↓ Skip to main content

Whose Knowledge, Whose Development? Use and Role of Local and External Knowledge in Agroforestry Projects in Bolivia

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Management, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
228 Mendeley
Title
Whose Knowledge, Whose Development? Use and Role of Local and External Knowledge in Agroforestry Projects in Bolivia
Published in
Environmental Management, December 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00267-016-0805-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Johanna Jacobi, Sarah-Lan Mathez-Stiefel, Helen Gambon, Stephan Rist, Miguel Altieri

Abstract

Agroforestry often relies on local knowledge, which is gaining recognition in development projects. However, how local knowledge can articulate with external and scientific knowledge is little known. Our study explored the use and integration of local and external knowledge in agroforestry projects in Bolivia. In 42 field visits and 62 interviews with agroforestry farmers, civil society representatives, and policymakers, we found a diverse knowledge base. We examined how local and external knowledge contribute to livelihood assets and tree and crop diversity. Projects based predominantly on external knowledge tended to promote a single combination of tree and crop species and targeted mainly financial capital, whereas projects with a local or mixed knowledge base tended to focus on food security and increased natural capital (e.g., soil restoration) and used a higher diversity of trees and crops than those with an external knowledge base. The integration of different forms of knowledge can enable farmers to better cope with new challenges emerging as a result of climate change, fluctuating market prices for cash crops, and surrounding destructive land use strategies such as uncontrolled fires and aerial fumigation with herbicides. However, many projects still tended to prioritize external knowledge and undervalue local knowledge-a tendency that has long been institutionalized in the formal educational system and in extension services. More dialogue is needed between different forms of knowledge, which can be promoted by strengthening local organizations and their networks, reforming agricultural educational institutions, and working in close interaction with policymakers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 228 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 228 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 33 14%
Researcher 32 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 11%
Student > Bachelor 18 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 7%
Other 37 16%
Unknown 68 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 42 18%
Environmental Science 30 13%
Social Sciences 24 11%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 7 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 3%
Other 33 14%
Unknown 86 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 February 2017.
All research outputs
#3,343,314
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Management
#224
of 1,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,098
of 421,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Management
#3
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,914 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,608 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.