↓ Skip to main content

Cultural evolution and US agricultural institutions: a historical case study of Maine’s blueberry industry

Overview of attention for article published in Sustainability Science, November 2017
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 (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
Cultural evolution and US agricultural institutions: a historical case study of Maine’s blueberry industry
Published in
Sustainability Science, November 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11625-017-0508-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samuel P. Hanes, Timothy M. Waring

Abstract

This paper presents a study of the emergence of environmental management institutions in Maine's blueberry industry. We follow a cultural evolutionary approach to understand the factors that influenced the emergence of these institutions in environmental collective action problems. Specifically, we use a cultural multilevel selection framework to explore the prediction that collective action and institutions of environmental management emerge when cultural selection is the strongest among social groups positioned to solve a given collective action problem. To do this, we construct an evidence typology suited for a historical evolutionary analysis. We find that the scale of cultural adaptation responded to scale of the most pressing adaptive problem. The case study provides support for the group-level selection theory of institutional evolution, and displays patterns of institutional adaptation that respond to changing conditions over time. We argue that the dominant level of selection concept in multilevel selection theory helps to clarify how matches and mismatches between resource scale and institutional scale arise. We conclude that cultural evolutionary theory provides a general causal framework for organizing evidence, and complements the study of environmental history, which provides the temporal depth needed to examine evolutionary hypotheses.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users 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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 32%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 21%
Lecturer 2 11%
Other 1 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 4 21%
Unknown 1 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 26%
Social Sciences 3 16%
Environmental Science 2 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Other 3 16%
Unknown 4 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 15 April 2018.
All research outputs
#2,144,756
of 23,007,887 outputs
Outputs from Sustainability Science
#220
of 801 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,337
of 326,841 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sustainability Science
#6
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,887 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 801 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 326,841 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.