefs, risk perceptions, and adaptation attitudes

    J. Stuart Carlton;J. Stuart Carlton;Amber S. Mase;Cody L. Knutson;Maria Carmen Lemos

  • Farmer Participation in U.S. Farm Bill Conservation Programs

    Adam P. Reimer;Linda S. Prokopy

  • Extension′s role in disseminating information about climate change to agricultural stakeholders in the United States

    Linda Stalker Prokopy;J. Stuart Carlton;J. Gordon Arbuckle;Tonya Haigh

  • Unrealized Potential: A Review of Perceptions and Use of Weather and Climate Information in Agricultural Decision Making

    Amber Saylor Mase;Linda Stalker Prokopy

  • More food, low pollution (mo fo lo Po): a grand challenge for the 21st century.

    Eric A. Davidson;Emma C. Suddick;Charles W. Rice;Linda S. Prokopy

  • Perceptions and use of cover crops among early adopters: Findings from a national survey

    Michael Dunn;Jessica D. Ulrich-Schad;Linda Stalker Prokopy;Robert L. Myers

  • People, place, behavior, and context: A research agenda for expanding our understanding of what motivates farmers' conservation behaviors

    Adam Reimer;Aaron Thompson;Linda Stalker Prokopy;J. Gordon Arbuckle

  • Farmers and Climate Change: A Cross-National Comparison of Beliefs and Risk Perceptions in High-Income Countries

    Linda S. Prokopy;J. G. Arbuckle;Andrew P. Barnes;V. R. Haden

  • Willingness to pay for travel information

    Asad J Khattak;Youngbin Yim;Linda Stalker Prokopy

Frequent Co-Authors

Laura C. Bowling
Laura C. Bowling Purdue University West Lafayette
Jane Frankenberger
Jane Frankenberger Purdue University West Lafayette
Dale Whittington
Dale Whittington University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Tomas O. Höök
Tomas O. Höök Purdue University West Lafayette
Paul J. Ferraro
Paul J. Ferraro Johns Hopkins University
Indrajeet Chaubey
Indrajeet Chaubey University of Connecticut
Eugene S. Takle
Eugene S. Takle Iowa State University
Dev Niyogi
Dev Niyogi The University of Texas at Austin
Mark D. Tomer
Mark D. Tomer US Department of Agriculture
Atul K. Jain
Atul K. Jain University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

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 advancing their studies in Environmental Sciences, exploring related online degrees can open doors to diverse career opportunities. Many professionals choose to pursue advanced education that complements their environmental expertise, such as education or social work, to broaden their impact across communities and organizations.

One popular route is earning a doctorate without the traditional dissertation, which can be found through doctorate degree online no dissertation programs. These options help busy professionals accelerate their education while maintaining work-life balance.

If you already hold an education degree, continue your professional development by exploring the seamless transition from eds to edd programs. This pathway enhances leadership skills, preparing graduates for high-level roles in environmental education and beyond.

For those passionate about social impact, fully funded dsw programs online present an excellent option. These programs equip learners to address environmental justice and policy through social work interventions.

Lastly, if you’re seeking a versatile foundation, consider some of the most affordable online general studies degree programs. These flexible degrees allow students to tailor their coursework around environmental themes alongside other interests.

Best Scientists Citing Linda Stalker Prokopy

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles