CorText Manager around the world

@article{Miara2023,

title = {Animal traction in developed countries: The reappropriation of a past practice through agroecological transition},

author = {M. Miara and P. Boudes and T. Rabier and M. Gafsi},

url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0743016723001900},

doi = {/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2023.103124},

issn = {0743-0167},

year  = {2023},

date = {2023-09-15},

urldate = {2023-09-15},

journal = {Journal of Rural Studies},

volume = {103},

pages = {103124},

abstract = {As part of the current agroecological transition, animal traction in agriculture is benefiting from an increased focus in developed countries. However, the practice is struggling to gain recognition from research, institutions and the agricultural profession. This article aims to analyze how animal traction is treated in developed countries, and to assess the extent to which it could be considered an agroecological practice. We analyze animal traction as a scientific object and a socio-professional movement. Our methodology is based on a review of scientific literature and an analysis of the French general press. The various studies show that animal traction has advantages in terms of energy, economics and agronomy. It tends to be developed by alternative movements and farmers motivated by a desire to redesign our food systems. Both scientific and press reviews show a renewed positive interest in animal traction. Although these reviews highlight its agroecological potential, the practice is facing difficulties in gaining recognition. The findings of this article are of obvious interest to rural development researchers and policy makers. They help the former to explore new issues in the return of animal traction, and the latter to better understand the development factors of this practice.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Loconto2023,

title = {Innovations for Sustainable Food Systems: Focusing on Agroecology and Participatory Guarantee Systems},

author = {Allison Marie Loconto and Francisco Garrido-Garza and Ivan Dufeu},

url = {https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/arfe/59/1/59_37/_article/-char/ja/

https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/arfe/59/1/59_37/_pdf/-char/ja},

doi = {10.7310/arfe.59.37},

issn = {2185-9973},

year  = {2023},

date = {2023-03-01},

urldate = {2023-03-01},

journal = {Journal of Rural Problems},

volume = {59},

number = {1},

pages = {37-44},

abstract = {While organic agriculture has created a set of institutions that allow producers to know which practices provide “organic” quality and allow consumers to recognize it via an on-package label, the landscape of agroecological products is quite fluid and diverse. Often, products are traded directly between producers and consumers and quality is conveyed verbally. However, there has been a general increase in the use of private labels to claim that products are agroecological or “more than organic”. This article explores these recent innovations by asking: How does agroecology become a product quality claim in innovative forms of quality control? To answer this question, data on labels claiming to be “agroecological” and related assurance systems were gathered through internet research, market monitoring and semi-structured interviews in the European Union. In this article we explore the range of claims, and control networks, used to characterize the so-called “agroecological” labels and confront them with FAO’s 10 principles of agroecology. This 27-country comparison offers interesting insights into the overlaps and boundaries between agroecology and organic agriculture in terms of the markets that are created.},

note = {農林業問題研究},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Lascialfari2022,

title = {Unpacking research lock-in through a diachronic analysis of topic cluster trajectories in scholarly publications},

author = {Matteo Lascialfari and Marie-Benoît Magrini and Guillaume Cabanac},

url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-022-04514-3

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11192-022-04514-3.pdf?pdf=button%20sticky},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04514-3},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-11-01},

urldate = {2022-11-01},

journal = {Scientometrics},

volume = {127},

abstract = {Lock-in and path-dependency are well-known concepts in economics dealing with unbalanced development of alternative options. Lock-in was studied in various sectors, considering production or consumption sides. Lock-in in academic research went little addressed. Yet, science develops through knowledge accumulation and cross-fertilisation of research topics, that could lead to similar phenomena when some topics do not sufficiently benefit from accumulation mechanisms, reducing innovation opportunities from the concerned field consequently. We introduce an original method to explore these phenomena by comparing topic trajectories in research fields according to strong or weak accumulative processes over time. We combine the concepts of ‘niche’ and ‘mainstream’ from transition studies with scientometric tools to revisit Callon’s strategic diagram with a diachronic perspective of topic clusters over time. Considering the trajectories of semantic clusters, derived from titles and authors’ keywords extracted from scholarly publications in the Web of Science, we applied our method to two competing research fields in food sciences and technology related to pulses and soya over the last 60 years worldwide. These highly interesting species for the sustainability of agrifood systems experienced unbalanced development and thus is under-debated. Our analysis confirms that food research for soya was more dynamic than for pulses: soya topic clusters revealed a stronger accumulative research path by cumulating mainstream positions while pulses research did not meet the same success. This attempt to unpack research lock-in for evaluating the competition dynamics of scientific fields over time calls for future works, by strengthening the method and testing it on other research fields.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Malanski2022b,

title = {International research on labor in agri-food value chains: A bibliometric review from web of science},

author = {Priscila Duarte Malanski and Sandra Mara de Alencar Schiavi and Benoît Dedieu and Julio Cesar Damasceno},

url = {https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03833144/document},

doi = {https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2022.852178},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-09-01},

urldate = {2022-09-01},

journal = {Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems},

volume = {6},

pages = {852178},

abstract = {Value chains are an important driver for the current labor dynamics in the agri-food sector, and agri-food value chain sustainability strongly depends on decent work conditions. An increasing literature body have been investigated the interactions between chain agents and how it impacted labor issues. Our aim was to map the scientific landscape of the scientific knowledge on labor in agri-food value chains. We performed a bibliometric review of 343 articles indexed in the Web of Science based on descriptive and network analysis of articles metadata, which covered authors, journals, citation times, keywords and countries. We showed that labor in agri-food value chains has an international audience, despite that knowledge production was largely built by a restraint leading scientific network. Overall, the scientific knowledge is organized into four main research domains on labor in agri-food value chains: (1) labor governance in global value chains through standards, (2) employment in value chains and impacts on socioeconomic conditions of rural areas, (3) gender issues and value chains, (4) labor and upgrading in global value chains. The controversies in the international literature regarding labor issues in the agri-food value chains, and blind spots of current research are discussed.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Wezel2018b,

title = {Agroecology in Europe: Research, Education, Collective Action Networks, and Alternative Food Systems},

author = {Alexander Wezel and Julia Goette and Elisabeth Lagneaux and Gloria Passuello and Erica Reisman and Christophe Rodier and Grégoire Turpin},

url = {https://doi.org/10.3390/su10041214},

doi = {10.3390/su10041214},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-04-17},

urldate = {2018-04-17},

journal = {Sustainability},

volume = {10},

number = {4},

pages = {1214},

abstract = {Agroecology is considered with different focus and weight in different parts of the world as a social and political movement, as science, and as practice. Despite its multitude of definitions, agroecology has begun in Europe to develop in different regional, national and continental networks of researchers, practitioners, advocates and movements. However, there is a lack of a comprehensive overview about these different developments and networks. Therefore, this paper attempts to document and provide a mapping of the development of European agroecology in its diverse forms. Through a literature review, interviews, active conference participation, and an extensive internet search we have collected information about the current state and development of agroecology in Europe. Agroecological research and higher education exist more in western and northern Europe, but farm schools and farmer-to-farmer training are also present in other regions. Today a large variety of topics are studied at research institutions. There is an increasing number of bottom-up agroecological initiatives and national or continental networks and movements. Important movements are around food sovereignty, access to land and seeds. Except for France, there are very few concrete policies for agroecology in Europe. Agroecology is increasingly linked to different fields of agri-food systems. This includes Community Supported Agriculture systems, but also agroecological territories, and some examples of labelling products. To amplify agroecology in Europe in the coming years, policy development will be crucial and proponents of agroecology must join forces and work hand-in-hand with the many stakeholders engaged in initiatives to develop more sustainable agriculture and food systems. View Full-Text},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}