The DOI matches its Crossref record; 78 of the 78 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 4 of the 49 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon
Open accessAbstract
Garrett, R. D., T. A. Gardner, T. Fonseca, S. Marchand, J. Barlow, D. Ezzine de Blas, J. Ferreira, A. C. Lees, and L. Parry. 2017. Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon. Ecology and Society 22(3):27. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09364-220327
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This paper asks why low-income, environmentally degrading land uses—especially extensive cattle ranching—persist in the eastern Brazilian Amazon despite higher-return cropping alternatives. Using social-ecological data from Santarém and Paragominas, it finds that income is not the main driver of perceived well-being, and that land-use persistence is shaped by assets, infrastructure, cultural preferences, and nonmonetary rural lifestyle benefits.
Key findings
- Specialty crops (perennials and horticulture) had the highest per-hectare farm income (mean US$3,304/ha), about 1,300% higher than livestock systems and 200% higher than soy, staple, and mixed crop production; staple crops (US$1,753/ha) also significantly outperformed cattle and mixed cattle-crop systems.
- Cattle remained the most expansive land use, occupying 73% of agricultural area, despite low productivity (0.83 head/ha) and low per-hectare income; 75% of households earned less than US$10,000/year from agricultural activities.
- Land use was associated with household attributes: cattle specialization was more common among households from the Northeast, with larger, more remote properties and less credit/machinery; specialty, staple, and mixed cropping were more common on small peri-urban properties among migrants from the South; soy properties had substantially higher government credit access.
- Subjective well-being was high overall (Santarém mean 2.7/3; Paragominas mean 2.5/3) and was not associated with farm, forest, or off-farm income; it was positively associated with income diversity, mixed cropping, safety, neighbor quality, and transportation access.
Methods
- Used the Sustainable Amazon Network social-ecological dataset collected in 2010–2011 across Santarém and Paragominas: 367 transects in 36 watersheds, 623 households, and 499 properties; the main land-use analysis used 420 properties with full data, and the well-being model used n = 328.
- Classified household-properties into mutually exclusive land uses when >75% of agricultural area was devoted to one use: cattle (n = 134), staple crops (n = 135), specialty crops (n = 27), soy (n = 21), mixed-crop (n = 48), cattle-crop (n = 33), and other livestock (n = 22); removed two property-size outliers >5,000 ha and four per-hectare income outliers.
- Analyzed per-hectare income differences with one-way ANOVA and Tukey post-hoc tests; land-use determinants with a multinomial logit model; and subjective well-being with an ordered logit model using reported life quality (1 = poor, 2 = okay, 3 = good).
Limitations
- The paper states that timber sales were excluded because of unreliable data and illegal practices; unpaid family labor costs were not included; home-consumed products were not counted as farm revenues; soil, slope, elevation, and input prices were excluded; and the well-being model had some multicollinearity, though VIFs were <1.9.
- The paper notes the two case-study regions are fairly representative but also unique because of unusually high environmental NGO attention and novel governance initiatives, limiting generalization.
- Evident from the design: the analysis is cross-sectional and observational, so causal claims are limited; income and land-use data rely on farmer recall; the 75% land-use classification threshold may obscure mixed or transitional systems.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
60 Own result · 19 Own interpretation · 15 No basis given · 13 No full text of the sources · 8 Sources not found · 8 Not checked yet · 5 Own method · 1 Supported · 1 Supported so far · 1 Partly supported · 1 Not supported · accuracy not yet measured
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“a person's subjective well-being (one's perception of well-being measured as the response to questions regarding, for example, their level of happiness and satisfaction) can offer a more holistic measure of how well-off households are compared to that which is possible when only assessing monetized measures such as consumption, income, or savings (Diener and Seligman 2004).”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESES
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Diener and Seligman 2004 source
In “Economic Indicators Versus Well-Being,” the paper calls money an inexact surrogate for well-being and argues for measuring well-being directly. Its “Conclusions and Cautions” say well-being indicators capture important information missed by economic indicators. The claim’s comparison with relying only on monetary measures is consistent with that argument; the paper advocates supplementing, not replacing, economic indicators. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“background processes of globalization, urbanization, migration, and infrastructure development are enhancing flows of ideas, money, and goods within and between rural and urban areas, leading to livelihoods that are increasingly pluralistic, engaging in both on and off-farm employment, and multilocal, occupying both urban and rural spaces simultaneously”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESES
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Rigg 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Supportedcites Padoch et al. 2008 source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Greiner and Sakdapolrak 2013 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Similarly, throughout the tropics the success of organizations aiming to reduce fire usage has been limited by a failure to frame the problem in ways that make sense to local people (Carmenta et al. 2011, 2013, Clark et al. 2011).”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Implications for improving environmental and agricultural conditions in the Brazilian Amazon
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Carmenta et al. 2011, 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Clark et al. 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In “Use of Knowledge for Decision Support” (page unavailable), the paper says an initial top-down framing of deforestation and slash-and-burn was at odds with realities on the ground, prompting ASB to pursue locally salient priorities. It does not establish that organizations’ success in reducing fire use was limited throughout the tropics by this failure of framing. (LLM, conf=0.85)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Access to machinery differentiated mixed crop-cattle properties from exclusively cattle properties”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Influence of property-household attributes on land use (Q2)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“yet 75% of households earned less than US$10,000 per year from agricultural activities.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Differences in farm income across land uses (Q1)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We find that livestock production, which yields the lowest per hectare incomes, remains the most prevalent land use in remote areas”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and +200% higher returns than soy, staple, and mixed crop production.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Differences in farm income across land uses (Q1)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Households from the South of Brazil who had no machinery and did not receive government extension or belong to agricultural groups were more likely to choose other forms of livestock, e.g., chickens, pigs, or goats, over cattle.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Influence of property-household attributes on land use (Q2)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Farm income was the largest source of income for households in our sample”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Differences in farm income across land uses (Q1)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In fact, 65% of the offfarm income was from rural, not urban, employment opportunities”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > The complex determinants of subjective well-being
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 16
- It may state two separate claims as one. 28
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“The prestige associated with cattle ranching in Amazonia can mask its low returns, creating an informational and cultural barrier to change (Hoelle 2011, Gomes et al. 2012).”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESES
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Hoelle 2011 source
- Disputedcites Gomes et al. 2012 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Political Economy of Cattle Ranching in the Brazilian Amazon (page unavailable) says ranching profitability in the Amazon exceeds that elsewhere in Brazil, contrary to the claim of low returns. The Discussion (page unavailable) describes extractivists learning from ranching neighbors and viewing their improved housing and electricity as evidence of greater wellbeing; it does not describe prestige masking poor returns or creating a barrier to change. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Yet, a majority of the cattle-focused properties in our sample do not have large agricultural areas (< 50 hectares) and still engage in extensive cattle ranching, earning low per hectare incomes relative to cropping.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > The persistence of low-income ranching in Amazonia
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Yet, unlike these studies, we find that fruit and horticulture products grown by households in our sample were largely sold, not gifted, and play a large role in generating income.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > The persistence of low-income ranching in Amazonia
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Land use choices were associated with myriad factors: traditional productive assets (land and machinery), financial capital (government credit), social and knowledge systems (government extension and membership in agricultural associations), region of origin, and proximity to the closest town”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Influence of property-household attributes on land use (Q2)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we find that farmers in our study region are still primarily engaged in farming activities as their dominant source of income, and many successful examples of small-scale farming exist.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Citrus, black pepper, and vegetable production all provide up to 10 times higher returns than other land uses.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > The persistence of low-income ranching in Amazonia
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Specialty, staple, and mixed cropping were significantly more common in small, periurban properties and among households who migrated from the south of Brazil”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Influence of property-household attributes on land use (Q2)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There was no significant difference in per hectare operating costs or labor costs across different land uses”
- Also stated in: § The persistence of low-income ranching in Amazonia · plain
“the per hectare operating and labor costs for cattle properties were not statistically lower that other land uses”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Differences in farm income across land uses (Q1)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § The persistence of low-income ranching in Amazonia · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Neither farm, forest, nor offfarm income or farm expenditures were associated with higher perceived life quality, despite being highly unequal within regions”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Determinants of subjective well-being (Q3)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The low per hectare incomes of cattle properties stemmed from low productivity (0.83 head of cattle per hectare), which in some cases did not even compensate the costs of production.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Differences in farm income across land uses (Q1)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, soy production provides only moderate incomes and sustains itself through economies of scale.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > The persistence of low-income ranching in Amazonia
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“because neither on-or off-farm income were associated with higher perceived life quality.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > The complex determinants of subjective well-being
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“a majority of cattle farms sold only 10% of their heard during 2010 and most herds were comprised largely of calves and juveniles, rather than adult cattle.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > A2.1 Calculation of income and life cycle revenue stream for cattle
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Having a larger farm size and a larger proportion of the farm cleared (a smaller forest reserve) were both associated with higher perceived well-being”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > The complex determinants of subjective well-being
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“most commonly, housecleaning, as found elsewhere in Brazil (da Silva and Del Grossi 2001)”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > The complex determinants of subjective well-being
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites da Silva and Del Grossi 2001 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The most common sale age for cattle in the region is 36 months”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > A2.1 Calculation of income and life cycle revenue stream for cattle
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Feeling secure and liking one's neighbors were strongly associated with higher perceived well-being.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > The complex determinants of subjective well-being
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Sustainable Amazon Network dataset collected ecological data from a stratified random sample of 367 transects distributed across 36 watersheds in the two regions of Santarém and Paragominas.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Data
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“concluding that the relative abundance of these key assets within a particular region plays a pivotal role in determining regional (and intra-household) land use choices.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESES
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although specialty cropping may be a culturally appropriate and potentially economically appealing land use for small farmers located close to urban areas, it will likely remain limited in more remote regions of the Amazon because of inadequate processing, storage, and supply infrastructure and high costs of transportation”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > The persistence of low-income ranching in Amazonia
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the other hand, such a reduction in the prices of fruits and vegetables could benefit the urban poor”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > The persistence of low-income ranching in Amazonia
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Existing theory and empirical analysis from agricultural economics and land change science suggest that current patterns of land use are the aggregate outcome of individual farmers acting to maximize their utility, given the assets they are endowed with (Officer andHalter 1968, Walker 2004).”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESES
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These data were cocollected with socioeconomic survey data from up to 20 randomly selected rural properties within each watershed for a total of 623 households and 499 properties”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Data
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Currently, these ecosystems are critically threatened by agricultural expansion for internationally traded commodities such as soybeans, palm oil, and beef (Hansen et al. 2013).”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Hansen et al. 2013 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“First, extensive cattle ranching is thought to have low and less seasonal labor demands relative to most systems of crop production (Hecht 1993, Muchagata andBrown 2003), particularly nonmechanized fruit and horticulture production (Nepstad et al. 2001).”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESES
What the sources say
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Instead, well-being in the study region is highly influenced by the nonmonetary outcomes associated with a rural lifestyle, including safety and good community relations, and the longer term economic and social benefits associated with the accumulation of land and cattle.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > DISCUSSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the expansion of profitable land uses (horticulture and perennials) continues to be limited by lagging supply chains and the fact that agricultural income is not a primary source of perceived life quality.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Second, in the context of volatile and uncertain land and currency markets, cattle ranching provides a low cost and low risk way to maintain control over a large land area and take advantage of speculative opportunities, while also building up a savings account, via the cattle themselves (Hecht 1993, Bowman et al. 2012, Campbell 2015).”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESES
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The disconnect between the income associated with land uses and its value to farmers may help explain why higher income land uses, specialty and staple cropping, are not associated with higher perceived life quality and why ranching, a low income land use, remains highly prevalent.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > The complex determinants of subjective well-being
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Yet, a majority of the farmers in humid forests remain impoverished, often depending on subsistence agriculture for their livelihoods (Sunderlin et al. 2003).”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Sunderlin et al. 2003
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If access to more distant markets remains limited, then increased local production of fruit and vegetables could outpace growth in demand, leading to a reduction in the price of these goods.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > The persistence of low-income ranching in Amazonia
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The transition to more profitable land uses is limited by lagging supply chain infrastructure, social preferences, and the fact that income associated with land use activities is not a primary source of perceived life quality.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This challenge is especially pronounced in the Brazilian Amazon, where agricultural exports have increased since 2005, yet rural income, education, and health remain well below the national average (Nepstad et al. 2014, Valentim andGarrett 2016).”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Nepstad et al. 2014 source
- Not matchedcites Valentim and Garrett 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Finally, the multinomial logit model has been used in several prior studies to investigate the determinants of land use in the literature (See Chomitz and Gray, 1996;Li et al., 2013;Schuck et al., 2002 as examples).”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > 5 𝑗=1
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chomitz and Gray, 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Li et al., 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Schuck et al., 2002
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The novel environmental governance initiatives present in these regions have engaged local farmers' groups and governments in a discussion around improved land use sustainability and aided our ability to conduct surveys in the region (Gardner et al., 2013).”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > A1.1 Case study selection
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gardner et al., 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, policies based solely on raising incomes may lead to unintended environmental and social consequences, including rebound effects on deforestation and increased social inequality.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Implications for improving environmental and agricultural conditions in the Brazilian Amazon
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we find that opportunities to generate higher income on small properties through specialty cropping exist, but are impeded by lagging supply chain infrastructure.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > CONCLUSIONS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, opportunities to improve the productivity of larger scale ranching through better management are now abundant, but slowed by a lack of machinery and the fact that generating high annual revenues is not the primary objective of cattle ranching as a land use.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > CONCLUSIONS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This diversity in backgrounds, assets, and land uses, both within and between regions, provides an ideal setting for statistical analysis.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > A1.1 Case study selection
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our research suggests that past efforts to promote changes in land use in the Brazilian Amazon have been stymied by a mischaracterization of well-being in purely economic terms and a misunderstanding of the factors that motivate farmers' decisions including social context, nonmonetary objectives, and asset and access limitations.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > CONCLUSIONS
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Agriculture continues to be an important part of rural livelihoods in the Brazilian Amazon, but not necessarily because of its income generating capacity.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Implications for improving environmental and agricultural conditions in the Brazilian Amazon
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“likely because they enable higher overall income and a greater range of land use and speculative possibilities, especially in the context of increasing restrictions on deforestation.”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > The complex determinants of subjective well-being
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
The survey data on household assets, land use, income, and well-being are accurate and valid.
“Farmers were asked to report details on land use for each property during the prior growing season (2009/2010) as well as 2006/2007.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The multinomial logit model assumption that a property-household chooses its land use based on differences in perceived utility, maximizing utility among available alternatives.
“This model assumes that a property-household chooses its land use based on differences in perceived utility, maximizing utility among available alternatives.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The subset of 420 properties with full data on all household assets is representative of the original 499 properties.
“Of the original 499 properties only 420 contained full data on all household assets.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The land use categories based on >75% of agricultural area represent the household's primary land use.
“Each household-property was classified under a mutually exclusive land use category if more than 75% of the agricultural area of their property was allocated to that use.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The interest rate used in the cattle net present value calculation is 5%.
“where r is the interest rate, assumed to be 5%”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Juveniles need on average 12 more months to mature before being sold and calves need 24 more months.
“This calculation assumes that juveniles need on average 12 more months to mature before being sold and calves need 24 more months.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
All male and female cattle are sold rather than being kept for breeding.
“It also assumes that all males and females are sold, rather than being kept for breeding.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Total operating costs for the entire herd are static across all three years.
“Total operating costs for the entire herd are assumed to be static across all three years (C2010) because we lack any method to refine cost estimates in future periods.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Farmers choose their land use strategies seeking to maximize utility (subjective wellbeing) from available alternatives.
“We assume that farmers choose their land use strategies seeking to maximize utility (subjective wellbeing) from available alternatives.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Net benefits for a farmer using an alternative are a deterministic function of the set of conditioning assets owned by the farmer.
“Net benefits, B, for the farmer i using the alternative j (i.e., one of the five land uses) are assumed to be a deterministic function of the set of conditioning assets Z owned by the farmer (Table S1), so 𝐵 𝑖𝑗 (𝑍).”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The farmer will continue to use alternative j so long as the expected utility from j is at least as high as another alternative k.
“It is assumed that the farmer will continue to use alternative j, so long as the expected utility from j is at least as high as another alternative k, such that: 𝑈(𝐵 𝑖𝑗 (𝑍)) ≥ 𝑈(𝐵 𝑖𝑘 (𝑍)) ≥ 0.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The last probability is a nonlinear function G(.) of only Z and the parameters of the linear approximation.
“It is generally assumed (McFadden, 1980;Wooldridge, 2010) that the last probability is a nonlinear function G(.) of only Z and the parameters of the linear approximation, βj, j=1,…7, which can be subsumed to a J-column matrix, β, such that P(y = j|Z) = G(Z,β).”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The relationship between each pair of life quality outcome groups is the same.
“This model assumes that the relationship between each pair of life quality outcome groups (e.g. 1 to 2 and 2 to 3) is the same.”
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 cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Indeed, smallholders in the Brazilian Amazon are known to sometimes pursue ranching even when more profitable land-use alternatives exist (Garrett et al., 2017).”
From Beyond the “supply chain” framing: Cattle ranching as a vanishing mediator of deforestation and dispossession in the Brazilian and Colombian Amazon (2026) · cites this paper as Garrett et al., 2017
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated major: it would touch a result — a value a result rests on, reported and recomputed p-values on opposite sides of the significance level, two passages that conflict with no sign which is right, or a cited work retracted before this paper was published.
In the paper
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > 3. Determinants of subjective wellbeing
“lowest among households specializing in cattle (US$372) and noncattle (US$195) livestock production.Soy properties earn moderate incomes (US$926).”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > 3. Determinants of subjective wellbeing
“Table A3.3:Per hectare farm income by land use Mean SD (US$) (US$) Other-Livestock (n=22) 195 198 Cattle (n=134) 250 1,202 Cattle-Crop (n=33) 518 872 Soy (n=21) 1,002 477”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Additional information
“Origin-Southeast -0.13** -0.04 -0.09* 0.03 0.38***”
§ Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon > Additional information
“Defn.Title -0.03 -0.08 0.03 0.03 0.21*** -0.09”
Citations
Cites
Yaşlı Kadınlarda Üreme Sağlığı
Kokanalı, D., & Engin Üstün, Y. (n.d.) · DergiPark (Istanbul University) · Cited by 170,090
(2001) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 27,577
High-Resolution Global Maps of 21st-Century Forest Cover Change
Hansen, M. C., Potapov, P. V., Moore, R., Hancher, M., Turubanova, S. A., Tyukavina, A., Thau, D., Stehman, S. V., Goetz, S. J., Loveland, T. R., et al. (2013) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1244693 · Cited by 11,704
(2023) · doi:10.1126/science · Cited by 6,063
Signals from Chloroplasts Converge to Regulate Nuclear Gene Expression
Koussevitzky, S., Nott, A., Mockler, T. C., Hong, F., Sachetto‐Martins, G., Surpin, M. A., Lim, J. C.-S., Mittler, R., & Chory, J. (2007) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1140516 · Cited by 5,765
Proximate Causes and Underlying Driving Forces of Tropical Deforestation
GEIST, H. J., & LAMBIN, E. F. (2002) · BioScience · doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0143:pcaudf]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 3,123
Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: A Framework for Analysis
Scoones, I. (1998) · OpenDocs (Institute of Development Studies) · Cited by 3,099
Beyond money: toward an economy of well-being
Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.00501001.x · Cited by 2,555
Bebbington, A. (1999) · World Development · doi:10.1016/s0305-750x(99)00104-7 · Cited by 2,182
Understanding and promoting adoption of conservation practices by rural landholders
Pannell, D. J., Marshall, G. R., Barr, N., Curtis, A. L., Vanclay, F. M., & Wilkinson, R. (2006) · Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture · doi:10.1071/ea05037 · Cited by 1,467
The Determinants of Rural Livelihood Diversification in Developing Countries
Ellis, F. (2000) · Journal of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/j.1477-9552.2000.tb01229.x · Cited by 1,312
Slowing Amazon deforestation through public policy and interventions in beef and soy supply chains
Nepstad, D., McGrath, D., Stickler, C., Alencar, A., Azevedo, A., Swette, B., Bezerra, T., DiGiano, M., Shimada, J., Seroa da Motta, R., et al. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1248525 · Cited by 1,202
Livelihoods, forests, and conservation in developing countries: An Overview
Sunderlin, W. D., Angelsen, A., Belcher, B., Burgers, P., Nasi, R., Santoso, L., & Wunder, S. (2005) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2004.10.004 · Cited by 1,018
Land, farming, livelihoods, and poverty: Rethinking the links in the Rural South
Rigg, J. D. (2005) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2005.07.015 · Cited by 784
Road paving, fire regime feedbacks, and the future of Amazon forests
Nepstad, D., Carvalho, G., Cristina Barros, A., Alencar, A., Paulo Capobianco, J., Bishop, J., Moutinho, P., Lefebvre, P., Lopes Silva, U., & Prins, E. (2001) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/s0378-1127(01)00511-4 · Cited by 712
Gibbs, H. K., Rausch, L., Munger, J., Schelly, I., Morton, D. C., Noojipady, P., Soares-Filho, B., Barreto, P., Micol, L., & Walker, N. F. (2015) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aaa0181 · Cited by 676
Subjective well-being and its determinants in rural China
Knight, J. B., Song, L., & Gunatilaka, R. (2008) · China Economic Review · doi:10.1016/j.chieco.2008.09.003 · Cited by 674
Poverty Alleviation and Tropical Forests—What Scope for Synergies?
Wunder, S. (2001) · World Development · doi:10.1016/s0305-750x(01)00070-5 · Cited by 625
Clark, W. C., Tomich, T. P., van Noordwijk, M., Guston, D., Catacutan, D., Dickson, N. M., & McNie, E. (2016) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0900231108 · Cited by 568
Exploring the forest--poverty link: key concepts, issues and research implications
A., A., & S., W. (2003) · doi:10.17528/cifor/001211 · Cited by 554
Translocality: Concepts, Applications and Emerging Research Perspectives
Greiner, C., & Sakdapolrak, P. (2013) · Geography Compass · doi:10.1111/gec3.12048 · Cited by 538
The Future of Small Farms: Trajectories and Policy Priorities
Hazell, P., Poulton, C., Wiggins, S., & Dorward, A. (2010) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2009.06.012 · Cited by 516
Motivations, risk perceptions and adoption of conservation practices by farmers
Greiner, R., Patterson, L., & Miller, O. (2008) · Agricultural Systems · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2008.10.003 · Cited by 449
Urban Environments: Issues on the Peri-Urban Fringe
Simon, D. (2008) · Annual Review of Environment and Resources · doi:10.1146/annurev.environ.33.021407.093240 · Cited by 438
Rural household demographics, livelihoods and the environment
de Sherbinin, A., VanWey, L. K., McSweeney, K., Aggarwal, R., Barbieri, A. F., Henry, S. J. F., Hunter, L. M., Twine, W. C., & Walker, R. (2007) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2007.05.005 · Cited by 437
Resilience, Adaptive Capacity, and the "Lock-in Trap" of the Western Australian Agricultural Region
Allison, H. E., & Hobbs, R. J. (2004) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-00641-090103 · Cited by 386
Deforestation and Cattle Ranching in the Brazilian Amazon: External Capital and Household Processes
Walker, R., Moran, E., & Anselin, L. (2000) · World Development · doi:10.1016/s0305-750x(99)00149-7 · Cited by 350
Padoch, C., Brondizio, E., Costa, S., Pinedo-Vasquez, M., Sears, R. R., & Siqueira, A. (2008) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-02526-130202 · Cited by 306
Gibbs, H. K., Munger, J., L'Roe, J., Barreto, P., Pereira, R., Christie, M., Amaral, T., & Walker, N. F. (2016) · Conservation Letters · doi:10.1111/conl.12175 · Cited by 301
Vulnerability, poverty and the need for sustainable adaptation measures
ERIKSEN, S. H., & O'BRIEN, K. (2007) · Climate Policy · doi:10.1080/14693062.2007.9685660 · Cited by 284
Bowman, M. S., Soares-Filho, B. S., Merry, F. D., Nepstad, D. C., Rodrigues, H., & Almeida, O. T. (2012) · Land Use Policy · doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.09.009 · Cited by 282
The Logic of Livestock and Deforestation in Amazonia
Hecht, S. B. (1993) · BioScience · doi:10.2307/1312340 · Cited by 271
Deforestation and land use in the Brazilian Amazon
Moran, E. F. (1993) · Human Ecology · doi:10.1007/bf00890069 · Cited by 250
Dinham, B. (2003) · Pest Management Science · doi:10.1002/ps.654 · Cited by 248
Gardner, T. A., Ferreira, J., Barlow, J., Lees, A. C., Parry, L., Vieira, I. C. G., Berenguer, É., Abramovay, R., Aleixo, A. L. P., Andretti, C. B., et al. (2013) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2012.0166 · Cited by 217
Self-citationSubjective well-being povertyvs. Income poverty and capabilities poverty?
Kingdon, G., & Knight, J. (2006) · The Journal of Development Studies · doi:10.1080/00220380600884167 · Cited by 214
Adoption and development of integrated crop–livestock–forestry systems in Mato Grosso, Brazil
Gil, J., Siebold, M., & Berger, T. (2015) · Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment · doi:10.1016/j.agee.2014.10.008 · Cited by 185
Theorizing Land-Cover and Land-Use Change: The Case of Tropical Deforestation
Walker, R. (2004) · International Regional Science Review · doi:10.1177/0160017604266026 · Cited by 172
Exchange rates, soybean supply response, and deforestation in South America
Richards, P. D., Myers, R. J., Swinton, S. M., & Walker, R. T. (2012) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.01.004 · Cited by 169
Wages and Unemployment in a Poor Agrarian Economy: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis
Bardhan, P. (1979) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/260774 · Cited by 159
Garrett, R. D., Lambin, E. F., & Naylor, R. L. (2013) · Land Use Policy · doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.03.011 · Cited by 154
Self-citationElinor Ostrom, B. (2009) · Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks · doi:10.4337/9781848445963.00010 · Cited by 152
Household demographic factors as life cycle determinants of land use in the Amazon
Perz, S. G. (2001) · Population Research and Policy Review · doi:10.1023/a:1010658719768 · Cited by 149
Utility Analysis in a Practical Setting
Officer, R. R., & Halter, A. N. (1968) · American Journal of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.2307/1237541 · Cited by 132
Conjuring Property: Speculation and Environmental Futures in the Brazilian Amazon
Baletti, B. (2016) · The AAG Review of Books · doi:10.1080/2325548x.2016.1222824 · Cited by 130
House-lot gardens in Santarém, Pará, Brazil: Linking rural with urban
WinklerPrins, A. M. G. A. (2002) · Urban Ecosystems · doi:10.1023/a:1025914629492 · Cited by 127
Socioeconomic development and agricultural intensification in Mato Grosso
VanWey, L. K., Spera, S. A., de, R., Mahr, D., & Mustard, J. F. (2013) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2012.0168 · Cited by 125
Surviving the City: Urban Home Gardens and the Economy of Affection in the Brazilian Amazon
Winklerprins, A. M. G. A., & de Souza, P. S. (2005) · Journal of Latin American geography · doi:10.1353/lag.2005.0033 · Cited by 124
Supplying vegetables to Asian cities: is there a case for peri-urban production?
Midmore, D. J., & Jansen, H. G. P. (2003) · Food Policy · doi:10.1016/s0306-9192(02)00067-2 · Cited by 122
Post-Crackdown Effectiveness of Field-Based Forest Law Enforcement in the Brazilian Amazon
Börner, J., Kis‐Katos, K., Hargrave, J., & König, K. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0121544 · Cited by 119
Wollni, M., & Brümmer, B. (2011) · Food Policy · doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2011.11.004 · Cited by 113
Wildlife Harvest and Consumption in Amazonia's Urbanized Wilderness
Parry, L., Barlow, J., & Pereira, H. (2014) · Conservation Letters · doi:10.1111/conl.12151 · Cited by 112
Self-citationDevelopment Conditions for Family Farming: Lessons From Brazil
Medina, G., Almeida, C., Novaes, E., Godar, J., & Pokorny, B. (2015) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.05.023 · Cited by 112
Nonpecuniary Benefits to Farming: Implications for Supply Response to Decoupled Payments
Key, N., & Roberts, M. J. (2008) · American Journal of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8276.2008.01180.x · Cited by 102
Rural Nonfarm Employment and Incomes in Brazil: Patterns and Evolution
Graziano da Silva, J., & Eduardo Del Grossi, M. (2001) · World Development · doi:10.1016/s0305-750x(00)00103-0 · Cited by 97
Shifting Cultivation and Fire Policy: Insights from the Brazilian Amazon
Carmenta, R., Vermeylen, S., Parry, L., & Barlow, J. (2013) · Human Ecology · doi:10.1007/s10745-013-9600-1 · Cited by 97
Self-citation(2015) · University of Washington Press eBooks · Cited by 93
Export-oriented deforestation in Mato Grosso: harbinger or exception for other tropical forests?
DeFries, R., Herold, M., Verchot, L. V., Macedo, M. N., & Shimabukuro, Y. E. (2013) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2012.0173 · Cited by 89
Carmenta, R., Parry, L., Blackburn, A., Vermeylen, S., & Barlow, J. (2011) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-03950-160153 · Cited by 85
Self-citationPacheco, P. (2012) · Geoforum · doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2012.02.003 · Cited by 84
Hecht, S. B., Yang, A. L., Sijapati Basnett, B., Padoch, C., & Peluso, N. L. (2015) · doi:10.17528/cifor/005762 · Cited by 77
(2003) · Cited by 71
Subjective Wellbeing in China: A Review
Davey, G., & Rato, R. (2011) · Journal of Happiness Studies · doi:10.1007/s10902-011-9266-6 · Cited by 66
Jonasson, E., & Helfand, S. M. (2009) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2009.11.020 · Cited by 64
Camfield, L. (2006) · UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) · Cited by 58
Beckley, T. M. (1995) · Society & Natural Resources · doi:10.1080/08941929509380919 · Cited by 56
Cows, colonists and trees: rethinking cattle and environmental degradation in Brazilian Amazonia
Muchagata, M., & Brown, K. (2003) · Agricultural Systems · doi:10.1016/s0308-521x(02)00015-x · Cited by 52
Soybean and oil palm expansion in South America: a review of main trends and implications
Pacheco, P. (2012) · doi:10.17528/cifor/003776 · Cited by 44
Gomes, C. V. A., Perz, S. G., & Vadjunec, J. M. (2012) · Journal of Latin American Geography · doi:10.1353/lag.2012.0018 · Cited by 38
Pereira, R., Simmons, C., & Walker, R. (2016) · Land · doi:10.3390/land5030024 · Cited by 36
Hoelle, J. (2011) · Culture, Agriculture, Food and Environment · doi:10.1111/j.2153-9561.2011.01053.x · Cited by 27
Searching for a Better Life: Peri‐Urban Migration in Western Para State, Brazil
Macdonald, T., & Winklerprins, A. M. G. A. (2014) · Geographical Review · doi:10.1111/j.1931-0846.2014.12027.x · Cited by 27
Convergent Agrarian Frontiers in the Settlement of Mato Grosso, Brazil
Rausch, L. L. (2014) · Historical geography · Cited by 21
(2017) · University of Texas Press eBooks · Cited by 21
Soybeans, poverty and inequality in the Brazilian Amazon
Weinhold, D., Killick, E., & Reis, E. J. (2013) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2012.11.016 · Cited by 20
Participatory Extension as Basis for the Work of Rural Extension Services in the Amazon
Pokorny, B., Cayres, G., & Nunes, W. (2005) · Agriculture and Human Values · doi:10.1007/s10460-005-3398-4 · Cited by 19
Cooperativism and Agroforestry in the Eastern Amazon: The Case of Tomé-Açu
Piekielek, J. (2010) · Latin American Perspectives · doi:10.1177/0094582x10382097 · Cited by 18
Cattle in the Backlands: Mato Grosso and the Evolution of Ranching in the Brazilian Tropics
Kauffman, J. B. (2018) · Hispanic American Historical Review · doi:10.1215/00182168-4380039 · Cited by 17
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- da Silva, J. G. 2009. Zero hunger and territories of citizenship: promoting food security in Brazil's rural areas. Pages 367-374 in J. von Braun, R. Vargas Hill, R. Pandya-Lorch, editors. The poorest and hungry: assessments, analyses and actions. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, D.C., USA.
- Reardon, T., and S. A. Vosti. 1995. Links between rural poverty and the environment in developing countries: asset categories and investment poverty. World Development 23(9):1495-1506. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(95)00061-G Ribot, J. C., and N. L. Peluso. 2003. A theory of access. Rural Sociology 68:153-181. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1549-0831.2003. · DOI
- Valentim, J., and R. Garrett. 2016. Promoção do Bem-Estar dos Produtores Familiares com uso de Sistemas de Produção Agropecuários e Florestais de Baixo Carbono no Bioma Amazônia. Pages 73-98 in A. A. Azevedo, M. Campanili, and C. Pereira, editors. Caminhos para uma Agricultura Familiar sob Bases Ecológicas: Produzindo com Baixa Emissão de Carbono. Instituto de Pesquisa Ambiental da Amazônia, Belém, Brasil.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The drivers and impacts of Amazon forest degradation
Lapola, D. M., Pinho, P., Barlow, J., Aragão, L. E. O. C., Berenguer, E., Carmenta, R., Liddy, H. M., Seixas, H., Silva, C. V. J., Silva-Junior, C. H. L., et al. (2023) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abp8622 · Cited by 630
Self-citationMiddle-range theories of land system change
Meyfroidt, P., Roy Chowdhury, R., de Bremond, A., Ellis, E. C., Erb, K.-H., Filatova, T., Garrett, R. D., Grove, J. M., Heinimann, A., Kuemmerle, T., et al. (2018) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.08.006 · Cited by 604
Self-citationDisentangling the numbers behind agriculture-driven tropical deforestation
Pendrill, F., Gardner, T. A., Meyfroidt, P., Persson, U. M., Adams, J., Azevedo, T., Bastos Lima, M. G., Baumann, M., Curtis, P. G., De Sy, V., et al. (2022) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abm9267 · Cited by 572
Self-citationGarrett, R. D., Koh, I., Lambin, É. F., de Waroux, Y. L. P., Kastens, J. H., & Brown, J. C. (2018) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.09.011 · Cited by 268
Self-citationWhy Brazil needs its Legal Reserves
Metzger, J. P., Bustamante, M., Ferreira, J., Fernandes, G. W., Librán‐Embid, F., Pillar, V. D., Prist, P. R., Rodrigues, R. R., Vieira, I. C. G., & Overbeck, G. E. (2019) · Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.pecon.2019.07.002 · Cited by 248
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Garrett, R. D., Gardner, T. A., Morello, T. F., Marchand, S., Barlow, J., Ezzine de Blas, D., Ferreira, J., Lees, A. C., & Parry, L.
- Affiliations
- Boston University (US)
- Stockholm Environment Institute (SE)
- Universidade Federal do ABC (BR)
- Lancaster University (GB)
- Embrapa (BR)
- Manchester Metropolitan University (GB)
- Universidade Federal do Pará (BR)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Ecology and Society
- Publisher
- Resilience Alliance, Inc.
- Published
- 2017
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 3
- ISSN
- 1708-3087 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2749354405
- Cited by
- 140
- References
- 76
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 8.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc
- Locations
- Ecology and Society (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- e-space (Manchester Metropolitan University) (acceptedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion)
- Agritrop (Cirad) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- OpenBU (Boston University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (1415352)
- Harvard University
- Government of the United Kingdom
- Nature Conservancy (NE/F01614X/1)
- Svenska Forskningsrådet Formas (2013‐1571)
- Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (02.08.06.005.00, SEG:02.08.06.005.00)
- Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq 574008/2008-0, 574008/2008-0, 400640/2012-0, 574008/2008)
- Economic and Social Research Council (ES/M011542, ES/K010018/1, ES/M011542/1)
- Natural Environment Research Council (NE/K016431/1, NE/G000816/1, NE/M017508/1, NE/l018123/1, NE/F015356/2, NE/F01614X/1)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
- Social Sciences › Development › Agriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Land Rights and Reforms
- Keywords
- Brazilian Amazon, deforestation, land use change, poverty, environmental degradation
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-03, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-03 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
