The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Understanding and promoting adoption of conservation practices by rural landholders
Open accessAbstract
Research on the adoption of rural innovations is reviewed and interpreted through a cross-disciplinary lens to provide practical guidance for research, extension and policy relating to conservation practices. Adoption of innovations by landholders is presented as a dynamic learning process. Adoption depends on a range of personal, social, cultural and economic factors, as well as on characteristics of the innovation itself. Adoption occurs when the landholder perceives that the innovation in question will enhance the achievement of their personal goals. A range of goals is identifiable among landholders, including economic, social and environmental goals. Innovations are more likely to be adopted when they have a high ‘relative advantage’ (perceived superiority to the idea or practice that it supersedes), and when they are readily trialable (easy to test and learn about before adoption). Non-adoption or low adoption of a number of conservation practices is readily explicable in terms of their failure to provide a relative advantage (particularly in economic terms) or a range of difficulties that landholders may have in trialing them.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Adoption of Agricultural Innovations in Developing Countries: A Survey
Feder, G., Just, R. E., & Zilberman, D. (1985) · Economic Development and Cultural Change · doi:10.1086/451461 · Cited by 3,482
Cited by
Landscapes that work for biodiversity and people
Kremen, C., & Merenlender, A. M. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aau6020 · Cited by 1,125
Predicting farmer uptake of new agricultural practices: a tool for research, extension and policy
Kuehne, G., Llewellyn, R., Pannell, D. J., Wilkinson, R., Dolling, P., Ouzman, J., & Ewing, M. (2017) · Agricultural Systems · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2017.06.007 · Cited by 367
Self-citationMarshall, G. R. (2009) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.10.008 · Cited by 147
Self-citationWhat carbon farming activities are farmers likely to adopt? A best–worst scaling survey
Dumbrell, N. P., Kragt, M. E., & Gibson, F. L. (2016) · Land Use Policy · doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.02.002 · Cited by 141
Garrett, R. D., Gardner, T. A., Morello, T. F., Marchand, S., Barlow, J., Ezzine de Blas, D., Ferreira, J., Lees, A. C., & Parry, L. (2017) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-09364-220327 · Cited by 140
Metadata
- Authors
- Pannell, D. J., Marshall, G. R., Barr, N., Curtis, A., Vanclay, F., & Wilkinson, R.
- Venue
- Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture
- Publisher
- CSIRO Publishing
- Published
- 2006
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1407
- ISSN
- 0816-1089 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2010100330
- Cited by
- 1,464
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 208.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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.
