Cited by 3,092Sustainability and Climate Change GovernanceInnovation Diffusion and ForecastingEnvironmental Education and Sustainability

The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: responses to seven criticisms

Open access
Geels, Frank W.·2011·Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.eist.2011.02.002

Cites

79 of 79 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Agroecology presents a potential in simultaneously achieving multiple societal goals, but the transition is progressively slow.

    “The study findings from the four countries highlight that while agroecology presents a potential in simultaneously achieving multiple societal goals (Bhandari et al., 2024;Faure et al., 2024;Geels, 2011), the transition is progressively slow, necessitating more concerted efforts to unlock its full potential.”

    From Agroecology for sustainable development: evidence on multidimensional performance from a cross-country TAPE assessment in Africa (2025) · cites this paper as Geels, 2011

    Section 1, “Transitions to sustainability” (page unavailable), describes agri-food sustainability transitions as complex, long-term processes and identifies barriers to changing established systems. It does not discuss agroecology’s potential to achieve multiple societal goals or establish the pace of an agroecological transition. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Geels, F. W.
Affiliations
University of Sussex (GB)
Corresponding author
Geels, Frank W.
Venue
Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-06
Volume
1
Issue
1
Pages
24-40
ISSN
2210-4224 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2146706569
Cited by
3,092
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 436 · 2025: 310 · 2024: 258 · 2023: 247 · 2022: 263 · 2021: 271 · 2020: 256 · 2019: 242 · 2018: 215 · 2017: 172 · 2016: 132 · 2015: 111 · 2014: 82 · 2013: 52 · 2012: 35
FWCI
48.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
FP7 Ideas: European Research Council (204246)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Innovation Diffusion and Forecasting
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Environmental Education and Sustainability
Keywords
multi-level perspective, sustainability transitions, socio-technical transitions, agency, bottom-up change, epistemology, attributional style, methodology, ontology, hierarchical levels

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