Social innovation and climate adaptation: Local collective action in diversifying Tanzania
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Individuals whose livelihoods depend on one activity, and who have less access to community resources, are those who are most at risk.
“Individuals whose livelihoods depend on one activity, and who have less access to community resources, are those who are most at risk [7,692].”
From Tackling climate change with machine learning (2023) · cites this paper as [692]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 29 · Cited by 113
- Authors
- Rodima-Taylor, D.
- Venue
- Applied Geography
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-04
- Volume
- 33
- Pages
- 128-134
- ISSN
- 0143-6228 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2030058380
- Cited by
- 113
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 6.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Applied Geography (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Tanzania Government
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Climate change impacts on agriculture
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
- Keywords
- social innovation, climate change adaptation, informal groups, collective action, income diversification, dispute mediation, economic cooperation, resource management, adaptive capacity, social-ecological resilience, vulnerability
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
