ArticleGlobal challenges (Hoboken, NJ)2022
The Shifting Cultivation Juggernaut: An Attribution Problem.
Article in Global challenges (Hoboken, NJ), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prediction of soil organic carbon increase in the transition from shifting cultivation to agroforestry in the Indian East Himalayas.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2026Article
- Article
- Natural and Human Disturbances Have Non-Linear Effects on Whole-Ecosystem Carbon Storage in an African Savanna.Global change biology · 2025Article
- The Shifting Cultivation Juggernaut: An Attribution Problem.Global challenges (Hoboken, NJ) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Shifting cultivation entails clearing a delimited land and transforming it into arable land. Owing to its complexity, this system has been a subject of debate and intervention since the colonial-era, and is often considered as the "tropical deforestation culprit." Shifting cultivators are often labeled as "forest eaters" and are considered backward and primitive. Opponents of shifting cultivation often attribute the loss of forest cover to shifting cultivation, and favor intensification, claiming that commercial plantations are more productive. However, attempts to replace it have often failed due to inadequate understanding of the system and the decision-making processes involved. On the other hand, a growing body of literature provides evidence that shifting cultivation is an ecologically and economically efficient practice. After a careful review of the literature, the authors conclude that the dichotomy of opinions is the consequence of the attribution problem. The authors also argue that the management of forest ecosystems will be challenging if policy and practice are not based on careful understanding of the power of this age-old practice. Hence, there is a need for a careful diagnosis of this system and a rethink before claiming that the system is unsustainable and attempting to replace it with practices such as plantations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.