Systematic Stakeholder Inclusion in Digital Agriculture: A Framework and Application to Canada

Ebrahimi, Hassan P.; Schillo, R. Sandra; Bronson, Kelly

doi:10.3390/su13126879

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some of these contributions highlight the unequal distribution of the benefits of digitalization in agriculture. Several studies of digital agriculture within the field of responsible research and innovation emphasize the importance of equity and inclusiveness in digital innovation, and have developed frameworks to analyze and facilitate the inclusion of farmers in innovation processes [14,15,[18][19][20][21][22][23][24].…”

Section: Introduction and Rationale For The Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of Inequalities in Digital Agriculture: A Systematic Literature Review

Hackfort

2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digitalization of agriculture is often hailed as the next agricultural revolution. However, little is yet known about its social impacts and power effects. This review addresses this research gap by analyzing patterns of inequality linked to the development and adoption of digital technologies in agriculture and reviewing the strategies developed to reduce these inequalities and challenge the power relations in which they are embedded. Analysis of 84 publications found through a systematic literature review identified five patterns of inequality: (1) in digital technology development; (2) in the distribution of benefits from the use of digital technologies; (3) in sovereignty over data, hardware and digital infrastructure; (4) in skills and knowledge (‘digital literacy’); and (5) in problem definition and problem-solving capacities. This review also highlights the existence of emancipatory initiatives that are applying digital technologies to challenge existing inequalities and to advance alternative visions of agriculture. These initiatives underscore the political nature of digital agriculture; however, their reach is still quite limited. This is partly due to the fact that existing inequalities are structural and represent expressions of corporate power. From such a perspective, digitalization in agriculture is not a ‘revolution’ per se; rather, digital technologies mirror and reproduce existing power relations.

show abstract

Section: Introduction and Rationale For The Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of Inequalities in Digital Agriculture: A Systematic Literature Review

Hackfort

2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While, with some key exceptions, there has been minimal activity engaging the general public in conversations around new (digital) technologies in farming, more recent studies have sought to involve farmers as end-users to a greater extent [39][40][41]. This paper focuses on farmers as their decisions and actions have significant impacts on how food is produced, and the quantity and nature of inputs that are available for the next stage in the supply chain.…”

Section: Inclusion Of Citizen-consumers and Farmersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing ‘Smart’ Dairy Farming Responsive to Farmers and Consumer-Citizens: A Review

Henchion

Regan

Beecher

et al. 2022

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Innovation has resulted in more dairy products being produced with less inputs than ever before. It has also affected how animals are raised, the structure of the sector and the nature of products produced. Not all impacts have been positive. As disruptive technologies—such as precision farming and robotics—herald significant change, it is timely to reflect on the perspectives of different actors on innovations within the sector. Drawing on a review of academic literature, this paper considers farmers’ and consumer-citizens’ perspectives; as expected, their diverse knowledge, interests and values surface a range of perspectives. To provide focus to the study, it examines technologies across three stages of the dairy production cycle: breeding, feeding and milking. It finds that consumer-citizen and farmer perspectives have been examined by researchers in several countries, using a variety of methods, across a range of technologies. It finds both areas of agreement and tension within and between consumer-citizen and producer cohorts. While differences in knowledge account for some variation, differences in values are also significant. The extent to which efforts can and should be put into addressing differences is raised as a point for reflection.

show abstract

“…Other theories employed by scholars in this review are assemblage theory (Klerkx et al, 2019); globalization theory (Ravis & Notkin, 2020); economic theory (Birner et al, 2021;Shogentsukova & Shogentsukov, 2020) and corporate social responsibility theory (Ebrahimi et al, 2021).…”

Section: B Underpinning Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other studies investigated the different aspect in the application of digital technologies in agriculture in relation to the role of research and development (Romani et al, 2020), agribusiness management and stakeholder (Ebrahimi et al, 2021;Shogentsukova & Shogentsukov, 2020), infrastructure (Bernhardt et al, 2021), and social sustainability use of resources (Prause et al, 2021;Teucher et al, 2022). There is no gainsaying that agriculture is the backbones of most developing countries and adoption of digital technologies in the production and processing as well as through the value chain will enhance greatly food productivity (Sott et al, 2021).…”

Section: Digital Agriculture Technology Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also, the relationship between stages and different infrastructure available for implementation. Clapp and Ruder (2020); Somers and Stapleton (2020); Runck et al (2021); Ebrahimi et al (2021); Silvestri et al (2021); Nitturkar (2021); Cook et al (2021) DigiTech Impact Saberioon et al (2013); Small (2017); Fountas et al (2020); Suresha (2019); Silvestri et al (2021); Nitturkar (2021); Cook et al (2021)…”

Section: Digital Agriculture Technology Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Systematic Literature Review: An overview of Digital Agriculture for Food Sustainability

Mustapha

Sakariyau

Zubairu

et al. 2022

ijebd

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digital agriculture has been noted to have far reaching prospects in the transformation of agribusiness. Digital technologies are been applied to improve food production, processing, security and packaging. As most of the least developed and developing economies are strategizing to reduce poverty and hunger, digital agriculture presents opportunities to reverse the trends. Thus, this paper presents a systematic literature review with aim to collect all related research and identify gaps in digital agriculture, as well as to understand the benefits of digital technology in agriculture in other to chart new proposition for future studies. A systematic literature review was carried, and we have extracted 67 journals published within the last two decades (2002 -2022). Findings suggests that digital agriculture is important drivers of food sustainability, with improve production yield and increase household income. Also, 42% of the studies on digital agriculture are dominated by precision agriculture model. This SLR recognizes knowledge gaps in relation to the context, theory and content for future research.

show abstract

Systematic Stakeholder Inclusion in Digital Agriculture: A Framework and Application to Canada

Cited by 12 publications

References 52 publications

Patterns of Inequalities in Digital Agriculture: A Systematic Literature Review

Patterns of Inequalities in Digital Agriculture: A Systematic Literature Review

Developing ‘Smart’ Dairy Farming Responsive to Farmers and Consumer-Citizens: A Review

Systematic Literature Review: An overview of Digital Agriculture for Food Sustainability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About