Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed

1.1k indexed citations

Abstract

loading...

About

This paper, published in 1999, received 1.1k indexed citations. Written by Andrew Levine and James C. Scott covering the research area of . It is primarily cited by scholars working on Sociology and Political Science (475 citations), Political Science and International Relations (345 citations) and Anthropology (133 citations). Published in Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews.

In The Last Decade

doi.org/10.2307/2655340 →

Countries where authors are citing Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed

Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed more than expected).

Fields of papers citing Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed

Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed.

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

This paper is also available at doi.org/10.2307/2655340.

Explore hit-papers with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026