You are presented with multiple paper abstracts, alongside the associated literature review and chapter titles. Given the provided information, you are going to do a literature review. Please generate a coherent literature review that synthesizes the content, draws connections between different works, highlights major findings, and identifies any gaps in the existing research.

Literature Review Title: A Critical Review of Surveys Emphasizing on Routing in Wireless Sensor Networks—An Anatomization under General Survey Design Framework 
Chapter Title:  Geographic Based Routing Surveys 
1. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB001):  Wireless sensor networks (WSNs) have emerged as an effective solution for a wide range of applications. Most of the traditional WSN architectures consist of static nodes which are densely deployed over a sensing area. Recently, several WSN architectures based on mobile elements (MEs) have been proposed. Most of them exploit mobility to address the problem of data collection in WSNs. In this article we first define WSNs with MEs and provide a comprehensive taxonomy of their architectures, based on the role of the MEs. Then we present an overview of the data collection process in such a scenario, and identify the corresponding issues and challenges. On the basis of these issues, we provide an extensive survey of the related literature. Finally, we compare the underlying approaches and solutions, with hints to open problems and future research directions. 
2. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB002):  The concentration of data traffic towards the sink in a wireless sensor network causes the nearby nodes to deplete their batteries quicker than other nodes, which leaves the sink stranded and disrupts the sensor data reporting. To mitigate this problem the usage of mobile sinks is proposed. Mobile sinks implicitly provide load-balancing and help achieving uniform energy-consumption across the network. However, the mechanisms to support the sink mobility (e.g., advertising the location of the mobile sink to the network) introduce an overhead in terms of energy consumption and packet delays. With these properties mobile sink routing constitutes an interesting research field with unique requirements. In this paper, we present a survey of the existing distributed mobile sink routing protocols. In order to provide an insight to the rationale and the concerns of a mobile sink routing protocol, design requirements and challenges associated with the problem of mobile sink routing are determined and explained. A definitive and detailed categorization is made and the protocols' advantages and drawbacks are determined with respect to their target applications. 
3. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB003):  Wireless sensor networks with mobile sinks, mWSNs, have attracted a lot of attention recently. This is because sink mobility can greatly alleviate the hotspot issue in WSNs and further prolong the network lifetime. However, sink mobility also causes unexpected changes in network topology and data routing paths, which can largely affect the routing performance in such networks. Design of efficient routing protocols for mWSNs has been a critical issue, and much work has been carried out in this aspect. In this article, we first classify existing protocols based on different design criteria and then present a survey of the state-of-the-art routing protocols in this area. We illustrate how each of the protocols works, and discuss their advantages and disadvantages. Finally, we point out some future directions for efficient routing in mWSNs. 
4. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB004):  The Mobile Wireless Sensor Network (MWSN) is an emerging technology with significant applications. The MWSN allows the sensor nodes to move freely and they are able to communicate with each other without the need for a fixed infrastructure. These networks are capable of out-performing static wireless sensor networks as they tend to increase the network lifetime, reduce the power consumption, provide more channel capacity and perform better targeting. Usually routing process in a mobile network is very complex and it becomes even more complicated in MWSN as the sensor nodes are low power, cost effective mobile devices with minimum resources. Recent research works have led to the design of many efficient routing protocols for MWSN but still there are many unresolved problems like retaining the network connectivity, reducing the energy cost, maintaining adequate sensing coverage etc. This paper addresses the various issues in routing and presents the state of the art routing protocols in MWSN. The routing protocols are categorized based on their network structure, state of information, energy efficiency and mobility. The classification presented here summarizes the main features of many published proposals in the literature for efficient routing in MWSN and also gives an insight into the enhancements that can be done to improve the existing routing protocols. 
5. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB005):  Recent advances in micro electro-mechanical systems MEMS, wireless sensor networks WSNs and digital electronics have provided low-cost, low-power, multi-functional but small in size sensors with capabilities of sensing various physical and environmental conditions, data processing and wireless communication within short range. In WSNs, sensors have limited power, processing, storage and communication capabilities. Hence, these networks require more effective and energy efficient schemes for routing of data and processing. In recent years, many location-based routing protocols have been proposed for WSNs where energy consideration is taken as an important constraint to extend the network lifetime. In this survey, we discuss the architecture of wireless sensor networks followed by challenges in designing routing protocols for these networks. Further, we present various location-based routing protocols proposed by numerous researcher and finally these protocols are compared on the basis of different parameters. 
6. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB006):  Mobility has the advantage of enlarging the WSN applications of the Internet of Things. However, proposing a mobility support protocol in Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) represents a significant challenge. In this paper, we proposed a survey on mobility management protocols in WSNs based on 6LoWPAN technology. This technology enables to connect IP sensor devices to other IP networks without any need for gateways. We highlighted the advantages and drawbacks with performances issues of each studied solution. Then, in order to select a typical classification of mobility management protocols in WSNs, we provided some classification criteria and approaches on which these protocols are based. Finally, we presented a comparative study of the existing protocols in terms of the required performances for this network type. 
7. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB007):  Introducing mobility to Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) puts new challenges particularly in designing of routing protocols. Mobility can be applied to the sensor nodes and/or the sink node in the network. Many routing protocols have been developed to support the mobility of WSNs. These protocols are divided depending on the routing structure into hierarchical-based, flat-based, and location-based routing protocols. However, the hierarchical-based routing protocols outperform the other routing types in saving energy, scalability, and extending lifetime of Mobile WSNs (MWSNs). Selecting an appropriate hierarchical routing protocol for specific applications is an important and difficult task. Therefore, this paper focuses on reviewing some of the recently hierarchical-based routing protocols that are developed in the last five years for MWSNs. This survey divides the hierarchical-based routing protocols into two broad groups, namely, classical-based and optimized-based routing protocols. Also, we present a detailed classification of the reviewed protocols according to the routing approach, control manner, mobile element, mobility pattern, network architecture, clustering attributes, protocol operation, path establishment, communication paradigm, energy model, protocol objectives, and applications. Moreover, a comparison between the reviewed protocols is investigated in this survey depending on delay, network size, energy-efficiency, and scalability while mentioning the advantages and drawbacks of each protocol. Finally, we summarize and conclude the paper with future directions.

Literature Review:
These surveys consider such routing protocols where sensor nodes have either Global Positioning System (GPS) or some location-aware system that may help to provide awareness about their position. On the basis reviewed literature, these protocols may be classified into three categories as discussed below: i In mobile based categorization, such surveys are discussed which consider mobility as main focus and categorize routing protocols on the basis of network structure (such as grid-based, cluster-based, tree-based, zone-based), state of information (such as proactive-based, reactive-based, hybrid-based), energy-efficiency (such as power control and saving, load-distribution-based), mobility (sink-only, node-only, hybrid) and biologically inspired routing. ii In location-based categorization, the classification metric may be flooding-based, curve-based, grid-based, geography-based and trajectory-based while mobility is not generally focused. iii The partial geographical categorization includes those surveys which consider some aspects/protocols of geographic routing in WSNs. In case of the surveys with complete emphasis on routing such as BIB003 BIB004 BIB005 BIB008 , the routing protocols are categorized by employing mobility based classification. The protocols in BIB003 BIB004 consider only mobile sink based routing protocols whereas BIB005 BIB008 considers mobility in general. The authors in BIB001 have mainly classified routing protocols using location-based categorization while BIB006 delineates brief discussion regarding location-based routing protocols in WSNs. In BIB008 , the authors have discussed and compared the characteristics of various mobility-oriented hierarchical routing protocols. Highlighting the applications of discussed protocols is helpful in protocol development in the corresponding fields in future. In BIB003 BIB006 , the authors have discussed challenges of location-based and mobility based routing respectively. The authors in BIB005 have discussed general issues of mobility in WSNs. Future research challenges are delineated in BIB003 BIB004 BIB001 BIB005 BIB008 . Moreover, it is apparent from Table 11 that this stratification contains 3 high count, 2 medium count and 1 low count surveys. Partial based Hg BIB002 BIB007 Hg* = High Count, Md* = Medium Count and Lw* = Low Count. Note: Various categories of count correspond to Count Number Index (CNI) in Tables 2 and 3 . The surveys having partial emphasis on routing include BIB002 BIB007 . In BIB002 BIB007 , the authors have discussed routing protocols under restricted geographical categorization. The authors in BIB007 have described some micro-mobility oriented routing protocols which may or may not consider triangular routing in their operations. The authors in BIB002 have discussed general issues of mobility in WSNs while BIB007 outlines design issues and challenges of mobility management in 6LoWPAN based WSNs. Future research challenges are delineated in BIB002 BIB007 .