Digitalization of agriculture: A way to solve the food problem or a trolley dilemma?

Lioutas, Evagelos D.; Charatsari, Chrysanthi; Rosa, Marcello De

doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101744

Cited by 111 publications

(89 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeterminacy describes their inability to predict or, at least, forecast how their and other actors’ behaviour will affect causal chains. Transition to Agriculture 4.0 is associated with many dilemmas (Lioutas et al., 2021a) and, as Rijswijk et al. (2021) state, unknown—positive or negative—impacts are always possible when digital technologies are introduced in the farm practice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This high degree of uncertainty generates a responsibility‐feasibility dilemma as McGinn (1979) put it in his essay many years before the appearance of intelligent technologies. Αt the one end of the spectrum, these technologies can act as ‘game‐changing’ innovations for the agro‐food sector (Seele & Lock, 2017), promising to address sustainability challenges (Latino et al., 2021) and improving the current status quo of agro‐food production and supply, whereas, at the other end, they give rise to serious concerns about their potential social externalities (Klerkx & Rose, 2020), including the unbalanced distribution of benefits (Jakku et al., 2019) and power across food systems (Ravis & Notkin, 2020), the development of economic and technological dependency among actors participating in agro‐food nexus (Lioutas & Charatsari, 2020), issues associated with data ownership and privacy (Wiseman et al., 2019), the loss of jobs for unskilled or low‐skilled farm workers (Lioutas & Charatsari, 2021), the creation and adoption of unsustainable business models (Cobby, 2020) and the fading of farm culture (Lioutas et al., 2021a). Moreover, inside the farm fence, worries about animal wellbeing (Blok & Long, 2016), the increase of farm specialisation (Weersink et al., 2018) and the consequent loss of traditional crop varieties (Breslau et al., 2019) or the difficulty of dealing with the high cost of Agriculture 4.0 technologies (Das et al., 2019), raise questions about the feasibility of transition to Agriculture 4.0.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Farm advisors amid the transition to Agriculture 4.0: Professional identity, conceptions of the future and future‐specific competencies

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The transition to Agriculture 4.0 creates new responsibilities for farm advisors and initiates changes to the professional trajectories. In this work, following a mixed research design, we examine how Greek advisors experience the transition to and anticipate the future of Agriculture 4.0. We also aim at identifying what elements they are changing in their professional identities to respond to the challenges associated with Agriculture 4.0, which are the new responsibility‐related competency needs that this transition generates, and how conceptions of the future of farming impact upon these needs. Our findings suggest that the transition to Agriculture 4.0 urges the emergence of a new culture, in which data and technology are considered more reliable than human advice, and creates new responsibility gaps. To cope with these changes, advisors add new roles in their professional identities, emphasising the principle of beneficence and paying limited attention to the societal externalities of transition. Advisors view Agriculture 4.0 as a threat or disruption more than as evolution or promise. In parallel, they prioritise different sets of competencies needed to responsibly facilitate agricultural digitalisation, depending on how they grasp the future of Agriculture 4.0.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Farm advisors amid the transition to Agriculture 4.0: Professional identity, conceptions of the future and future‐specific competencies

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the digitalization era of the industrial revolution 4.0, MSMEs in the agricultural sector must prepare themselves and adapt to changes to respond to future challenges and turn threats into opportunities (HAJI, 2021;Hrivnák et al, 2021;Kusumawati et al, 2021;Lioutas et al, 2021;PENG et al, 2021;Zambon et al, 2019). Agricultural MSME activities are expected to efficiently and effectively increase productivity significantly and be competitive (Rovena Tahiti & Besa Shahini, 2010;Szanyi-Gyenes, 2019).…”

Section: Industry 40mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Challenges to Developing Smart Agricultural Village in the Industrial Revolution 4.0.

Tumiwa

Tuegeh²,

Bittner³

et al. 2022

TIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nowadays, rural depopulation is one of the biggest problems in developed and developing countries, especially due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This pandemic impacts various sectors, especially the economic sector. However, the development of the 4.0 Industrial Revolution forced all sectors, including agriculture, to adapt and take advantage of internet-based digital technology by developing smart agriculture. Therefore, the objective of this study is to analyze the development of smart agriculture in rural areas. This study uses a systematic literature review with a TAA approach with secondary data collected from Scopus databases. The downloaded documents will be further analyzed using VOSviewer software to find the clustering. After the coding process by first-order categories, second layer theme, and aggregate dimension, this research found several theoretical concepts about the “Smart Village”. The definition of the ‘smart village’ concept is a combination of smart agriculture and industry 4.0 technology utilized by rural MSMEs to use the information and communication technology integrated into public services and economic activities. There are still many obstacles encountered in the application of ‘smart villages,’ such as the lack of youth participation and the low quality of human resources in the agricultural sector, limited internet network coverage, and the lack of optimal capital support. This research will contribute to the systematic literature review method by purposing filtering criteria of TAA to shade the light of the lack of data accuracy in several leading databases of scholarly impacts. This research also gives a clear direction for further research regarding industry 4.0 and Indonesia's smart agriculture concept application.

show abstract

“…Agriculture is mostly defined with environmental and biological factors, and therefore its physical specifications should be basically considered (CEMA 2017a;. Lioutas et al (2021) presented the beneficial and negative aspects of digitalization. They also indicated the necessity to develop new approaches based on science in terms of societal impacts in the evolution of digital agriculture.…”

Section: Digital Transformationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Digital Transformation for Sustainable Future - Agriculture 4.0 : A review

Dayioğlu

Türker

2021

Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digitalization of agriculture: A way to solve the food problem or a trolley dilemma?

Cited by 111 publications

References 67 publications

Farm advisors amid the transition to Agriculture 4.0: Professional identity, conceptions of the future and future‐specific competencies

Farm advisors amid the transition to Agriculture 4.0: Professional identity, conceptions of the future and future‐specific competencies

The Challenges to Developing Smart Agricultural Village in the Industrial Revolution 4.0.

Digital Transformation for Sustainable Future - Agriculture 4.0 : A review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About