Agricultural mechanization in Africa: Myths, realities and an emerging research agenda

Daum, Thomas; Birner, Regina

doi:10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100393

Cited by 83 publications

(110 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition to the government and NGO support to FOs, there is a growing interest in engagement with the private sector 54 . The number of studies assessing the impacts of such engagement was low in our review.…”

Section: Government Role In Supporting Fosmentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review of the contributions of farmers’ organizations to smallholder agriculture

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Farmers’ organizations (FOs), such as associations, cooperatives, self-help and women’s groups, are common in developing countries and provide services that are widely viewed as contributing to income and productivity for small-scale producers. Here, we conducted a scoping review of the literature on FO services and their impacts on small-scale producers in sub-Saharan Africa and India. Most reviewed studies (57%) reported positive FO impacts on farmer income, but much fewer reported positive impacts on crop yield (19%) and production quality (20%). Environmental benefits, such as resilience-building and improved water quality and quantity were documented in 24% of the studies. Our analysis indicates that having access to markets through information, infrastructure, and logistical support at the centre of FO design could help integrate FOs into policy. Natural resource management should also be more widely incorporated in the services provided by FOs to mitigate risks associated with environmental degradation and climate change. Finally, farmers who are already marginalized because of poor education, land access, social status and market accessibility may require additional support systems to improve their capacities, skills and resources before they are able to benefit from FO membership.

show abstract

Section: Government Role In Supporting Fosmentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review of the contributions of farmers’ organizations to smallholder agriculture

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More than 75% of tractors were half-funded or donated to users and cooperatives, except for some personal purchases. This important role of the government in tractor purchase for farmers was recognized by Daum and Birner (2020) especially for the smallholder farmers because they are a key in agricultural development.…”

Section: Variations Of Mechanized Parameters Between the Poles Of Agrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of the use of tractors in different poles of agricultural development in Benin Republic

Dayou

Zokpodo

Atidegla

et al. 2021

Heliyon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The deep assessment of agricultural mechanization inside developing countries could help for local action-taking. This study investigates the use of tractors between the poles of agricultural development (PAD) in Benin Republic. Using a multi-stage random sampling procedure and a questionnaire, 203 tractor users were surveyed in 43 municipalities distributed across the seven PADs of the country. Kruskal-Wallis tests were carried out to compare the different poles of agricultural development based on the mechanization level and tractor performances. Student-Newman-Keuls tests were used to structure the means of these variables. The results show a significant variation (P < 0.05) of the mechanization level between the PADs. Apart PAD1, all the poles use greater than 60 % manual equipment. Animal-drawn is most implemented in the northern part of the country (PAD1; 2 and 3). The use of tractors is lower over the country, and the PAD2 and PAD3 are the most users. From PAD4 to PAD7, the combination of manual tillage with animal power or tractor is not well represented, indicating manual tillagebased agriculture in these poles. In general, 53.20% of the users do not have a tractor parking and the repair center is quasi-absent (97.54 %). PAD2; 4 and 3 are most disc plow users. Mechanical sowing is more observed in PAD2 and 7 and absent in PAD1; 3 and 4. Moreover, the harvester is present in PAD2; 4; 6, and 7. On average, the highest mechanized area was 134.56 ha from PAD3, whereas, the lowest, 12.00 ha was found in PAD7. PAD7 spends more on plowing (47670 FCFA) than the other poles. The mechanized plowing is most slower in PAD7 (3.53 h/ha) while much faster at the PAD2 (1.96 h/ha). These results could help decision-makers for accurate actions taking to advocate for agricultural mechanization sectors in the country based on the weakness of each pole of agricultural development.

show abstract

“…The principal economic factors are the forces of demand and supply for mechanization in Nigeria. The need for mechanization in Nigeria is shallow, as more than 90% of farmers involved in farming do not use mechanization [66]. Most of these farmers are low-income earners who cannot afford the initial high starting cost of mechanization.…”

Section: A: Economic Factors Affecting the Low Adoption Of Mechanization In Nigeriamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The high cost of operation and low patronage makes the mechanization business unattractive to investors and suppliers. Some farmers, researchers, and policymakers believe that mechanization will lead to unemployment in Nigeria [66]. Others think that smallholder farmers will not benefit much from the heavy initial financial investment of mechanized farming.…”

Section: A: Economic Factors Affecting the Low Adoption Of Mechanization In Nigeriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Agriculture 4.0: An Implementation Framework for Food Security Attainment in Nigeria’s Post-Covid-19 Era

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The challenge of Nigeria's food insecurity in the era of the Covid-19 pandemic, insecurity, climate change, population growth, food wastage, etc., is a demanding task. This study addresses Nigeria's food insecurity challenges by adopting agriculture 4.0 and commercial farming. Using data from six digital libraries, the Nigerian Bureau of Statistics, and other internet sources, we conducted a Systematic Literature Review (SLR using PRISMA) on Nigeria's agriculture, food security, and agriculture 4.0. Our results show Nigeria's current agricultural state, threats to food security, and modern digital agriculture technologies. We adapted our SLR findings to develop an implementation framework for agriculture 4.0 in solving Nigeria's food insecurity challenge in the post-Covid-19 era. Our proposed framework integrates precision agriculture in Nigeria's food production and the necessary enabling digital technologies in the agri-food supply chain. We analyzed the critical implementation considerations during each agri-food supply chain stage of farming inputs, farming scale, farming approach, farming operation, food processing, food preservation/storage, distribution/logistics, and the final consumers. This study will help researchers, investors, and the government address food security in Nigeria. The implementation of agriculture 4.0 will substantially contribute to SDG 2 (zero hunger), SDG 3 (good health and well-being), and SDG 8 (decent work and economic growth) of #Envision 2030 of the United Nations, for the benefit of Nigeria, Africa, and the entire world.INDEX TERMS Agriculture 4.0, agri-food 4.0, food security, Sustainability, SDG goal 2, implementation framework, supply chain.

show abstract

Agricultural mechanization in Africa: Myths, realities and an emerging research agenda

Cited by 83 publications

References 36 publications

A scoping review of the contributions of farmers’ organizations to smallholder agriculture

A scoping review of the contributions of farmers’ organizations to smallholder agriculture

Analysis of the use of tractors in different poles of agricultural development in Benin Republic

Agriculture 4.0: An Implementation Framework for Food Security Attainment in Nigeria’s Post-Covid-19 Era

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About