Purpose This study aims to find out how the e-records management subject has been researched and tackled by researchers in the Eastern and Southern African Regional Branch of the International Council on Archives (ESARBICA). Design/methodology/approach This research paper applied a bibliometric survey, where a quantitative survey of the literature pertaining to the study of e-records management in the ESARBICA region, covering the period from 2000 to 2016, was conducted applying bibliometric methods. The survey aimed at providing descriptive data that cast a spotlight on the features and development of the e-records management base literature in the ESARBICA region. Findings The research data display a lamentable outlook in the contribution to the electronic records management body of knowledge from the ESARBICA region. Few research articles from professionals in the records and archives management are being published. These figures call for increased investments in electronic records management research by institutions in ESARBICA, as management of electronic content has become the centre of political and socio-economic development. Follow-up studies need to be done to counter limitations placed on this research paper. The findings show that there is under production of research publications in the ESARBICA region. The region only contributed 2 per cent of the total world output in the period under review and in the study of electronic records management from journals indexed by Scopus. Research limitations/implications A bibliometric study places researchers at the mercy of analysing incomplete information due to limitations of resources. The variance in use of terminology (key words) by authors in published research articles may entail some being left out in an analysis of articles the same subject matter. As much as due diligence was placed on using Boolean search methods to counter such limitations they are unavoidable. An interpretation of bibliometric or citation analysis research is subjective as some analysts may label results incomplete or unreliable; hence, this paper finds itself in the same predicament. Inability to access the Thompson Reuters Web of Science database left the authors with Scopus as the only option, as Google Scholar was overlooked due to difficulties of having to rely on third-party software for analysing its indexed content that are mostly inaccurate and or ambiguous. Practical implications The findings of this study help uncover areas in e-records management, which have been researched over the years, and identify the prominent e-records management researchers in the ESARBICA region. Originality/value A number of bibliometric studies have been conducted; however, none has been conducted to establish e-records management research trends in the ESRABICA region.

中文翻译：

---

ESARBICA中的电子记录管理研究：文献计量研究

目的本研究旨在找出国际档案理事会（ESARBICA）东部和南部非洲区域分会的研究人员如何研究和解决电子记录管理主题。设计/方法/方法本研究论文采用文献计量法，其中采用文献计量法对ESARBICA地区2000年至2016年间电子记录管理研究的文献进行了定量调查。该调查旨在提供描述性数据，以聚焦于ESARBICA地区电子记录管理基础文献的功能和发展。调查结果在ESARBICA地区对电子记录管理知识体系的贡献方面，研究数据显示出可悲的前景。很少有专业人士发表有关记录和档案管理的研究文章。由于电子内容的管理已成为政治和社会经济发展的中心，这些数字要求埃塞俄比亚的机构增加对电子记录管理研究的投资。需要进行后续研究以克服本研究论文中的局限性。调查结果表明，ESARBICA地区正在生产研究出版物。在本报告所述期间和在Scopus索引的期刊进行的电子记录管理研究中，该区域仅贡献了世界总产出的2％。研究的局限性/涵义文献计量学研究使研究者只能分析由于资源限制而导致的不完整信息。作者在已发表的研究文章中使用术语（关键词）的差异可能导致在对同一主题的文章进行分析时遗漏了一些内容。尽最大努力使用布尔搜索方法来应对这种局限性是不可避免的。文献计量分析或引文分析研究的解释是主观的，因为某些分析人员可能将结果标记为不完整或不可靠。因此，本文发现自己处于同样的困境中。无法访问Thompson Reuters的Web of Science数据库，使作者只能选择Scopus，因为由于必须依靠第三方软件来分析其索引内容（大多数是不准确和/或模棱两可的）而遇到的困难，Google Scholar被忽略了。实际意义本研究的结果有助于发现多年来进行的电子记录管理领域，并确定ESARBICA地区杰出的电子记录管理研究人员。原创性/价值已经进行了许多文献计量研究。但是，在ESRABICA地区尚未开展任何建立电子记录管理研究趋势的工作。