Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 198

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

State Policy and Pasture Degradation in Inner Asia

Sneath, David·1998·Science

Abstract

The pastoralists of the Inner Asian grassland have been administered in different ways by Russian, Mongolian and Chinese governments. A Cambridge-based international research project set out to compare the results of these various approaches in the light of the widespread pastoral degradation reported in Chinese and Russian parts of the region. The findings suggest that areas, such as Mongolia, which have retained mobile pastorialism have much lower levels of reported pastoral degradation than those that introduced static, highly-mechanised agro-industrial techniques.

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 · 10.1126/science.281.5380.1147

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.

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

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

Cited by

See all 198

Metadata

Authors
Sneath, D.
Venue
Science
Published
1998-08-21
Volume
281
Issue
5380
Pages
1147-1148
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W1596608435
Cited by
198
References
0
FWCI
17.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: State Policy and Pasture Degradation in Inner Asia. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1126/science.281.5380.1147
The paper
Sneath, D. (1998). State Policy and Pasture Degradation in Inner Asia. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.281.5380.1147

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.