The DOI matches its Crossref record; 192 of the 192 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A new analytical framework of farming system and agriculture model diversities. A review
Open accessAbstract
In most current farming system classifications (e.g. “conventional” versus “organic”), each type of farming system encompasses a wide variety of farming practices and performances. Classifying farming systems using concepts such as “ecological”, “sustainable intensification” or “agro-ecology” is not satisfactory because the concepts “overlap in…definitions, principles and practices, thus creating…confusion in their meanings, interpretations and implications”. Existing classifications most often focus either on biotechnical functioning or on socio-economic contexts of farming systems. We reviewed the literature to develop an original analytical framework of the diversity of farming systems and agriculture models that deal with these limits. To describe this framework, we first present the main differences between three biotechnical types of farming systems differing in the role of ecosystem services and external inputs: chemical input-, biological input- and biodiversity-based farming systems. Second, we describe four key socio-economic contexts which determine development and functioning of these farming systems: globalised commodity-based food systems, circular economies, alternative food systems and integrated landscape approaches. Third, we present our original analytical framework of agriculture models, defined as biotechnical types of farming systems associated with one or a combination of socio-economic contexts differing in the role of relationships based on global market prices and “territorial embeddedness”. We demonstrate the potential of this framework by describing six key agriculture models and reviewing key scientific issues in agronomy associated with each one. We then analyse the added value of our analytical framework and its generic character. Lastly, we discuss transversal research issues of the agriculture models, concerning the technologies required, their function in the bioeconomy, their multi-criteria and multi-level assessments, their co-existence and the transitions between them.
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
The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital
Costanza, R., d'Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O'Neill, R. V., Paruelo, J., et al. (1997) · Nature · doi:10.1038/387253a0 · Cited by 22,585
A safe operating space for humanity
Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin, F. S., Lambin, E. F., Lenton, T. M., Scheffer, M., Folke, C., Schellnhuber, H. J., et al. (2009) · Nature · doi:10.1038/461472a · Cited by 13,333
Global Consequences of Land Use
Foley, J. A., DeFries, R., Asner, G. P., Barford, C., Bonan, G., Carpenter, S. R., Chapin, F. S., Coe, M. T., Daily, G. C., Gibbs, H. K., et al. (2005) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1111772 · Cited by 13,272
Food Security: The Challenge of Feeding 9 Billion People
Godfray, H. C. J., Beddington, J. R., Crute, I. R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J. F., Pretty, J., Robinson, S., Thomas, S. M., & Toulmin, C. (2010) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1185383 · Cited by 11,943
Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis
Assessment, M. E. (2005) · Island Press · doi:10.5281/zenodo.18167309 · Cited by 10,665
Solutions for a cultivated planet
Foley, J. A., Ramankutty, N., Brauman, K. A., Cassidy, E. S., Gerber, J. S., Johnston, M., Mueller, N. D., O’Connell, C., Ray, D. K., West, P. C., et al. (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature10452 · Cited by 8,476
Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices
Tilman, D., Cassman, K. G., Matson, P. A., Naylor, R., & Polasky, S. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01014 · Cited by 7,957
Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity
Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin, F. S. I., Lambin, E., Lenton, T. M., Scheffer, M., Folke, C., Schellnhuber, H. J., et al. (2009) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-03180-140232 · Cited by 7,187
Transformation of the Nitrogen Cycle: Recent Trends, Questions, and Potential Solutions
Galloway, J. N., Townsend, A. R., Erisman, J. W., Bekunda, M., Cai, Z., Freney, J. R., Martinelli, L. A., Seitzinger, S. P., & Sutton, M. A. (2008) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1136674 · Cited by 6,995
Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C., & Ulgiati, S. (2016) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007 · Cited by 6,536
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- Ali MH, Talukder MSU (2008) Increasing water productivity in crop production—a synthesis. Agr Water Manage 95:1201–1213. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2008.06.008 · doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2008.06.008
- Anbumozhi V, Radhakrishnan J, Yamaji E (2005) Impact of riparian buffer zones on water quality and associated management considerations. Ecol Eng 24:517–523. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2004.01.007 · doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2004.01.007
- Billen G, Lasseletta L, Garnier J (2014b) A biogeochemical view of the global agro-food system: nitrogen flows associated with protein production, consumption and trade. Global Food Secur 3:209–219. doi: 10.1016/j.gfs.2014.08.003i · doi:10.1016/j.gfs.2014.08.003i
- Cordeau S, Triolet M, Wayman S, Steinberg C, Guillemin JP (2016) Bioherbicides: dead in the water? A review of the existing products for integrated weed management. Crop Prot 87:44–49. doi: 10.1016/j.cropro.2016.04.016 · doi:10.1016/j.cropro.2016.04.016
- Daily G (1997) Daily - What Are Ecosystem Services.pdf. Nature’s Serv, Arlington, pp 1–19
- Gan-Mor S, Matthews GA (2003) Recent developments in sprayers for application of biopesticides - an overview. Biosyst Eng 84:119–125. doi: 10.1016/S1537-5110(02)00277-5 · doi:10.1016/s1537-5110(02)00277-5
- Hynes RK, Boyetchko SM (2006) Research initiatives in the art and science of biopesticide formulations. Soil Biol Biochem 38:845–849. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2005.07.003 · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2005.07.003
- IAASTD (2009) International assessment of agricultural knowledge, science and technology for development: agriculture at a crossroads. In: BD MI, Herren HR, Wakhungu J, Watson RT (eds) Global report. International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development, Island Press, Washington, DC
- Marsden T (2010) Mobilizing the regional eco-economy: evolving webs of agri-food and rural development in the UK. Cambridge J Reg Econ Soc 3:225–244. doi: 10.1093/cjres/rsq010 · doi:10.1093/cjres/rsq010
- MEA (2005) Millennium ecosystem assessment. Ecosystems and human wellbeing—synthesis. Island Press, Washington
- Müller F, Hoffmann-Kroll R, Wiggering H (2000) Indicating ecosystem integrity—theoretical concepts and environmental requirements. Ecol Model 130:13–23 · doi:10.1016/s0304-3800(00)00210-6
- Noellemeyer E, Six J (2015) Basic principles of soil carbon management for multiple ecosystem benefits. In: Banwart SA, Noellemeyer E, Milne E (eds) Soil carbon: science, management and policy for multiple benefits. SCOPE series 71, pp 265–276
- Playan E, Mateos L (2006) Modernization and optimization of irrigation systems to increase water productivity. AgricWater Manage 80:100–116 · doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2005.07.007
- Savary S (2014) The roots of crop health: cropping practices and disease management. Food Secur 6:819–831. doi: 10.1007/s12571-014-0399-4 · doi:10.1007/s12571-014-0399-4
Cited by
D'Amato, D., & Korhonen, J. (2021) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107143 · Cited by 438
Mayer, A., Haas, W., Wiedenhofer, D., Krausmann, F., Nuss, P., & Blengini, G. A. (2019) · Journal of Industrial Ecology · doi:10.1111/jiec.12809 · Cited by 339
Palomo-Campesino, S., González, J. A., & García-Llorente, M. (2018) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su10124339 · Cited by 116
Morel, K., Revoyron, E., San Cristobal, M., & Baret, P. V. (2020) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0229910 · Cited by 111
A Cloud-Based IoT Platform for Precision Control of Soilless Greenhouse Cultivation
Sagheer, A., Mohammed, M., Riad, K., & Alhajhoj, M. (2020) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s21010223 · Cited by 85
Metadata
- Authors
- Therond, O., Duru, M., Roger-Estrade, J., & Richard, G.
- Venue
- Agronomy for Sustainable Development
- Published
- 2017-06
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 3
- ISSN
- 1773-0155 (ISSN-L)
- 1774-0746
- OpenAlex
- W2622821927
- Cited by
- 293
- References
- 192
- FWCI
- 13.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- erratum (2017-10-03)
- 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: A new analytical framework of farming system and agriculture model diversities. A review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s13593-017-0429-7
- The paper
- Therond, O., Duru, M., Roger-Estrade, J., & Richard, G. (2017). A new analytical framework of farming system and agriculture model diversities. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-017-0429-7
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.