EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 306 (2021) E3S Web Conf., 306 (2021) 04015 References
Open Access
Issue
E3S Web Conf.
Volume 306, 2021
The First International Conference on Assessment and Development of Agricultural Innovation (1st ICADAI 2021)
Article Number 04015
Number of page(s) 13
Section Agricultural Environmental and Engineering
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202130604015
Published online 24 September 2021
  1. Kubankova M., Hajek M. and Votavova A., Agric. Econ. (Zemëdëlska EkonJ. 62, 101–112 (2016) [Google Scholar]
  2. Bernard F., Noordwijk M. Van, Luedeling, E., Villamor, G.B., Sileshi, G.W. and Namirembe, S., Environ. Sustain. 6, 155–161 (2014) [Google Scholar]
  3. Eakin H., Tucker C.M., Castellanos E., Juan R.D. and Helda F.B., Adaptation in a multistressor environment : perceptions and responses to climatic and economic risks by coffee growers in Mesoamerica 123–139 (2014) [Google Scholar]
  4. Unteawati B. Fiitriani and Zaini, M., Kajian Sosial Ekonomi Masyarakat Pemanfaat Kawasan Hutan Lindung REG. 20 Kabupaten Pesawaran, in Prosiding Seminar Nasional Swasembada Pangan Politeknik Negeri Lampung, 25 April 2015, Lampung, pp 382–391(2015) [Google Scholar]
  5. Fitriani F., Arifin B. and Ismono H., J. Socioecon. Dev. 4, 120 (2021) [Google Scholar]
  6. Fitriani, Arifin B., Zakaria W.A. and Ismono R.H., Coffee agroforestry for sustainability of Upper Sekampung Watershed management Coffee agroforestry for sustainability of Upper Sekampung Watershed management International Conference on Biomass: Toward Sustainable Biomass Utilization for Industrial and Energy Applications (IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science) pp 1–13 (2018) [Google Scholar]
  7. Fitriani, Arifin B., Abbas Zakaria W., Hanung Ismono R. and Erry Prasmatiwi F., Int. J. Ecol. Dev. 35 (2020) [Google Scholar]
  8. Fitriani, Arifin B., Zakaria W.A. and Ismono R.H., J. Penelit. Pertan. Terap. 18, 65–74 (2018) [Google Scholar]
  9. Anon Designing Agricultural Development Model for Lampung State using Social Accounting Matrix (SAM) [Google Scholar]
  10. Mengist W., Soromessa T. and Legese G., Method for conducting systematic literature review and meta-analysis for environmental science research MethodsX 7 100777 (2020) [Google Scholar]
  11. Kamioka H., Japanese Pharmacol. Ther. 47, 1177–1185 (2019). [Google Scholar]
  12. Pullin A.S. and Stewart G.B., Conserv. Biol. 20, 1647–1156 (2006). [Google Scholar]
  13. Rosenstock T.S., Lamanna C., Chesterman S., Bell P., Arslan A., Richards M., Rioux J., Akinleye A.O., Champalle C., Cheng Z., Corner-dolloff, C., Dohn, J., English, W., Eyrich, A., Girvetz, E.H., Kerr, A., Lizarazo, M., Madalinska, A., Mcfatridge, S., Morris, K.S., Namoi, N., Poultouchidou, A., Ravina, M., Richards, M., Akinleye, A.O., Corner-dolloff, C., English, W. and Eyrich, A., The scientific basis of climate-smart agriculture A systematic review protocol GIAR Research Program Clim. Chang. Agric. Food Secur. ty (2015) [Google Scholar]
  14. Secinaro, S. and Calandra, D., Br. Food J. 123, 1 (2020) [Google Scholar]
  15. Shelby L.B. and Vaske J.J., Understanding Meta-Analysis: A Review of the Methodological Literature Human and Social Dimensions of Global Environmental Change View project Coastal Management-Cebu, Philippines View project [Google Scholar]
  16. Luo Z., Deng, L. and Yan, C., Soil erosion under different plant cover types and its influencing factors in Napahai Catchment, (Shangri-La County, Yunnan Province, China 4509 (2015). [Google Scholar]
  17. Coe R., Sinclair, F. and Barrios, E., Environ. Sustain. 6, 73–77 (2014). [Google Scholar]
  18. Valencia V., West P., Sterling E.J., Garcia-Barrios, L. and Naeem, S., Ecosphere. 6, 1–17 (2015) [Google Scholar]
  19. Binam J.N., Place, F. and Kalinganire, A., Effects of farmer managed natural regeneration on livelihoods in semi-arid West Africa (2015) [Google Scholar]
  20. Dawson I.K., Guariguata M.R., Loo J., Weber J.C., Lengkeek A., Bush D., Cornelius, J. and Guarino, L., Biodivers Conserv. 22, 301–324 (2013) [Google Scholar]
  21. Maryanto A., Murtilaksano, K. and Rachman, M., J. Kehutan. Wallacea. 3, 2 85–96 (2014) [Google Scholar]
  22. Lasco R.D., Delfino R.J.P., Catacutan D.C., Simelton E.S. and Wilson D.M., Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 6, 83–88 (2013) [Google Scholar]
  23. Kittur B.H. and Bargali S.S., J. Progress. Agric. 130 (2014) [Google Scholar]
  24. Fauzi, A. and Anna, Z., Ecosyst. Serv. 6 54–63 (2013) [Google Scholar]
  25. Minang P.A., Duguma L.A., Bernard F., Mertz O. and Noordwijk M. Van, Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 6, 78–82 (2014) [Google Scholar]
  26. Reisland M.A., Conservation in a Sacred Forest : An Integrated Approach to Assessing the Management of a Community-Based Conservation Site By Melissa Ann Reisland A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Winconsin-Madison, 2013) [Google Scholar]
  27. Purwanto S.A., For. Trees, Livelihoods. 1–18 (2018) [Google Scholar]
  28. Mbow C., Smith P., Skole D., Duguma, L. and Bustamante, M., Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 6, 8–14 (2014) [Google Scholar]
  29. Syaukat Y., ISSAAS. 17, 40–51 (2011) [Google Scholar]
  30. Lastiantoro C.Y., Cahyono S.A., Penelitian B., Kehutanan T., Das P., Yani J.A. and Box P.O., J. Anal. Kebijak. Kehutan. 13, 203–212 (2016) [Google Scholar]
  31. Luedeling E., Kindt R., Huth, N.I. and Koenig, K., Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 6, 1–7 (2014) [Google Scholar]
  32. Jaji H-A-R.I., Managing Natural Resources And Conflict In Conflict-Affected Watersheds In The Philippines (State University of New York, 2011) [Google Scholar]
  33. Ruhimat I.S., Penelit. Sos. Ekon. Kehutan. 12, 99–110 (2015) [Google Scholar]
  34. Kiptot E., Franzel, S. and Degrande, A., Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 6, 104–109 (2014) [Google Scholar]
  35. Puspitojati T., Yamin Mile M., Fauziah E and Darusman D., Hutan Rakyat Sumbangsih Masyarakat Pedesaan untuk Hutan Tanaman ed Bahruni (Sleman, Yogyakarta: Penerbit Kanisius, 2014) [Google Scholar]
  36. Luiz A., Vianna M. and Fearnside P.M., Sustain. For. 9811 (2014) [Google Scholar]
  37. Barrios E., Valencia V., Jonsson M., Brauman A., Hairiah K., Mortimer, P.E. and Okubo, S., Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Ecosyst. Serv. Manag. 14, 1–16 (2018) [Google Scholar]
  38. Takahashi, R. and Todo, Y., Environ. Manage. 50, 396–404 (2012) [Google Scholar]
  39. Rosin, C. and Dwiartama, A., Resilience in Retrospective: Analysis of Response to Shocks and Stress in the New Zealand Kiwifruit and Sheep and Beef Sectors, (2012) [Google Scholar]
  40. Assogbadjo A.E., Kakaï R.G., Vodouhê F.G., Djagoun C.A.M.S., Codjia J.T.C. and Sinsin B., For. Policy Econ. 14, 41–49 (2012) [Google Scholar]
  41. Chen H., Shivakoti G., Zhu, T. and Maddox, D., Environ. Manage. 49, 219–228 (2012) [Google Scholar]
  42. Magcale-Macandog D.B., Visco R.G. and Delgado M.E.M., J. Sustain. Agric. 29, 97–116 (2006) [Google Scholar]
  43. Hidayat T., Pandjaitan N.K., Dharmawan A.H. and Sitorus F., J. transdisiplin sosiologi, komunikasi, dan Ekol. Mns. 04, 1–16 (2010) [Google Scholar]
  44. Jerneck, A. and Olsson, L., J. Rural Stud. 32, 114–125 (2013) [Google Scholar]
  45. Okubo, S. and Koji, P., Agrofoestry Syst. 80, 17–31 (2010) [Google Scholar]
  46. Santoso I., Ekonom. 13, 3 92–98 (2010) [Google Scholar]
  47. Pender, John, Suyanto, John Kerr E.K., Impacts of the Hutan Kamasyarakatan Social Forestry Program in the Sumberjaya Watershed, West Lampung District of Sumatra, Indonesia (2008) [Google Scholar]
  48. Asah S.T., Empirical Social-Ecological System Analysis : From Theoretical Framework to Latent Variable Structural Equation Model 1077-1090 (2008) [Google Scholar]
  49. Tole L. and Â.C.Â.S. Environ. Manage. 45, 1312–1331 (2010) [Google Scholar]
  50. Kittur, B.H. and Bargali, S.S., J. Progress. Agric. 4, 91–94 (2013) [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.