The framework is designed to assess resilience to specific challenges (specified resilience) as well as a farming system's capacity to deal with the unknown, uncertainty and surprise (general resilience). The framework provides a heuristic to analyze system properties, challenges (shocks, long-term stresses), indicators to measure the performance of system functions, resilience capacities and resilience-enhancing attributes. Capacities and attributes refer to adaptive cycle processes of agricultural practices, farm demographics, governance and risk management.
Mountain agricultural systems (MASs) are multifunctional and multidimensional sociocultural systems. They are constantly influenced by many factors whose intensity and impacts are unpredictable. The recent Hindu Kush–Himalayan Assessment Report highlighted the need to integrate mountain perspectives into governance decisions on sustaining resources in the Hindu Kush–Himalayan region, emphasizing the importance of sustainable MASs.
While there is a lot of literature from a natural or technical sciences perspective on different forms of digitalization in agriculture (big data, internet of things, augmented reality, robotics, sensors, 3D printing, system integration, ubiquitous connectivity, artificial intelligence, digital twins, and blockchain among others), social science researchers have recently started investigating different aspects of digital agriculture in relation to farm production systems, value chains and food systems. This has led to a burgeoning but scattered social science body of literature.
This article conceptualizes the diffusion of user innovations from a service ecosystem perspective. With the focus on sustainable innovations, the service ecosystem is evaluated, along with other systemic innovation concepts, as a possible theoretical basis for explaining the first adoption and diffusion of user innovations.
This paper explores possible pathways for different types of farmers, considering where they might be in the future, beyond 2030 and the era of the SDGs. It outlines some of the necessary interventions, risks and trade-offs associated with these different pathways, for farmers operating in a variety of agricultural systems globally, including cropping, livestock and tree (silvopasture) systems. It also considers the impacts of different disruption scenarios that could radically alter anticipated pathways and offers a range of possible interventions.
En Europe, depuis trois décennies, la prise en compte des enjeux environnementaux dans les politiques agricoles se traduit, en partie, par la conception de Mesures agrienvironnementales (MAE), visant à promouvoir le changement de pratiques. En France, ces mesures ont été mobilisées dans différents modèles de contrats avec les agriculteurs, passant d’un paradigme basé sur la subvention de la multifonctionnalité d’une exploitation agricole à une compensation des surcoûts liés à l’adoption de nouvelles pratiques plus vertueuses au niveau des parcelles.
There is sufficient evidence, drawn from surveys of innovation in the public sector and cognitive testing interviews with public sector managers, to develop a framework for measuring public sector innovation. Although many questions that are covered in the Oslo Manual guidelines for measuring innovation in the private sector can be applied with some modifications to the public sector, public sector innovation surveys need to meet policy needs that require collecting additional types of data.
The latest comprehensive research agenda in the Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension was published in 2012 (Faure, Desjeux, and Gasselin 2012), and since then there have been quite some developments in terms of biophysical, ecological, climatological, social, political and economic trends that impact farming and the transformation of agriculture and food systems at large as well as new potentially disruptive technologies.
Researches on agri-food supply chain coordination have been gaining public attention due to their critical relevance to food availability, security, and safety. Still, the research focus is considerably in its early stage of development. This study was aimed at reviewing a holistic understanding on agri-food supply chain, particularly on issues related to coordination. This review was conducted by analyzing selected articles from peer-reviewed journals and proceedings.
Drawn from numerous sources, including papers in this journal, this concluding paper synthesizes evidence on the relationship between agricultural research for development and poverty reduction, with particular emphasis on agri-food systems perspectives in shaping programs aimed at rural prosperity. Following the introduction in section 1, we revisit the ex ante set of 18 pathways in section 2 (which were laid out in our introductory paper for this SI), posing some critical questions: Can a manageable set of impact pathways be identified? How are they inter-related?