Abstract

1. Background

2. Research Methodology

3. Results

4. Discussion

5. Conclusion

Abbreviations

Data Availability

Authors’ Contributions

Acknowledgments

References

Abstract

     Introduction. Analyzing the effect of COVID-19 is an important issue in agricultural sectors. However, such analysis requires a complex hierarchical statistical model. Rapid spread of the COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the world’s production and productivity in many sectors. Among those sectors, the agricultural sector is highly affected. The Bale zone in the larger extent and Sinana district, in particular, is one of the potential agricultural areas in the Oromia regional state, Ethiopia where agriculture is the major sector in supporting the livelihood of thousands of subsistence farmers in the area as well as the country at large. Research Methodology. This study involved primary data collected from the farmers in the Sinana district during the period 2020–2021. A total of 991 farmers were selected from the entire 22 kebeles in the district. The data were analyzed using multilevel binary logistic random intercept regression models with maximum-likelihood parameter estimation. Results. Of the 991 farmers, 549 (55.4%) responded that COVID-19 has brought only challenges in their agricultural production and 311 (31.4%) responded both challenges and opportunities. About 632 (63.8%) of the farmers said that there was wastage of products such as milk, dairy, fruits, and vegetables. Three hundred twenty-eight (33.1%) of the participants obtained modernization in their agricultural production system like use of tractors and irrigation systems. According to the model results, farmer’s sex, age, educational level, family size, farmland size, types of effect, aggravation in food insecurity, input delay, lack of workers, slowdown of service, falling in income, modernization in the system of production, wastage of product, and types of wasted products were identified as significant factors. About 8% of the total variability in the effect of COVID-19 is due to differences across kebeles (ICC = 0.08,  value ≤0.05), and the remaining is due to individual differences. Conclusion. This study further demonstrated the potential of a hierarchical model for the study of COVID-19 effect variation within and between the kebeles. The majority, about 92% variation in the effect, is due to the disparity of individuals (farmers). The farmers with large family sizes and high capacity to produce and who were females were negatively related to the effect of COVID-19 in agricultural production.

Background

     The rapid spread of COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the world’s production and productivity in many sectors and, as a consequence, slowed down the world’s economic growth to a larger extent. The agricultural sector is among the highly affected especially in the Third-World countries. Even during prepandemic times, agricultural production was subjected to high risk, as compared to other sectors, because of its dependence on environmental conditions, which are largely unpredictable nowadays. The pandemic halted the rate of economic growth in many countries during 2019 and is expected to result in severe recession in the upcoming years, especially in the Third-World countries where agriculture is a key sector [1]. bib3

     Ethiopia is among the highly affected countries and faced a dramatic decrease in agricultural production and productivity, hence a minimum economic growth (GDP) as compared to the last ten years. The pandemic and related partial social restrictions have posed a negative impact on the smallholder farmers such as market loss and cause significant income losses in specific sectors such as livestock and horticulture [2].

Conclusion

     The main purpose of this study was to estimate the challenges and opportunities of COVID-19 on agricultural production among farmers in Sinana district, Bale zone, Ethiopia. The study revealed a huge negative impact on the agricultural production and productivity of the farmers and the country at large. Of the 991 farmers, 549 said COVID-19 had only challenges in their agricultural production, and 311 had both challenges and opportunities. About 632 (63.8%) of the farmers said that there was wastage of products such as milk, dairy, fruits, and vegetables. Three hundred twenty-eight (33.1%) of the participants obtained modernization in their agricultural production system like use of tractors and irrigation systems. This study further demonstrated the potential of a multilevel random intercept model for the study of COVID-19 effect variation within and between the kebeles. The majority, about 92% variation of the effect, is due to the disparity of individuals (farmers). Farmers with a large family size and high capacity to produce, and whose sex is female were negatively related to the effect of COVID-19 in agricultural production. The odds of farmers who did not face both challenges and opportunities due to the pandemic was 1.308 (adjusted OR = 1.308, 95% CI = (−1.232, 1.769)) times more likely than those farmers who did face only challenges. This study also contributes to the literature by statistically examining challenges and opportunities for agricultural producers in Sinana district in reflection to COVID-19 and its countermeasures based on the variation within individuals and between kebeles that have been explained, which can provide more targeted implications for policymakers.

Abstract

Context

     Crop-livestock integration is a theoretical ideal for sustainable agriculture. However, the number of European crop-livestock farms has decreased due to multiple factors (e.g. agricultural policies and work constraints). Crop-livestock integration beyond the farm level (e.g. through grain-manure exchanges) is a relevant option to address these limiting factors. However, this integration within farmer groups is challenging because it requires collective redesign to address organizational issues.

Objective

     We developed a participatory approach that includes the serious game Dynamix to support the co-design of scenarios of crop-livestock integration among farms.

Methods

     The approach consists of six steps: (1) initial group meeting to define the problem; (2) farmer interviews to identify motivations and collect technical and economic farm data; (3) scenario co-design meeting using the serious game Dynamix, including a spatially explicit board game and a simulation model; (4) multicriteria evaluation of these scenarios at the individual farm and group levels using the simulation model included in Dynamix; (5) group meeting to discuss the results; and (6) monitoring of selected scenario implementation. We applied this methodology with two groups of farmers in southwestern France.

Results and conclusions

     In the two groups, crop farmers wanted to diversify their cropping systems and use manure to improve soil quality. Livestock farmers were interested in local and non-GMO feed for their animals. The scenario they selected included i) inserting cereal-legume mixtures into crop rotations on crop farms to be sold to livestock farms and ii) transferring manure from livestock farms to crop farms. In this scenario, the predicted overall gross margin increased more for livestock farmers (median = 29.90 €/ha) than for crop farmers (median = 6.60 €/ha). Nitrogen balance management was improved: crop farmers decreased their use of mineral fertilizer by 2.8–17.4 kg/ha/year; livestock farmers decreased their feed inputs improving local feed self-sufficiency. However, farmers’ workload and management complexity increased, with 22–54 h of additional work per farmer per year. Compared to other scenarios, trade-offs between individual farm and group benefits resulted in greater local autonomy in inputs but lower autonomy in decision-making. In the two groups, discussions improved trust, which is a key ingredient for transitioning to integration beyond the farm level.

Significance

     Our study is the first to use a standardized participatory approach based on a serious game to support the complex issue of crop-livestock integration beyond the farm level. Applying the approach to a case-study revealed its strong potential. It can easily be scaled-out to other agricultural contexts.

Introduction

     Farms that include crops and livestock are widely perceived as an ideal option to maintain agricultural production levels while limiting environmental impacts on soil and biodiversity (Franzluebbers et al., 2014; Hendrickson et al., 2008; Lemaire et al., 2014). However, globalized markets associated with policy incentives contributed to their decrease in number (Garrett et al., 2017), especially in Europe, due to limited availability of workforce and loss of skills (Ryschawy et al., 2013). Integration beyond the farm level could thus be a relevant alternative to address these limiting factors (Martin et al., 2016). It consists of reconnecting neighboring specialized farms through exchanges of grain, fodder, crop by-products and manure, or even by sharing land and other resources (e.g. workers, equipment).

     Only a few crop-livestock integration initiatives beyond the farm level have been documented (de Wit et al., 2006; Regan et al., 2017; Ryschawy et al., 2019). Asai et al. (2018) compared worldwide case studies and identified a variety of barriers that restrict implementation of crop-livestock integration among farms. Operational barriers related to the availability of on-farm storage capacity and transportation, distance and legal aspects related to contracts and billing. Social barriers related to establishing trust and shared goals, and to the complexity of governance. Frequent meetings and communication among participants and a third party were deemed necessary to develop and maintain effective mediation (Cofr´e-Bravo et al., 2019). Thus, organizing highly coordinated groups of crop farmers and livestock farmers remains a challenge due to the high cost of coordination (Asai et al., 2018).

Conclusion

     This study was the first to use a standardized participatory approach based on a serious game to support crop-livestock integration beyond the farm level, including implementation. The case-study application showed its potential for addressing this complex issue. The method can be easily scaled-out to other contexts and is already planned to be adapted to other cases of crop-livestock integration beyond farm level, including sheep-viticulture systems in France and California, cattle grazing cover crops in Scottland and biogas production in Denmark. Further developments will be needed to include permanent crops and biogas plants in the Dynamix serious game.

Abstract

     A farm scale life cycle assessment (LCA) was conducted to estimate environmental indicators of organic dairy systems in the U.S. and evaluate alternative management practices and methodological decisions. Fourteen farm layouts (including Amish and grass intensive) are evaluated over four U.S. regions. Carbon (C) sequestration from pasture and cropping systems is estimated based on C added to the soil and the crop and grassland management practices. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions range from 0.76 to 1.08 kg CO2-eq/kg fat and protein corrected milk (FPCM) after C sequestration. Methane (CH4) from enteric fermentation and liquid-slurry manure storage are major sources of GHGs, with the first related to cow feed to milk conversion efficiency. The production and consumption of fossil energy contribute to GHGs depending on the mix of fuels of regional electricity production. NH3 emissions range from 7.7 to 20.0 g/kg FPCM with differences between regions explained by environmental factors, management practices, and dairy diet composition. Eutrophication potential ranges from 3.4 to 6.6 g PO4/kg FPCM from phosphorus and nitrogen losses after manure application from on-farm and imported feeds. Electricity and diesel are the major contributors to fossil energy depletion (2.1 to3.7 MJ/kg FPCM), with the embedded energy from imported feeds also contributing significantly.

Introduction

     Agricultural systems are challenged to balance feeding a growing population while addressing environmental concerns and providing a high quality of life for farmers and rural communities. Agricultural emissions to air and water contribute to climate change, ecosystem deterioration, and human health issues (Poore and Nemecek, 2018). In the U.S., agriculture is responsible for 10% of total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, with soil management, enteric fermentation, and manure accounting for 55%, 28% and 10%, respectively (U.S. EPA, 2021a). Up to 70% of the excreted nitrogen (N) in manure can be emitted as ammonia (NH3) in livestock operations (Hristov et al., 2002). These losses represent 80–90% of the global anthropogenic NH3 emissions (Xu et al., 2019) that can redeposit and lead to impaired waterways (U.S. EPA, 2004), or further transform to particulate matter or N2O. Nutrient losses from manure have the potential to reach ground and surface water contributing to eutrophication.

Conclusions

     GHG emissions (including C sequestration), NH3 emissions, resource depletion (energy, land, and water use), and EP at organic dairy farms in the U.S. were evaluated. Despite that milk production levels are generally lower than conventional systems, environmental impacts are comparable. Carbon sequestration is largely absent from LCA studies given its complexity but can be important for dairies that rely on pasture and forages. This study presents a procedure that can be implemented in other dairy or agricultural related LCA studies and promote discussion around this topic. Enteric CH4 remains the most prominent source of GHGs from cradle-to-farm gate, but results show that farms can still improve feeding efficiencies. Impacts from energy consumption are directly related to the regional electricity mix, with the implementation of renewables having the greatest impact on Amish farms that use diesel generators. As NH3 emissions continue to be an important concern for animal agriculture, baseline estimations will help establish mitigation targets and strategies. Manure management remains an important source of environmental impacts, especially during storage and after land application. Water use is significantly higher on farms that use irrigation and import feed. Alternative management practices can reduce GHGs and can guide on-farm implementation. Variations in results by different methodological decisions show these choices remain an unresolved topic in LCA worthy of discussion.

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Material and methods

3. Results and discussion

4. Conclusion

Author contribution statement

Acknowledgements

References

Abstract

     The use of digital technologies in agriculture offers various benefits, such as site-specific application, better monitoring, and physical relief. The handling of these technologies requires a specific skill set. Therefore, the question arises of when and how farm managers learn about digital technologies. Aiming to analyse the current situation, the present research investigated the role that digital technologies play in vocational training for future farm managers. Taking the example of farm management information systems (FMIS), the present study also analysed various predictors of adoption, including the effect of training. To investigate these research questions, an online survey among teachers and students of the farm management vocational programme across Switzerland was conducted in the spring of 2021. In total, 150 individuals participated, 41 of whom were teachers. Participants answered questions about the learning content in the farm management programme and their perception of digital technologies in general. Students further reported whether they already had a farm they would be managing in the future and how they perceived FMIS. The results indicate that both teachers and students are convinced that digital technologies play an important role in agriculture and will gain more importance in the future. A substantial part of 43% of the students who participated indicated that they had learned neither about digital technologies during their basic agricultural training nor the subsequent farm management programme. In terms of FMIS, 51% of the student sample indicated that they had never heard about FMIS during their agricultural training.

Introduction
Digital technologies and FMIS in agriculture

     The use of digital technologies in agriculture can facilitate the recording of data, support the sustainable use of resources, and make everyday work easier for farmers (Groher, Heitkamper, et al., 2020a, b). Digital technologies include a wide range of applications such as robots (e.g. for milking or hoeing), GPS applications (e.g. driver assistance or precision farming), sensors (e.g. measuring ammonia levels in barns or soil moisture), and smart phone applications.

     One digital technology that helps farmers collect, manage, and interpret their data is the farm management information system (FMIS). In essence, FMIS are farm record systems, which provide information that supports decision making related to the farm business (Lewis, 1998). They can further assist inexperienced farmers in their decision making by compensating for a relative lack of farming experience (Lewis, 1998). FMIS are a heterogeneous group of systems that cover a range of different functions. Fountas et al. (2015) identified in their review four clusters of FMIS: (1) basic systems, (2) sales-oriented systems, (3) site-specific systems, and (4) complete systems. Basic systems offer a limited set of functions that mainly support traditional farm management. Sales-oriented systems focus on sales and marketing, inventory management, and finance functions. The third group, site-specific systems, focuses on precision agriculture. The final group of complete systems offers a wide range of functions, some of which are also covered by the other three clusters. In this group, the percentage of web-based and mobile functions is the highest (Fountas et al., 2015).

Conclusion

     This work is among the first to investigate the role that digital technologies and FMIS play in agricultural training in Switzerland and what the predictors are for their adoption. The current study finds that only about 60% of the students of the farm management programme learned about digital technologies, and around 50% learned about FMIS during their agricultural training. Whether students had learned about FMIS in their agricultural training, however, had no significant effect on their adoption of FMIS. In line with previous research, which investigated the adoption of other technologies as measured with the TTMA, the current research also identified gender, perceived ease of use, and intention to use more digital technologies in the future as important predictors for the adoption of FMIS. These findings are relevant for both research and practice. For researchers, a better understanding of the predictors of the adoption of FMIS can help build prognoses for their future development. Further, an analysis of the situation in Switzerland complements the numerous studies conducted in Germany and helps reflect the situation in Europe. In terms of practical relevance, this knowledge can be useful to adapt the educational and advisory offers to fit the needs and skill levels of future farm managers. Policymakers can use the information to develop measures supporting the improvement of teaching materials and learning content.

Highlights

ABSTRACT

Abbreviations

Keywords

Introduction

Clarifying the nomenclature: towards a definition of SynBio chassis

The roadmap from being a rDNA host to a fully-fledged certified SynBio chassis

Safe implementation of SynBio agents: standardized chassis should ease ERA certifications

Barcoding as an avenue to ease traceability and manage contingencies

The need of new ERA standards and metrics

Pseudomonas putida as an example of how to become a SynBio chassis

Is P. putida safe?

Conclusion

Acknowledgements

References

ABSTRACT

At the onset of the 4th Industrial Revolution, the role of synthetic biology (SynBio) as a fuel for the bioeconomy requires clarification of the terms typically adopted by this growing scientific-technical field. The concept of the chassis as a defined, reusable biological frame where non-native components can be plugged in and out to create new functionalities lies at the boundary between frontline bioengineering and more traditional recombinant DNA technology. As synthetic biology leaves academic laboratories and starts penetrating industrial and environmental realms regulatory agencies demand clear definitions and descriptions of SynBio constituents, processes and products. In this article, the state of the ongoing discussion on what is a chassis is reviewed, a non-equivocal nomenclature for the jargon used is proposed and objective criteria are recommended for distinguishing SynBio agents from traditional GMOs. The use of genomic barcodes as unique identifiers is strongly advocated.

Introduction

The language of physics and engineering uses clear definitions of forces, measures, and units to be precise and unequivocal. If one says ampere, kilometer, gravity or screw pitch it is known exactly what the term means. In contrast, the jargon of synthetic biology (SynBio), which aims at transforming biology to an engineering discipline is peppered with words and metaphors which seem to be more a declaration of intentions (or wishes) than an accurate description of the items named thereby. One of the central notions of contemporary SynBio is that of chassis [[1], [2], [3], [4]] a term that evokes the basic frame of a car to which a number of components can be added in response to specifications and/or customers’ desires (from French: châssis = frame; latin capsa = container, box). By the same token, the word started to be used in the early 2000s by the incipient SynBio community of the time as a somewhat humorous and engineering-sounding description of the biological host used as the recipient of recombinant DNA — which by that time meant nearly exclusively Escherichia coli. The word chassis (and the powerful metaphor embodied in it) became an instant success and was quickly incorporated into the habitual discourse of SynBio-as-engineering. However, the word has acquired new meanings over the years and has been used in many different contexts beyond its original and somewhat modest significance.

Abstract

Keywords

1. Introduction

2. Literature review

3. Methods and data sources

4. Data analysis and discussions

5. Conclusion and recommendations

Declaration of Competing Interest

References

Abstract

In recent years, the agricultural industry has been experiencing an ever-increasing application of information and communication technologies globally. This new revolution has been touted to impact efficiency and productivity in the agricultural extension services within the agriculture sector. Notwithstanding this, empirical research need to be carried out amongst its users in the sector to ascertain these assertions. Therefore, the main objective of this study is to assess the use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) among agricultural extension workers and its implications on extension service delivery. A simple random sampling technique was used to select 153 field extension workers, and a structured questionnaire was used to elicit information from the respondents. The data obtained were analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics software version 22. The study revealed that agricultural extension officers use ICT for personal communication, but not mainly for extension activities. It was recommended that the agricultural extension services provide intensive ICT training for the agricultural extension workers to enhance ICT incorporation into extension advisory service.

1. Introduction

The application of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) across different sectors of the global economy has become a game changer in boosting work efficiency and productivity. The agriculture sector in the global economy is one of the industries experiencing tremendous ICT application in all spheres of its operations. Daum (2020) observed that in recent years, ICTs had become one of the main driving tools used by farmers to manage the essential factors of production (land, labour, capital, and soil) in agriculture. ICT applications have the potential to identify and find solutions to some of the numerous problems faced in the field of agriculture, which includes prolonged droughts, pest and disease outbreaks, seasonality and spatial dispersion of farming; high transaction costs and information asymmetry (Anh et al., 2019). ICT application along the agricultural value chain (from farm to fork) could offer the opportunities for actors within the chain to obtain accurate, timely, and relevant information; which will not only contribute to profitability but also enhance food security, sustainable and remunerative agriculture (Purnomo & Lee, 2010). ICT also has the potential to resolve the challenges faced by governments, farmers, and other land users in valuation, registration, and taxation of land. For instance, in India, the digitalization of land administrative activities saved farmers close to 1.32 million working days of man-hours and about 806 million Rupees in bribe due to the improved system, which reduced corruption levels (Daum, 2020). The application of ICT in agricultural activities across the globe is not only gaining popularity but also transforming the sector’s businesses.

The agriculture sector has experienced a new technological revolution for the past ten years. Compared to a decade earlier, this new technological revolution, has the potentials to respond to farmers’ needs accurately and swiftly. Wolfert et al. (2017) observed that technological advancement in the area of digital platforms, such as e-commerce, agro-advisory apps, big data, computational power, and satellite systems like remote sensing, among others, quicken communication and information sharing among farmers in recent years. Mobile phones that have internet connectivity (smartphones) are the most widely used ICT devices across the globe (O’Dea, 2020). Research published by Statista (2020), showed that the number of smartphone users around the world were 3.2 billion in 2019, and forecasted that this figure could reach 3.8 billion by 2021.

Highlights

Abstract

Keywords

1. Introduction

2. Material and methods

2.1. Study area

2.2. Data collection

2.3. Statistical analysis

3. Results

4. Discussion

5. Conclusion

Author statement

Acknowledgements

References

Abstract

The study aims to identify the influencing factors and their impact level on the public agricultural land management. The results show that the policy group is the most influential with an impact level of 38.06 %, followed by the financial group with an impact level of 36.17 %, the management factor with an impact level of 25.77 %. In order to improve the efficiency of the management of public agricultural land fund, it is necessary to amend and supplement a number of policies and laws, such as setting the maximum lease time of public agricultural land fund to be equal to the duration of district-level land use planning; strengthening the propagation and dissemination of land law; rational use of fragmented and scattered land parcels; settling encroached or occupied land plots through conversion of land use purposes into residential or public purposes of the commune.

1. Introduction

In Vietnam, the public agricultural land fund is the land area not exceeding 5% of the total land area for annual crops, land for perennial crops and aquaculture land of a commune. In addition to supplementing the public agricultural land fund, there are other sources such as agricultural land returned by organizations, households and individuals or donated with the right to use to the State, reclaimed land, recovered agricultural land. It is the source to form or supplement the agricultural land fund used for public purposes of the commune. The fund of public agricultural land managed and used by the commune is to meet the needs of constructing cultural, physical training and sport facilities, health care, public entertainment, cemeteries and other works of the commune and for rent when not in use to collect land rental for public purposes of the commune. According to Vietnam’s land law, land is owned by the people and is uniformly managed by the State. People do not have the right to own land, can only use the land and transfer the land use right when needed. Land management in general, and management of public agricultural land fund in particular is the State’s purposeful impact on land in order to use land efficiently and sustainably in association with environmental protection (Pham Phuong Nam and Nguyen Van Quan, 2014). The National Assembly manages land through the promulgation of land legislation, decisions on land use planning and plans throughout the country, and exercises the supreme supervision over land management and use. The Government uniformly manages land, including land funds nationwide. The commune-level People’s Committee directly manages and leases public agricultural land fund for a period not exceeding 5 years. So far there have been a number of studies on different aspects of land management in general and public agricultural land in particular. The study of Le Thi Thanh Xuan et al. (2015) has pointed out some limitations in the management of public agricultural land such as leasing land to wrong subjects, illegally transferring public land, using land for improper purposes, encroaching and occupying public agricultural land; Public land management records are not regularly updated. According to Nguyen Huu Ngu et al. (2017), public agricultural land fund is still scattered, small plot land area; rental of public land without contracts should affect the efficiency of managing public agricultural land, causing rent losses.

Highlights

Abstract

Keywords

1. Introduction

2. Major constraints of the agriculture sector in Nepal

3. Potential pathways to build resilience and revitalize the agriculture sector in Nepal

4. Conclusion

Funding declaration

Declaration of Competing Interest

Appendix A. Supplementary data

References

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has seriously affected the agrarian and remittance-based economy of Nepal. Dwindling the employment opportunities and disrupting the food production and distribution channels, the pandemic has further exacerbated the unemployment and food insecurity situation. Providing employment opportunities and livelihood support to pandemic-affected households has, therefore, become increasingly challenging but a necessary priority to the government. Therefore, to build a sustainable and resilient economy that generates employment and enhance agricultural productivity, revitalization of the constraints-ridden agriculture sector is essential as it still contributes 65% and 24.3% to employment and Gross Domestic Product, respectively. Against this backdrop, this paper presents major pathways and priority actions to rebuild and revitalize the growth of the agricultural sector in Nepal while addressing the challenge posed by the pandemic to generate employment and income-earning opportunities. We emphasize the need for scale-appropriate strategies, programs and plans to build resilience of production, supply chains, and agribusiness systems. We conclude that the government should initially focus on targeted priority interventions to the pandemic-affected farmers and agro-entrepreneurs, and strengthen their productive, competitive, and adaptive capacities. These need to be followed by long-term strategies such as development of agricultural infrastructure, innovative policies, legal instruments, and institutional arrangements, including strengthening of the recently established local governments in line with the federal structure of Nepal.

1. Introduction

COVID-19 (or SARS-CoV-2) is a global pandemic of enormous proportion that has severely affected human lives and the global economy (UNDP, 2020b). The virus has spread to over 213 countries and territories infecting more than 65.1 million people and killing over 1.5 million by 3 December 2020 (Worldometer, 2020). Lockdowns and mobility restrictions have been the common responses to the pandemic, but they have disrupted production, input and output markets, supply chains, global trade, travel, and tourism; delivering an enormous shock to the global economy in 2020 as indicated by early estimates of 495 million job losses and 5.2% contraction on global output (ILO, 2020a; World Bank, 2020b).

The health and economic impacts of the pandemic have been severe in countries that have weak health systems and rely heavily on trade, tourism, and remittances (World Bank, 2020b). Like many other severely affected countries, Nepal has been experiencing health and economic impacts of COVID-19. Over 237,589 infections and 1551 deaths have been reported in Nepal by 3 December 2020 (MOHP, 2020) and the country has entered a second wave that is more severe than the first (World Bank, 2020f). COVID-19 and associated nationwide complete (from 24 March to 21 July 2020) and partial (after 21 July) lockdowns have severely affected the Nepalese economy through multiple channels: a) the collapse of tourism, trade, and hospitality sectors, affecting over one million jobs; b) loss of foreign jobs and return of migrants, affecting remittance earnings; and c) disruption of production and supply chains of the industrial and agricultural products, affecting the livelihoods of millions of people (Baniya et al., 2020; ILO, 2020b; World Bank, 2020c).

Highlights

Abstract

Keywords

1. Introduction

2. Learning from the ghosts of agriculture past

3. From the past into our agriculture present

4. Anticipating our agricultural future

5. Conclusion

Declaration of competing interest

Acknowledgements

References

Abstract

Strategic foresight is systematic means to explore plausible futures. In the agricultural context, strategic foresight allows decision-makers to explore how alternative investments in agriculture research may function given anticipated futures associated with a variety of drivers ranging from climate change to increasing wealth to a changing policy environment. This paper presents an overview and context for six recently published articles in Global Food Security that comprise a virtual special issue on agricultural futures. Each of the papers takes a distinct perspective and addresses key issues from how past trends drive future outcomes to specific commodity systems to issues around employment and rural transformation. While each of the included papers stands on its own merits, the collection presents a unique opportunity to unpack the role of investment in agriculture research from a variety of perspectives. Collectively, the special issue offers insights to support current and future investment planning to better target desired outcomes associated with long-term agricultural research.

1. Introduction

Since agriculture first appeared in the Fertile Crescent some 10,000 years ago, humankind has been working to make it better. Early farmers quickly learned that different crops had different properties, and that a variety of tools could help improve agricultural outcomes under different conditions. In the present day, our interconnected agricultural systems are still the foundation of the global food system, and the latest technologies from improved crop varieties to digital agro-advisory systems provide modern farmers with a range of solutions that would have been unimaginable even a few decades ago.

Whether talking about an ancestral farmer in the Fertile Crescent, a large-scale farmer in North America, or a small-scale farmer in sub-Saharan Africa, farmers have long recognized the need to develop their craft on an ongoing basis. Agricultural research and innovation, both informal and formal, have arguably been the “secret sauce” that has allowed economies to diversify, grow, and sustain the Earth’s population over decades and even millennia.

Highlights

Abstract

Keywords

1. Introduction

2. Impacts of COVID-19 pandemic on agriculture

3. Three potential mechanisms to mitigate the impacts of major crises and disasters on agriculture

3.1. Developing crisis management plans and designing resilience-promoting policies

3.2. The need to create and exploit community marketing schemes

3.3. Can smart farming technologies and big data help farmers deal with major crises or disasters?

4. Conclusions

Declaration of Competing Interest

Acknowledgments

References

Abstract
The COVID-19 outbreak was an unprecedented situation that uncovered forgotten interconnections and interdependencies between agriculture, society, and economy, whereas it also brought to the fore the vulnerability of agrifood production to external disturbances. Building upon the ongoing experience of the COVID-19 pandemic, in this short communication, we discuss three potential mechanisms that, in our opinion, can mitigate the impacts of major crises or disasters in agriculture: resilience-promoting policies, community marketing schemes, and smart farming technology. We argue that resilience-promoting policies should focus on the development of crisis management plans and enhance farmers’ capacity to cope with external disturbances. We also stress the need to promote community marketing conduits that ensure an income floor for farmers while in parallel facilitating consumer access to agrifood products when mainstream distribution channels under-serve them. Finally, we discuss some issues that need to be solved to ensure that smart technology and big data can help farmers overcome external shocks.

1. Introduction
COVID-19 appeared as a black swan, which puts at risk the lives of millions of people through its massive spread (Whitworth, 2020), simultaneously prompting new fears about the economic recession that is expected to follow the pandemic (Goodell, 2020; Snooks, 2020). After the identification of the first infections in China in December 2019, the virus began surging in other countries in February 2020 (Pedrosa, 2020). On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization officially announced the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic (WHO, 2020). To protect public health, governments around the world – even those whose leaders expressed denial of COVID-19 at the beginning of the pandemic – initiated several measures (ranging from media announcements to partial or even complete lockdown) to mitigate the disease. These measures led to profound changes in consumers buying behavior and food consumption patterns, disturbances in transportation networks, and the closure of some food suppliers (Nakat & Bou-Mitri, 2020). Such an upheaval created uncertainty shocks that impacted every sector of social and economic life, including agriculture.

1- Introduction

2- Background

3- Theoretical Framework

4- Econometric model

5- Data

6- Results and discussion

7- Conclusion and policy implications

References

Abstract

This study investigates the factors affecting farmland rental prices in China. Special emphasis is put on the capitalization of China’s grain subsidy program into land rental rates. Using national representative farm-level data, Heckman sample selection model, and quantile regression (QR) approach, we find that a 10% increase in grain subsidy payments for contracted farmland increases the farmland rental price by about 1%. However, quantile regression results show that the capitalization rate is heterogeneous and varies across the distribution. Findings suggest that family labor input and farm location are important factors driving up farmland rental prices. Moreover, for farm size, rental experience, and natural disaster we detect a negative impact on land rental prices.

Introduction

To promote grain production, ensure food security, and improve rural household income, China’s government implemented a national grain subsidy program in 2004 (Yi et al., 2015). Since its inception, the program’s size has increased continuously (Huang et al., 2013), and the program accounted for 22% of the government’s annual agricultural and environmental expenditures in 2014 (Yi and McCarl, 2018). The government initially designed the grain subsidy program (GSP) to increase grain production and to ensure national food security. Thus, researchers focused their efforts on estimating the effects of GSP on agricultural output and rural livelihoods. For instance, Tan et al. (2006) using micro survey data found that the direct grain subsidy has had a modest impact on farmers’ income and has reduced income inequality in villages. However, Huang et al. (2011) detected that grain subsidies have no impact on grain production and demand for production inputs. In a recent study, Huang and Yang (2017) stated that the grain subsidy’s impact on farmers’ income was negligible because the size of the subsidy per farmer was minimal. While there has recently been ample research on developments in land use and rural adjustments in China (e.g. Zhang et al., 2019; Liu et al., 2018; Liu, 2018; Yang et al., 2018; Liu and Li, 2017; Liu et al., 2014; Li et al., 2014; Wang et al., 2013), no study has examined China’s GSP from the perspective of human-land relationships, or specifically rural households’ land rental activities (e.g., farmland rental behavior, farmland rental prices). During the transition of China’s production mode and land use pattern, the farmland rental market is believed to be an essential channel in solving land fragmentation and small-scale nature of Chinese farms (Zhou et al., 2019).