The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed
Abstract
Compulsory ujamaa villages in Tanzania, collectivization in Russia, Le Corbusier’s urban planning theory realized in Brasilia, the Great Leap Forward in China, agricultural "modernization" in the Tropics—the twentieth century has been racked by grand utopian schemes that have inadvertently brought death and disruption to millions. Why do well-intentioned plans for improving the human condition go tragically awry? In this wide-ranging and original book, James C. Scott analyzes failed cases of large-scale authoritarian plans in a variety of fields. Centrally managed social plans misfire, Scott argues, when they impose schematic visions that do violence to complex interdependencies that are not—and cannot—be fully understood. Further, the success of designs for social organization depends upon the recognition that local, practical knowledge is as important as formal, epistemic knowledge. The author builds a persuasive case against "development theory" and imperialistic state planning that disregards the values, desires, and objections of its subjects. He identifies and discusses four conditions common to all planning disasters: administrative ordering of nature and society by the state; a "high-modernist ideology" that places confidence in the ability of science to improve every aspect of human life; a willingness to use authoritarian state power to effect large- scale interventions; and a prostrate civil society that cannot effectively resist such plans.
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
Cited by
A space for place in sociology
Gieryn, T. F. (2000) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.463 · Cited by 2,370
Espeland, W. N., & Stevens, M. L. (2008) · European Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1017/s0003975609000150 · Cited by 1,265
Hydrosocial territories: a political ecology perspective
Boelens, R., Hoogesteger, J., Swyngedouw, E., Vos, J., & Wester, P. (2016) · Water International · doi:10.1080/02508060.2016.1134898 · Cited by 810
Blockchains and the economic institutions of capitalism
DAVIDSON, S., DE FILIPPI, P., & POTTS, J. (2018) · Journal of Institutional Economics · doi:10.1017/s1744137417000200 · Cited by 582
Metadata
- Authors
- Scott, J. C.
- Venue
- Yale University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Yale University Press
- Published
- 2017-10-17
- OpenAlex
- W275850004
- Cited by
- 1,514
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 54.16
- Type
- book
- 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: Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.12987/9780300128789
- The paper
- Scott, J. C. (2017). Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. Yale University Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.12987/9780300128789
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.