Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 31Agricultural economics and policiesHousing, Finance, and NeoliberalismAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Financial subjectivities in the agricultural sector: A comparative analysis of relations between farmers and banks in Latvia, Denmark and the UK

Open access
Grivins, Mikelis, Thorsøe, Martin Hvarregaard, Maye, Damian·2021·Journal of Rural Studies
DOI 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.06.006
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Abstract Access to financing is crucial for farmers to ensure competitiveness and to facilitate change. A better understanding of how farmers can access funds could help farmers to remain profitable and to adopt more sustainable farming practices. However, most of the academic literature discussing agricultural financing depicts farmers’ access to funds as impersonal and universal – emerging from the idea of “optimal financial behaviour”. This paper takes a different approach and introduces the concept of “financial subjectivities” to show how financial markets are constructed as locally embedded reinterpretations of the financialisation of agriculture that guide local agro-financial relations. We examine financial subjectivities in Latvia, Denmark and the UK respectively to understand how stakeholders co-constitute contextually embedded relations between farmers and banks and to assess processes of agro-financial relations in specific national contexts. The cases illustrate different relationships between banks and farms. In Latvia, agricultural crediting has developed comparatively recently and is heavily supported by government intervention; in Denmark, agriculture has undergone a period of financial crisis, and farmers are struggling to refinance and remain profitable; meanwhile, in the UK, relations between farmers and banks are well established but increasingly strained as agricultural producer returns on investment yield less profit. Each case thus reflects historical development trajectories and the regulatory engagement of agro-financial relations, asserting the importance of embedding analysis of agricultural financing in specific socio-political contexts.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.06.006

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Jakobsen, 2013, Landbrugets stordrift uden driftsøkonomisk logik, Tidsskrift for landøkonomi, 198/199, 81

Cited by

See all 31

Metadata

Authors
Grivins, M., Thorsøe, M. H., & Maye, D.
Affiliations
  • Aarhus University (DK)
  • Countryside and Community Research Institute (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Rural Studies
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-08
Volume
86
Pages
117-126
ISSN
0743-0167 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.06.006
OpenAlex
W3168413638
Cited by
31
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 5
FWCI
5.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Rural Studies (publishedVersion)
  • Research Repository (University of Gloucestershire) (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Repository (University of Gloucestershire) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Horizon 2020
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Agricultural economics and policies
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Housing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
  • Social Sciences › Development › Agriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Keywords
agricultural finance, agricultural credit, access to finance, Latvia, Denmark, United Kingdom, state intervention in agriculture, sustainable agriculture

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

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.