DOCSLIB.ORG

A Surveybased Journal Ranking by Agricultural Economists

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Surveybased Journal Ranking by Agricultural Economists Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 62, No. 3, 2011, 710–732 doi: 10.1111/j.1477-9552.2011.00308.x Going Beyond Impact Factors: A Survey-based Journal Ranking by Agricultural Economists Roland Herrmann, Ernst Berg, Stephan Dabbert, Siegfried Po¨chtrager and Klaus Salhofer1 (Original submitted March 2010, revision received August 2010, accepted April 2011.) Abstract A consistent and comprehensive ranking of journals relevant for agricultural economists cannot rely on impact factors for at least two major reasons: (i) the scientific database by Thomson Reuters, on which the standard impact factor is based, includes only a very limited number of relevant journals; (ii) the standard impact factor cannot be compared across research fields of different sizes. Survey-based journal rankings may overcome these problems. We report on such a survey-based ranking initiated by the Agricultural Economics Associations of Germany and Austria. Results of the ranking and a classification of journals, i.e. a rating, are provided for 160 selected journals. Scientific quality is assessed by an index based on the researchers’ perception of the quality standards of each journal and of the quality of its published articles. The survey-based ranking allows a much more comprehensive and consistent ranking than the impact factor, as specific agricultural economics journals can be directly compared with neighbouring economic and interdisciplinary journals to which agricultural econo- mists submit their work. The low impact factors of core agricultural economics journals are put into perspective. The scientific quality of the top agricultural economics journals is assessed as being rather high and above most of the 1 Roland Herrmann is with the Institute of Agricultural Policy and Market Research, Univer- sity of Giessen, Germany. E-mail: [email protected] for correspon- dence. Ernst Berg is with the Institute for Food and Resource Economics, University of Bonn, Germany. Stephan Dabbert is with the Department of Farm Management, University of Hohenheim, Germany. Siegfried Po¨chtrager is with the Institute for Marketing and Inno- vation, BOKU, Vienna, Austria. Klaus Salhofer is with the Enviromental and Agricultural Policy Group, Technische Universitaet, Muenchen, Germany. We thank David Harvey and three anonymous referees for their very helpful and detailed comments and suggestions. Thanks are due to the Gesellschaft fu¨r Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e. V. (GEWISOLA) and O¨sterreichische Gesellschaft fu¨r Agraro¨konomie (O¨GA) for financial support and members of both associations for their participation in the survey. Very helpful research assistance by Marco Huigen, who edited the data in a data bank, and by Matthias Staudigel and Sascha Weber in the statistical analysis is greatly appreciated. Ó 2011 The Agricultural Economics Society. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK, and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA. Ranking of Journals Relevant for Agricultural Economists 711 relevant interdisciplinary journals from agricultural and food sciences that are typically characterised by higher impact factors. Agricultural economists’ percep- tions on the scientific quality of the journals vary more across journals than perceptions of their relevance. Keywords: Agricultural economics; Germany and Austria; impact factor; journal ranking; survey-based evaluation. JEL classifications: A11, A12, D19. 1. Introduction Evaluations of scientific performance have become widespread and more frequent, and the results of such evaluations are often crucial for the allocation of human and other resources within the research system. In this context, publications (journal articles, monographs, book chapters, etc.) are certainly the single most important output, particularly in the social sciences. A critical appraisal of this type of output requires the measurement of both quantity and quality, where the latter refers to the intellectual influence of the publications. Ideally, a careful and comprehensive quality assessment should be based on the contents and methodology of the work an individual or an institution has published. However, this procedure is time- consuming and complex and is not practical in all cases. Given that journal review systems aim to assure a certain quality standard, journal quality could serve as a proxy judgement of the quality of articles published in it. This leads to journal rankings that have gained notable interest. In the scientific community and within universities and research institutions, publications in high-quality peer-reviewed journals are seen today as the most important dimension of the overall output of researchers, institutes or faculties. Assessing the scientific quality of journals can be based on expert judgements obtained from primary surveys, on bibliometric analyses of secondary databases or on a combination of both (Jokic and Ball, 2006). In the majority of cases, the bibliometric approach is used, based typically on citation analysis (Moed, 2005) and assuming that the number of citations is positively correlated with the quality of the cited articles. The standard impact factor (Garfield, 1972, 1994) is the most widespread among the indices of citation analysis. Its calculation relies on citation databases established and maintained originally by the International Scientific Institute (ISI) and now by Thomson Reuters. Impact factors are computed regularly from the Thomson Scientific database and reported annually in the company’s Journal Citation Report (JCR). The pros and cons of the impact factor have been widely debated. In the disci- plines of biology, medical sciences, chemistry and physics, which all enjoy excellent coverage of journals in the ISI database (Moed, 2005, p. 138), the impact factor has been the most important indicator for many years, and is often viewed as ‘a reason- able indicator of quality’ if used for a comparison of scientific journals within one of these disciplines (Saha et al., 2003). Some publications are much more critical, however, and stress conceptual weaknesses (Jemec, 2001), and some even recom- mend that the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research (Seglen, 1997). In particular, journal impact factors depend on a number of deter- minants that are unrelated to journal quality. The following drawbacks of the Ó 2011 The Agricultural Economics Society. 712 Roland Herrmann et al. impact factor are the most pronounced: (i) impact factors differ widely according to the size of a research field (Althouse et al., 2009); the larger the number of journals included in the JCR database, the higher the impact factors of top journals in that field; (ii) impact factors tend to be higher in rapidly growing fields, where the turnover time between journal submission and publication is short, and references are only short-lived. Both arguments imply that impact factors should not be com- pared across disciplines in fields of study, because such comparisons would yield wide differences across those fields (Althouse et al., 2009) with, for example, lower impact factors in agricultural economics than in biotechnology or microbiology. One option to circumvent the disadvantages of the standard impact factor in assessing journal quality is to improve citation analysis and to derive superior indices. Examples are weighted impact factors as suggested by some authors (Jemec, 2001; Habibzadeh and Yadollahie, 2008), the h-index and its variants (http://sci2s. ugr.es/hindex/), the eigenfactor (http://www.eigenfactor.org/) and advanced statisti- cal indicators developed in the general economics literature on journal quality (e.g. Ritzberger, 2008). With regard to journals that are relevant for agricultural economists, however, it is more difficult to apply sophisticated citation analyses using these improved methods. Although general economics has a ‘good’ coverage in the JCR database (Moed, 2005, p. 138), agricultural economics has not. An impact factor was provided by Thomson Reuters for only nine journals in the cate- gory ‘Agricultural Economics and Policy’ up to 2008 and 11 as from 2009.2 Other well-established or new agricultural economics journals are not covered, such as the Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization, the Journal of Wine Economics and a number of European agricultural economics journals including those published in German or French. This very limited coverage strongly reduces the value of the impact factor for assessing agricultural economics journals, espe- cially for non-English speakers. The few specific citation analyses for agricultural economics also concentrate on only 12 (Barrett et al., 2000) or seven (Burton and Phimister, 1996) agricultural economics journals. Interdisciplinary ties are also much stronger for agricultural economics than for general economics (Zapata, 2009). Agricultural economists may publish in their own, in economics or in interdisciplin- ary journals of agricultural, food and environmental sciences. Though quite a number of these interdisciplinary journals have impact factors, these may not be comparable with those of agricultural economics journals, as argued above. What we are lacking is a comprehensive and consistent journal ranking that covers all areas where agricultural economists publish their research. For this reason, the Agricultural Economics Associations of Germany and Austria3 attempted to establish a journal ranking based on expert assessment
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Bibliometric and Visual Analysis of Rural Development Research
    sustainability Review A Bibliometric and Visual Analysis of Rural Development Research Ying Lu * and Walter Timo de Vries Chair of Land Management, Department of Aerospace and Geodesy, Technical University of Munich (TUM), 80333 Munich, Germany; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: Rural development research integrates numerous theoretical and empirical studies and has evolved over the past few decades. However, few systematic literature reviews have explored the changing landscape. This study aims to obtain an overview of rural development research by applying a bibliometric and visual analysis. In this paper, we introduce four computer-based software tools, including HistCite™, CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and Map and Alluvial Generator, to help with data collection, data analysis, and visualization. The dataset consists of 6968 articles of rural development research, which were downloaded from the database Web of Science. The period covers 1957 to 2020 and the analysis units include journals, categories, authors, references, and keywords. Co-occurrence and co-citation analysis are conducted, and the results are exported in the format of networks. We analyze the trends of publications and explore the discipline distribution and identify the most influential authors and articles at different times. The results show that this field of study has attracted progressively more scholars from a variety of research fields and has become multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary. The changing knowledge domains of rural development research also reflect the dynamics and complexity of rural contexts. Keywords: rural development research; bibliometric analysis; visualization Citation: Lu, Y.; de Vries, W.T. A Bibliometric and Visual Analysis of Rural Development Research.
    [Show full text]
  • Analyzing Social Disadvantage in Rural Peripheries in Czechia and Eastern Germany: Conceptual Model and Study Design
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Keim-Klärner, Sylvia et al. Working Paper Analyzing social disadvantage in rural peripheries in Czechia and Eastern Germany: Conceptual model and study design Thünen Working Paper, No. 170 Provided in Cooperation with: Johann Heinrich von Thünen Institute, Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries Suggested Citation: Keim-Klärner, Sylvia et al. (2021) : Analyzing social disadvantage in rural peripheries in Czechia and Eastern Germany: Conceptual model and study design, Thünen Working Paper, No. 170, ISBN 978-3-86576-218-4, Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut, Braunschweig, http://dx.doi.org/10.3220/WP1614067689000 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/232538 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitus and Homeland: Educational Aspirations, Family Life and Culture in Autobiographical Narratives of Educational Experience in Rural Wales
    Habitus and Homeland: Educational Aspirations, Family Life and Culture in Autobiographical Narratives of Educational Experience in Rural Wales Sally Baker* and B.J. Brown Abstract We use the concept of habitus to illuminate the autobiographical narratives of partici- pants from disadvantaged backgrounds in mid-twentieth century rural Wales who were successful at university. The participants’ constructions of their habitus and aspirations drew upon a number of themes that intersected with their ideas of Welsh culture. Images of Welsh culture, history and national identity played a significant role in their accounts. The participants’ ‘aspirational habitus’ involved a rich blend of images and symbolic resources and a sense that they had a right to be at university. This has implications for how we conceive of habitus and its role in guiding people from rural to largely urban intellectual cultures. The participants’ experiences were made possible by virtue of the isolation of their rural communities and the corresponding significance of their social milieu, which consolidated their value system by attaching considerable significance to educational achievement. Introduction his article uses Bourdieu’s notion of ‘habitus’ to illuminate a sense of national Tculture encouraging educational aspiration. This was done through exploring the narratives of 10 participants between the ages of 49 and 72 who grew up with disadvantage in rural Wales. Their biographies demonstrate how their sense of culture, history and national identity were bound up with their success at university. Previous work investigating people who were from disadvantaged groups who accessed higher education has deployed the concept of habitus (although that term is not always used) to illuminate the sense of difference felt when the students con- trasted their own backgrounds with the atmosphere encountered in higher education (Archer and Hutchings 2000; Reay 2004a).
    [Show full text]
  • Poverty and Social Exclusion in Diversified Rural Contexts Josef Bernard Sandra Contzen Anja Decker Mark Shucksmith Rural Povert
    Poverty and social exclusion in diversified rural contexts Josef Bernard Sandra Contzen Anja Decker Mark Shucksmith Rural poverty has received relatively little attention from scholars or publics in Europe over recent decades, often regarded as secondary to more visible urban poverty. The same holds true for research in the US, despite important contributions like Tickamyer et al. (2017). Lately, however, rural poverty and other manifestations of rural disadvantage gained unexpected prominence in public debates as an urgent and provocative issue, if only for its perceived role in generating political upheaval (see Krugman, Hank or Guilluy for example). Divergencies between rural and metropolitan electoral results, support of populism in rural areas and even the rise of protest movements in the countryside on both sides of the Atlantic have prompted a renewed interest in urban-rural disparities and rural feelings of inferiority and marginalisation - feelings described in detail in Wuthnow’s The Left Behind (2018). Despite the plausibility of such upheavals deriving from a growing divide between rural and metropolitan societies, this has yet to be supported by rigorous research. Strong evidence of a new dynamic of rural-urban polarisation as a source of growing rural grievance and resentment is still missingi. This lack is one of the reasons for preparing a special issue on rural poverty and exclusion. The other reason is that exactly 15 years ago, two important publications concerning rural poverty were published: a special issue of Sociologia Ruralis on social exclusion and Milbourne’s book Rural Poverty, Marginalisation and Exclusion in Britain and the United States (2004). Both publications summarised the state of the art and proposed new research directions, building on Shucksmith and Chapman (1998).
    [Show full text]
  • Top Peer Reviewed Journals – Social Sciences
    Top Peer Reviewed Journals – Social Sciences Presented to Iowa State University Presented by Thomson Reuters Social Sciences (General) The subject discipline for Social Sciences (General) is made of 49 narrow subject categories from the Web of Science. The 49 categories that make up Social Sciences (General) are: 1. Anthropology 25. Industrial Relations & Labor 2. Architecture 26. Information Science & Library Science 3. Archaeology 27. International Relations 4. Area Studies 28. Language & Linguistics 5. Asian Studies 29. Law 6. Communication 30. Linguistics 7. Criminology & Penology 31. Medical Ethics 8. Demography 32. Medicine, Legal 9. Education & Educational Research 33. Nursing 10. Education, Disciplines 34. Planning & Development 11. Education, Special 35. Political Science 12. Environmental Studies 36. Psychology, Educational 13. Ethics 37. Public Administration 14. Ethnic Studies 38. Public, Environ. & Occupational Health 15. Family Studies 39. Rehabilitation 16. Film, Radio, Television 40. Religion 17. Geography 41. Social Issues 18. Geriatrics & Gerontology 42. Social Sciences, Biomedical 19. Gerontology 43. Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary 20. Health Care Sciences & Services 44. Social Work 21. Health Policy & Services 45. Sociology 22. History 46. Substance Abuse 23. History & Philosophy of Science 47. Transportation 24. History of Social Sciences 48. Urban Studies 25. Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism 49. Women’s Studies The chart below provides an ordered view of the top peer reviewed journals within the 1st quartile
    [Show full text]
  • Journal Rankings in Sociology
    Journal Rankings in Sociology: Using the H Index with Google Scholar Jerry A. Jacobs1 Forthcoming in The American Sociologist 2016 Abstract There is considerable interest in the ranking of journals, given the intense pressure to place articles in the “top” journals. In this article, a new index, h, and a new source of data – Google Scholar – are introduced, and a number of advantages of this methodology to assessing journals are noted. This approach is attractive because it provides a more robust account of the scholarly enterprise than do the standard Journal Citation Reports. Readily available software enables do-it-yourself assessments of journals, including those not otherwise covered, and enable the journal selection process to become a research endeavor that identifies particular articles of interest. While some critics are skeptical about the visibility and impact of sociological research, the evidence presented here indicates that most sociology journals produce a steady stream of papers that garner considerable attention. While the position of individual journals varies across measures, there is a high degree commonality across these measurement approaches. A clear hierarchy of journals remains no matter what assessment metric is used. Moreover, data over time indicate that the hierarchy of journals is highly stable and self-perpetuating. Yet highly visible articles do appear in journals outside the set of elite journals. In short, the h index provides a more comprehensive picture of the output and noteworthy consequences of sociology journals than do than standard impact scores, even though the overall ranking of journals does not markedly change. 1 Corresponding Author; Department of Sociology and Population Studies Center, University of Pennsylvania, 3718 Locust Walk, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; email: [email protected] Interest in journal rankings derives from many sources.
    [Show full text]
  • Publication Productivity of Czech Sociology in Scientific Journals Within the Last Decade
    PUBLICATION PRODUCTIVITY OF CZECH SOCIOLOGY IN SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS WITHIN THE LAST DECADE Josef Basl Daniel Münich Oleg Sidorkin CERGE-EI Charles University Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic Economics Institute WORKING PAPER SERIES (ISSN 1211-3298) Electronic Version 392 Working Paper Series 392 (ISSN 1211-3298) Publication Productivity of Czech Sociology in Scientific Journals Within the Last Decade Josef Basl Daniel Münich Oleg Sidorkin CERGE-EI Prague, September 2009 EVROPSKÝ SOCIÁLNÍ FOND PRAHA & EU: INVESTUJEME DO VAŠÍ BUDOUCNOSTI Projekt je financován Evropským sociálním fondem, rozpočtem hl. města Prahy a státním rozpočtem ISBN 978-80-7343-194-5 (Univerzita Karlova. Centrum pro ekonomický výzkum a doktorské studium) ISBN 978-80-7344-183-8 (Národohospodářský ústav AV ČR, v.v.i.) Publication Productivity of Czech Sociology in Scientific Journals Within the Last Decade* Josef Basl† Daniel Münich Oleg Sidorkin Institute of Sociology, ‡ Academy of Sciences of the CERGE-EI Czech Republic Abstract The paper maps publication outcomes of Czech sociologists in journals with impact factor within the last decade. The methodology we employ is similar to that used in recently published work analyzing the productivity of Czech economists. Our work is based on data from the Web of Science and covers the 1998 to 2007 period. Publication outcomes for sociology are presented within the context of the whole field of social sciences. The productivity of individual authors is based on data about published articles, impact factors of journals, and co-author shares and citations. Our analysis does not provide detailed insight on publications in another most important publication channel – scientific monographs – due to non-existence of suitable quality indicators.
    [Show full text]
  • Prospects of Agrarian Populism and Food Sovereignty Movement in Post‐Socialist Romania
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Hajdu, Anna; Mamonova, Natalia Article — Published Version Prospects of Agrarian Populism and Food Sovereignty Movement in Post-Socialist Romania Sociologia Ruralis Provided in Cooperation with: Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), Halle (Saale) Suggested Citation: Hajdu, Anna; Mamonova, Natalia (2020) : Prospects of Agrarian Populism and Food Sovereignty Movement in Post-Socialist Romania, Sociologia Ruralis, ISSN 1467-9523, Wiley, Hoboken, Vol. 60, Iss. 4, pp. 880-904, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/soru.12301 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/225066 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Latest Impact Factors (2016 Journal Citation Reports, Thomson Reuters)
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317639994 2017 Latest Impact Factors (2016 Journal Citation Reports, Thomson Reuters) Research · June 2017 CITATIONS READS 0 23,550 1 author: Anket Sharma Guru Nanak Dev University 42 PUBLICATIONS 34 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Brassinosteroids and Abiotic Stress management in Plants View project 24-epibrassinolide regulated detoxification of imidacloprid in Brassica juncea L. View project All content following this page was uploaded by Anket Sharma on 17 June 2017. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Journal Data Filtered By: Selected JCR Year: 2016 Selected Editions: SCIE,SSCI Selected Category Scheme: WoS Journal Impact Rank Full Journal Title Total Cites Eigenfactor Score Factor 1 CA-A CANCER JOURNAL FOR CLINICIANS 24,539 187.040 0.064590 2 NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE 315,143 72.406 0.700770 3 NATURE REVIEWS DRUG DISCOVERY 28,750 57.000 0.060820 4 CHEMICAL REVIEWS 159,155 47.928 0.246600 5 LANCET 214,732 47.831 0.404930 6 NATURE REVIEWS MOLECULAR CELL BIOLOGY40,565 46.602 0.095760 7 JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL141,015 ASSOCIATION44.405 0.280910 8 NATURE BIOTECHNOLOGY 53,992 41.667 0.169930 9 NATURE REVIEWS GENETICS 32,654 40.282 0.102540 10 NATURE 671,254 40.137 1.433990 11 NATURE REVIEWS IMMUNOLOGY 34,948 39.932 0.093010 12 NATURE MATERIALS 81,831 39.737 0.204020 13 Nature Nanotechnology 48,814 38.986 0.172520 14
    [Show full text]
  • Rank Full Journal Title Total Cites Journal Impact Factor 1 AMERICAN
    Journal Rank Full Journal Title Total Cites Impact Factor 1 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW 12,515 4.266 2 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY 11,681 4.045 3 Annual Review of Sociology 6,083 3.630 4 ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH 4,480 2.795 5 SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY 1,193 2.586 6 POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 2,349 2.306 7 SOCIOLOGICAL METHODS & RESEARCH 2,178 2.292 8 SOCIOLOGY OF EDUCATION 1,710 2.270 9 SOCIAL NETWORKS 2,683 2.138 10 SOCIOLOGY OF HEALTH & ILLNESS 2,683 2.014 11 EUROPEAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW 1,622 1.990 12 Journal of Consumer Culture 442 1.969 13 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY 7,373 1.899 14 WORK AND OCCUPATIONS 802 1.853 15 Socio-Economic Review 496 1.717 16 SOCIOLOGICAL QUARTERLY 1,343 1.690 17 SOCIOLOGY OF RELIGION 577 1.667 18 POETICS 856 1.661 19 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH 2,210 1.515 20 International Political Sociology 269 1.500 20 Sociological Methodology 2,167 1.500 22 JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY 383 1.455 23 SOCIAL INDICATORS RESEARCH 3,767 1.452 1 24 ECONOMY AND SOCIETY 1,259 1.436 25 Qualitative Research 1,441 1.416 26 SOCIOLOGIA RURALIS 951 1.362 27 SOCIAL PROBLEMS 2,725 1.360 28 AGRICULTURE AND HUMAN VALUES 970 1.359 29 Annual Review of Law and Social Science 290 1.357 SOCIOLOGY-THE JOURNAL OF THE BRITISH SOCIOLOGICAL 30 ASSOCIATION 2,346 1.348 31 LAW & SOCIETY REVIEW 1,515 1.310 32 Information Communication & Society 620 1.283 33 POLITICS & SOCIETY 766 1.268 GLOBAL NETWORKS-A JOURNAL OF TRANSNATIONAL 34 AFFAIRS 751 1.255 35 WORK EMPLOYMENT AND SOCIETY 1,253 1.229 36 Biodemography and Social Biology 87 1.227 37 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
    [Show full text]
  • Being a Poor Farmer in a Wealthy Country: a Swiss Case Study
    Being a poor farmer in a wealthy country: A Swiss case study Sandra Contzen* and Eric Crettaz Abstract Many Swiss farming families face socioeconomic disadvantage despite Switzerland being a wealthy country with instruments of agricultural policy financially supporting almost all farmers. However, official poverty statistics exclude Swiss farmers and scientific knowledge is rare about how such situations are experienced. This article scrutinises the situation of Swiss farming families living in poverty or material deprivation by intertwining qualitative and quantitative methods to enrich both types of data and interpretations. By statistically comparing farmers with the self-employed in other economic sectors, it uses a novel way of comparing the farming with the non- farming population. The article shows that the poverty among farmers resembles that of the self-employed with no or few employees in other economic sectors and describes the lived experiences of poverty and material deprivation. It concludes that adaptive preferences make farming families resilient to socioeconomic disadvantage, while possibly leading to a loss of their livelihood in the long run. | downloaded: 28.9.2021 Introduction overty among farming families in Western European countries is not a new Pissue. They have had to struggle for new income sources or adapt their pro- duction systems for many centuries, a fact which leads Meert et al. (2005) to de- scribe it as a chronic problem. Processes of globalisation and trade liberalisation further impact the lives of farming families. Even in a wealthy country like to- day’s Switzerland, characterised by one of the highest GDP per capita worldwide (Worldbank 2018) and median household income (OECD 2018a), and despite instruments of agricultural policy supporting almost all farmers in financial terms, poverty in faming families exists.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae with Track Record (For Researchers)
    Curriculum vitae with track record (for researchers) Role in the project Project manager ☐ Project partner ☐ Personal information First name, Surname: Arild Blekesaune Date of birth: 1959-11-06 Sex: male Nationality: Norwegian Researcher unique identifier(s) https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6642-2634 (ORCID, ResearcherID, etc.): H-1500-2018 URL for personal website: https://www.ntnu.no/ansatte/arild.blekesaune Education Year Faculty/department - University/institution - Country 1996 PhD. Department of Sociology and Political Science - Norwegian University of Science and (dissertation Technology - Norway defended) 1987 Master in Sociology: Department of Sociology and Social Science - University of Trondheim - Norway Positions - current and previous (Academic sector/research institutes/industrial sector/public sector/other) Year Job title – Employer - Country 2009- Professor, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NTNU, From September 15 2009. 2013-2014 Visiting Scholar, University of California - Berkeley, USA, September 1 2013 – January 5 2014 2012-2013 Chairman and Professor, Department of sociology and political science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NTNU, August 1 2012 – July 31 2013. 2009 Professor (full), Deputy, and Educational Leader, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NTNU, September 15 2009 – July 31 2012. 2009 Visiting Scholar, University of California - Berkeley, May 1 – August 1 2009 1999-2009 Associate Professor, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NTNU, August 1 1999 - September 14 2009 1995-1999 Research Manager, Centre for Rural Research, NTNU, December 1 1995 - July 31 1999 1991-1995 Research Fellow, Centre of Rural Research, Univ. of Trondheim, January 1 1991- November 30 1995. 1989-1990 Researcher, Centre of Rural Research, Univ. of Trondheim, July 1 1989 - December 31 1990 1999 Research Assistant, Centre of Rural Research, Univ.
    [Show full text]