The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Livelihoods perspectives and rural development
Open accessAbstract
Livelihoods perspectives have been central to rural development thinking and practice in the past decade. But where do such perspectives come from, what are their conceptual roots, and what influences have shaped the way they have emerged? This paper offers an historical review of key moments in debates about rural livelihoods, identifying the tensions, ambiguities and challenges of such approaches. A number of core challenges are identified, centred on the need to inject a more thorough-going political analysis into the centre of livelihoods perspectives. This will enhance the capacity of livelihoods perspectives to address key lacunae in recent discussions, including questions of knowledge, politics, scale and dynamics.
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
Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance
North, D. C. (1990) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808678 · Cited by 32,691
Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways
Geels, F. W., & Schot, J. (2007) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2007.01.003 · Cited by 5,245
Rural Livelihoods and Diversity in Developing Countries
Ellis, F. (2000) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198296959.001.0001 · Cited by 3,999
Resilience and Sustainable Development: Building Adaptive Capacity in a World of Transformations
Folke, C., Carpenter, S., Elmqvist, T., Gunderson, L., Holling, C. S., & Walker, B. (2002) · AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment · doi:10.1579/0044-7447-31.5.437 · Cited by 3,136
Misreading the African Landscape: Society and Ecology in a Forest-Savanna Mosaic
Fairhead, J., & Leach, M. (1996) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139164023 · Cited by 1,037
Cited by
The Dark Side of Transformation: Latent Risks in Contemporary Sustainability Discourse
Blythe, J., Silver, J., Evans, L., Armitage, D., Bennett, N. J., Moore, M., Morrison, T. H., & Brown, K. (2018) · Antipode · doi:10.1111/anti.12405 · Cited by 526
Contemporary Discourses and Contestations around Pro-Poor Land Policies and Land Governance
BORRAS JR, S. M., & FRANCO, J. C. (2010) · Journal of Agrarian Change · doi:10.1111/j.1471-0366.2009.00243.x · Cited by 204
Human and social values in agroecology
Bezner Kerr, R., Liebert, J., Kansanga, M., & Kpienbaareh, D. (2022) · Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene · doi:10.1525/elementa.2021.00090 · Cited by 95
Application of Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping in Livelihood Vulnerability Analysis
Murungweni, C., van Wijk, M. T., Andersson, J. A., Smaling, E. M. A., & Giller, K. E. (2011) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-04393-160408 · Cited by 73
Governance matters: climate change, corruption, and livelihoods in Bangladesh
Rahman, M. A. (2018) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-018-2139-9 · Cited by 63
Metadata
- Authors
- Scoones, I.
- Venue
- The Journal of Peasant Studies
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2009-01
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 171-196
- ISSN
- 0306-6150 (ISSN-L)
- 1743-9361
- OpenAlex
- W2135295898
- Cited by
- 1,886
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 177.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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.
