Rural resilience in a digital society: Editorial
Open accessAbstract
The four editors of this special issue led research at the dot.rural Digital Economy Hub, a research centre funded by the RCUK Digital Economy programme (award reference: EP/G066051/1). Some of this research is presented in papers in this special issue.
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
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.
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?
Limited work to date has examined digital mobilization in the agrarian communities that comprise much of the Global South.
“Yet while critical data studies has expanded its geographic focus, limited work to date has examined digital mobilization in the agrarian communities that comprise much of the Global South.”
From Organic online politics: Farmers, Facebook, and Myanmar's military coup (2023) · cites this paper as Roberts et al., 2017
The Introduction notes an implicit urban bias in digital-technology discourse, which supports the broader point that rural settings receive less attention. It does not establish that little work has examined digital mobilization specifically in agrarian communities of the Global South; the discussion of future research in section 5 addresses rural digital inclusion more generally. (LLM, conf=0.78)
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
Digital inequalities and why they matter
Robinson, L., Cotten, S. R., Ono, H., Quan-Haase, A., Mesch, G., Chen, W., Schulz, J., Hale, T. M., & Stern, M. J. (2015) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2015.1012532 · Cited by 1,216 · cited 2× · see citing works
“…that understands that digital inequality and exclusion cannot be analysed in isolation, separate from offline disadvantage and that the continued integration of digital technologies into new aspects of daily life means that forms of disadvantage mutate (Helsper, 2012; Robinson et al., 2015).”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 16
- Anderson, B., 2015. What kind of thing is resilience? Politics 35 (1), 60e66.
- Cote, M., Nightingale, a. J., 2011. Resilience thinking meets social theory: situating social change in socio-ecological systems (SES) research. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 36 (4), 475e489.
- Davidson, D.J., 2010. The applicability of the concept of resilience to social systems: some sources of optimism and nagging doubts. Soc. Nat. Resour. 23 (12), 1135e1149.
- Graham, M., 2011. Time machines and virtual portals: the spatialities of the digital divide. Prog. Dev. Stud. 11 (3), 211e227.
- Graham, M., Hale, S., Stephens, M., 2012. Featured graphic: digital divide: the geog- raphy of Internet access. Environ. Plan. A 44 (5), 1009e1010. Retrieved March 17, 2013, from editor & translator.
- Haklay, M., Singleton, A., Parker, C., 2008. Web mapping 2.0: the neogeography of the GeoWeb. Geogr. Compass 2 (6), 2011e2039.
- Heley, J., Jones, L., 2012. Relational rurals: some thoughts on relating things and the- ory in rural studies. J. Rural Stud. 28 (3), 208e217.
- Helsper, E.J., 2012. A corresponding fields model for the links between social and digital exclusion. Commun. Theory 22 (4), 403e426.
- MacKinnon, D., Derickson, K.D., 2013. From resilience to resourcefulness: a critique of resilience policy and activism. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 37 (2), 253e270.
- Park, S., Freeman, J., Middleton, C., Allen, M., Eckermann, R., Everson, R., 2015. The multi-layers of digital exclusion in rural Australia. In: Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 3631e3640, 2015eMarch.
- Robinson, L., Cotten, S.R., Ono, H., Quan-haase, A., Chen, W., Schulz, J., et al., 2017. Digital inequalities and why they matter. Inf. Commun. Soc. 0 (0), 1e14.
- Scott, M., 2013. Resilience: a conceptual lens for rural studies? Geogr. Compass 7 (9), 597e610.
- Townsend, L., Sathiaseelan, a., Fairhurst, G., Wallace, C., 2013. Enhanced broadband access as a solution to the social and economic problems of the rural digital divide. Local Econ. 28 (6), 580e595.
- Weichselgartner, J., Kelman, I., 2015. Geographies of resilience: challenges and op- portunities of a descriptive concept. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 39 (3), 249e267.
- Wilson, M.W., Graham, M., 2013. Situating neogeography. Environ. Plan. A 45 (1), 3e9. Retrieved March 10, 2013, from editor & translator.
- Woods, M., 2009. Rural geography: blurring boundaries and making connections. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 33 (6), 849e858.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Rotz, S., Gravely, E., Mosby, I., Duncan, E., Finnis, E., Horgan, M., LeBlanc, J., Martin, R., Neufeld, H. T., Nixon, A., et al. (2019) · Journal of Rural Studies · doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.01.023 · Cited by 557 · see citing works
Castilla, D., Botella, C., Miralles, I., Bretón-López, J., Dragomir-Davis, A. M., Zaragoza, I., & Garcia-Palacios, A. (2018) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2018.05.009 · Cited by 159 · see citing works
Organic online politics: Farmers, Facebook, and Myanmar's military coup
Faxon, H. O., Kintzi, K., Tran, V., Wine, K. Z., & Htut, S. Y. (2023) · Big Data & Society · doi:10.1177/20539517231168101 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
- Authors
- Roberts, E., Beel, D., Philip, L., & Townsend, L.
- Affiliations
- University of the West of England (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Roberts, Elisabeth
- Venue
- Journal of Rural Studies
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-08
- Volume
- 54
- Pages
- 355-359
- ISSN
- 0743-0167 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2731534852
- Cited by
- 127
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Rural Studies (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (acceptedVersion)
- e-space (Manchester Metropolitan University) (acceptedVersion)
- Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- UWE Research Repository (UWE Bristol) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- RCUK Digital Economy (EP/G066051/1)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Rural development and sustainability
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › ICT Impact and Policies
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Digitalization and Economic Development in Agriculture
- Keywords
- rural resilience, digital society, digital technologies, rural communities
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
