Cited by 249Sustainable Agricultural Systems AnalysisSustainable Development and Environmental PolicyAgricultural economics and policies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

MOTIFS: a monitoring tool for integrated farm sustainability

Open access

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1051/agro:2008001

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The research team tried to mediate the subjectivity of the school garden sustainability components in order to create a framework that allowed data collection to be standardized and for results to be comparable.

    “By following the approach used in the formulation of SAEMETH [32], already successfully applied by Van Calker et al. [37] and Meul et al. [38], the research team tried to mediate the subjectivity of the school garden sustainability components in order to create a framework that allowed data collection to be standardized and for results to be comparable.”
  • Assessments that focus on the environmental pillar are not holistic and cannot be used for integrated sustainability evaluation of farming systems.

    “Such assessments are not holistic and cannot be used for integrated sustainability evaluation of FSs [3,6].”

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Davidson D.A. (2000) Soil quality assessment: recent advances and controversies, Prog. Environ. Sci. 2, 342–350.
  2. Nevens F., Dessein J., Meul M., Rogge E., Verbruggen I., Mulier A., Van Passel S., Lepoutre J., Hongenaert M. (2007) On tomorrow’s grounds; development of a vision on Flemish agriculture in 2030, J. Cleaner Prod. (in press).
  3. Rotmans J. (2003) Transitiemanagement, sleutel voor een duurzame samenleving, Koninklijke Van Gorcum, Assen, The Netherlands.
  4. WBCSD (2000) Eco-efficiency. Creating more value with less impact, World Business Council for Sustainable Development, North Yorkshire.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Meul, M., Passel, S., Nevens, F., Dessein, J., Rogge, E., Mulier, A., & Hauwermeiren, A.
Affiliations
  • Ghent University (BE)
  • Hasselt University (BE)
  • Vlerick Business School (BE)
  • Instituut voor Landbouw en Visserijonderzoek (BE)
  • Flanders Environment Agency (BE)
Corresponding author
Meul, Marijke
Venue
Agronomy for Sustainable Development
Published
2008-06
Volume
28
Issue
2
Pages
321-332
ISSN
  • 1773-0155 (ISSN-L)
  • 1774-0746
OpenAlex
W2131892938
Cited by
249
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 14
FWCI
6.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Agronomy for Sustainable Development (publishedVersion)
  • Springer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
  • Document Server@UHasselt (UHasselt) (submittedVersion)
  • Lannoo Campus eBooks
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Sustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Agricultural economics and policies
Keywords
integrated sustainability assessment, sustainable agriculture, dairy farming, indicator aggregation, stakeholder engagement, ease of use, motifs, Flemish 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