The DOI matches its Crossref record; 163 of the 163 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Systemic perspectives on scaling agricultural innovations. A review
Open accessAbstract
Agricultural production involves the scaling of agricultural innovations such as disease-resistant and drought-tolerant maize varieties, zero-tillage techniques, permaculture cultivation practices based on perennial crops and automated milking systems. Scaling agricultural innovations should take into account complex interactions between biophysical, social, economic and institutional factors. Actual methods of scaling are rather empirical and based on the premise of ‘find out what works in one place and do more of the same, in another place’. These methods thus do not sufficiently take into account complex realities beyond the concepts of innovation transfer, dissemination, diffusion and adoption. As a consequence, scaling initiatives often do not produce the desired effect. They may produce undesirable effects in the form of negative spill-overs or unanticipated side effects such as environmental degradation, bad labour conditions of farm workers and loss of control of farming communities over access to genetic resources. Therefore, here, we conceptualise scaling processes as an integral part of a systemic approach to innovation, to anticipate on the possible consequences of scaling efforts. We propose a method that connects the heuristic framework of the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions (MLP) to a philosophical ‘modal aspects’ framework, with the objective of elucidating the connectedness between technologies, processes and practices. The resultant framework, the PRactice-Oriented Multi-level perspective on Innovation and Scaling (PROMIS), can inform research and policymakers on the complex dynamics involved in scaling. This is illustrated in relation to three cases in which the framework was applied: scaling agro-ecological practices in Nicaragua, farmer field schools on cocoa cultivation in Cameroon and ‘green rubber’ cultivation in Southwest China.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x033007014 · Cited by 11,170 · cited 2×
“The variety of suggested methodological options follows pleas to use mixed methods and mixed approaches for research and evaluation (Johnson and Onwuegbuzie 2004; Garcia and Zazueta 2015) in order to enrich perspectives and to compensate for limitations of particular methods and approaches.”
BackgroundNew Environmental Theories: Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior
Stern, P. C. (2000) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00175 · Cited by 8,682
Geels, F. W. (2002) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(02)00062-8 · Cited by 7,275
The diffusion of innovations: Some examples of finnish civil servant's professional tours in Europe
Hietala, M. (1983) · Scandinavian Journal of History · doi:10.1080/03468758308579015 · Cited by 6,162
Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways
Geels, F. W., & Schot, J. (2007) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2007.01.003 · Cited by 5,245
Early-warning signals for critical transitions
Scheffer, M., Bascompte, J., Brock, W. A., Brovkin, V., Carpenter, S. R., Dakos, V., Held, H., van Nes, E. H., Rietkerk, M., & Sugihara, G. (2009) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature08227 · Cited by 4,854
Soft Systems Methodology in Action
Gough, T. G. (1991) · Journal of the Operational Research Society · doi:10.1057/jors.1991.157 · Cited by 3,414
Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (1999) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/210361 · Cited by 3,232
Developing a framework for responsible innovation
Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2013) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008 · Cited by 3,184
Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: A Framework for Analysis
Scoones, I. (1998) · OpenDocs (Institute of Development Studies) · Cited by 3,099
Cited by
Big Data in Smart Farming – A review
Wolfert, S., Ge, L., Verdouw, C., & Bogaardt, M.-J. (2017) · Agricultural Systems · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2017.01.023 · Cited by 3,378
Pigford, A.-A. E., Hickey, G. M., & Klerkx, L. (2018) · Agricultural Systems · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2018.04.007 · Cited by 434
Self-citationEastwood, C., Klerkx, L., Ayre, M., & Dela Rue, B. (2019) · Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10806-017-9704-5 · Cited by 369
Self-citationPredicting farmer uptake of new agricultural practices: a tool for research, extension and policy
Kuehne, G., Llewellyn, R., Pannell, D. J., Wilkinson, R., Dolling, P., Ouzman, J., & Ewing, M. (2017) · Agricultural Systems · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2017.06.007 · Cited by 367
Reviewing financing barriers and strategies for urban nature-based solutions
Toxopeus, H., & Polzin, F. (2021) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112371 · Cited by 196
Metadata
- Authors
- Wigboldus, S., Klerkx, L., Leeuwis, C., Schut, M., Muilerman, S., & Jochemsen, H.
- Venue
- Agronomy for Sustainable Development
- Published
- 2016-08-09
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 3
- ISSN
- 1773-0155 (ISSN-L)
- 1774-0746
- OpenAlex
- W2512865108
- Cited by
- 355
- References
- 163
- FWCI
- 69.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Systemic perspectives on scaling agricultural innovations. A review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s13593-016-0380-z
- The paper
- Wigboldus, S., Klerkx, L., Leeuwis, C., Schut, M., Muilerman, S., & Jochemsen, H. (2016). Systemic perspectives on scaling agricultural innovations. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-016-0380-z
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.