IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/eurcho/v20y2021i2p70-75.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Farm Diversification: Drivers, Barriers and Future Growth Potential

Author

Listed:
  • Claire Jack
  • Austen Ashfield
  • Adewale Henry Adenuga
  • Conall Mullan

Abstract

Family farm businesses throughout Europe are facing new economic, environmental and social challenges. In order to deliver a more resilient primary agriculture sector, national and regional governments are identifying mechanisms to support farm businesses to adapt to these changing demands. This qualitative study explored the drivers of and barriers to farm diversification and its potential as a strategy to make farms more sustainable. Although there are a range of farm diversification strategies being pursued regionally, farm diversification is under‐exploited as an opportunity to achieve additional household income. Areas considered to have the potential for growth included, agri‐tourism, care services (including social farming), professional services and developing artisan food products. Beyond the need to generate new income sources, creating employment for other family members was considered an important motivation. Those factors identified as constraints to diversification included internet access, planning, business rates, support around skills development, networks and a farmer's own fear of failure. For smaller scale, family farm businesses located in more marginal areas, there is a need to identify a range of policy levers which support local farming systems and capture the multifaceted nature of the products and services that these farm businesses could provide and may be asked to deliver in the future. A travers toute l'Europe, les entreprises agricoles familiales sont confrontées à de nouveaux défis économiques, environnementaux et sociaux. Afin de rendre le secteur agricole primaire plus résilient, les pouvoirs publics nationaux et régionaux identifient des mécanismes pour aider les entreprises agricoles à s'adapter à ces demandes changeantes. Cette étude qualitative a exploré les moteurs et les obstacles à la diversification agricole et la capacité de cette stratégie à rendre les exploitations plus durables. Bien qu'il existe au niveau régional une gamme de stratégies à cet égard, le potentiel de la diversification des exploitations à générer des revenus supplémentaires pour les ménages est sous‐exploité. Les domaines considérés comme prometteurs comprennent l'agrotourisme, les services de soins (y compris l'agriculture sociale), les services professionnels et le développement de produits alimentaires artisanaux. Au‐delà de la nécessité de générer de nouvelles sources de revenus, la création d'emplois pour d'autres membres de la famille était considérée comme une motivation importante. Les facteurs identifiés comme des obstacles à la diversification comprenaient l'accès à Internet, le planning, les tarifs commerciaux, le soutien au développement des compétences, les réseaux et la peur de l’échec des agriculteurs. Pour les entreprises agricoles familiales à plus petite échelle situées dans des zones plus marginales, il est nécessaire d'identifier une gamme de leviers d'action publique qui soutiennent les systèmes agricoles locaux et capturent la nature multiforme des produits et services que ces entreprises agricoles pourraient fournir et pourraient être invitées à offrir dans le futur. Landwirtschaftliche Familienbetriebe stehen in ganz Europa vor neuen wirtschaftlichen, ökologischen und sozialen Herausforderungen. Um die Widerstandsfähigkeit des primären Landwirtschaftssektors zu verbessern werden von nationalen und regionalen Regierungen Anpassungsmaßnahmen zur Unterstützung landwirtschaftlicher Betriebe an diese sich wandelnden Anforderungen identifiziert. Die vorliegende qualitative Studie untersucht die Anreize, Hindernisse und Potenziale im Zusammenhang mit einer Diversifizierung, die als Strategie dazu dienen kann, landwirtschaftliche Betriebe nachhaltiger zu gestalten. Obwohl auf regionaler Ebene eine Reihe von betrieblichen Diversifizierungsstrategien verfolgt werden, wird die Diversifizierung als Möglichkeit, um zusätzliches Haushaltseinkommen zu erzielen, zu wenig genutzt. Zu den Bereichen, denen Wachstumspotenzial zugeschrieben wurde, gehörten der Agrar‐Tourismus, Pflegedienste (einschließlich sozialer Landwirtschaft), professionelle Dienstleistungen und die Entwicklung handwerklich hergestellter Lebensmittel. Abgesehen von der Notwendigkeit, neue Einkommensquellen zu erschließen, wurde die Schaffung von Arbeitsplätzen für andere Familienmitglieder als wichtige Motivation genannt. Zu den Faktoren, die als Hemmnisse für die Diversifizierung genannt wurden, gehörten Internetzugang, Planung, Unternehmenssteuern, Unterstützung bei der Entwicklung von Fachkenntnissen, Netzwerke und die Angst der Landwirtinnen und Landwirte vor dem Scheitern. In kleinerem Maßstab, d.h. bei Familienbetrieben in eher abgelegenen Gebieten, besteht die Notwendigkeit eine Reihe verschiedener politischer Maßnahmen zu identifizieren, welche die landwirtschaftlichen Systeme vor Ort unterstützen. Diese Maßnahmen sollten darüber hinaus die Vielschichtigkeit der Produkte und Dienstleistungen erfassen, die diese landwirtschaftlichen Betriebe bereitstellen könnten und die in Zukunft möglicherweise von ihnen verlangt werden.

Suggested Citation

  • Claire Jack & Austen Ashfield & Adewale Henry Adenuga & Conall Mullan, 2021. "Farm Diversification: Drivers, Barriers and Future Growth Potential," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 20(2), pages 70-75, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:eurcho:v:20:y:2021:i:2:p:70-75
    DOI: 10.1111/1746-692X.12295
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692X.12295
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1746-692X.12295?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lobley, Matt & Butler, Allan, 2010. "The impact of CAP reform on farmers' plans for the future: Some evidence from South West England," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 341-348, August.
    2. Jack, Claire & Miller, Ana Corina & Ashfield, Austen & Anderson, Duncan, 2019. "New entrants and succession into farming: A Northern Ireland perspective," International Journal of Agricultural Management, Institute of Agricultural Management, vol. 8(2), August.
    3. Meuwissen, Miranda P.M. & Feindt, Peter H. & Spiegel, Alisa & Termeer, Catrien J.A.M. & Mathijs, Erik & Mey, Yann de & Finger, Robert & Balmann, Alfons & Wauters, Erwin & Urquhart, Julie & Vigani, Mau, 2019. "A framework to assess the resilience of farming systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    4. Arnout R.H. Fischer & Meike T. A. Wentholt & Gene Rowe & Lynn J. Frewer, 2014. "Expert involvement in policy development: A systematic review of current practice," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(3), pages 332-343.
    5. Peter Howley, 2015. "The Happy Farmer: The Effect of Nonpecuniary Benefits on Behavior," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 97(4), pages 1072-1086.
    6. Alem, Habtamu & Lien, Gudbrand & Kumbhakar, Subal C. & Hardaker, J. Brian, 2019. "Are Diversification And Structural Change Good Policy? An Empirical Analysis Of Norwegian Agriculture," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(1), pages 1-26, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Oksana Žabko & Talis Tisenkopfs, 2022. "New Entrants Need Tailored Farm Advice," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 21(1), pages 63-69, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Blazquez-Soriano, Amparo & Ramos-Sandoval, Rosmery, 2022. "Information transfer as a tool to improve the resilience of farmers against the effects of climate change: The case of the Peruvian National Agrarian Innovation System," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    2. Leduc, Gaëlle & Billaudet, Larissa & Engström, Ebba & Hansson, Helena & Ryan, Mary, 2023. "Farmers' perceived values in conventional and organic farming: A comparison between French, Irish and Swedish farmers using the Means-end chain approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    3. Daniele, Bertolozzi-Caredio & Barbara, Soriano & Isabel, Bardaji & Alberto, Garrido, 2022. "Analysis of perceived robustness, adaptability and transformability of Spanish extensive livestock farms under alternative challenging scenarios," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    4. Abele Kuipers & Agata Malak-Rawlikowska & Aldona Stalgienė & Anita Ule & Marija Klopčič, 2021. "European Dairy Farmers’ Perceptions and Responses towards Development Strategies in Years of Turbulent Market and Policy Changes," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-24, March.
    5. Antonio Zavala-Alcívar & María-José Verdecho & Juan-José Alfaro-Saiz, 2020. "A Conceptual Framework to Manage Resilience and Increase Sustainability in the Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-38, August.
    6. Pietro De Marinis & Paolo Stefano Ferrario & Guido Sali & Giulio Senes, 2022. "The Rapid and Participatory Assessment of Land Suitability in Development Cooperation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-24, October.
    7. Meuwissen, Miranda & Feindt, Peter & Slijper, Thomas & Spiegel, Alisa & Finger, Robert & de Mey, Yann & Paas, Wim & Termeer, Katrien & Poortvliet, P. Marijn & Peneva, Mariya & Urquhart, Julie & Vigani, 2021. "Impact of Covid-19 on farming systems in Europe through the lens of resilience thinking," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 191.
    8. Bang, Rasmus & Hansen, Bjørn Gunnar & Guajardo, Mario & Sommerseth, Jon Kristian & Flaten, Ola & Asheim, Leif Jarle, 2024. "Conventional or organic cattle farming? Trade-offs between crop yield, livestock capacity, organic premiums, and government payments," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    9. Daniel Kangogo & Domenico Dentoni & Jos Bijman, 2020. "Determinants of Farm Resilience to Climate Change: The Role of Farmer Entrepreneurship and Value Chain Collaborations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-15, January.
    10. Saint-Cyr, Legrand D. F., 2016. "Accounting for farm heterogeneity in the assessment of agricultural policy impacts on structural change," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235778, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Latruffe, Laure & Dupuy, Aurelia & Desjeux, Yann, 2012. "What would farmers’ strategies be in a no-CAP situation? An illustration to France," 86th Annual Conference, April 16-18, 2012, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 134989, Agricultural Economics Society.
    12. Nele Lohrum & Morten Graversgaard & Chris Kjeldsen, 2021. "Historical Transition of a Farming System towards Industrialization: A Danish Agricultural Case Study Comparing Sustainability in the 1840s and 2019," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-15, November.
    13. Thomas Slijper & Yann de Mey & P Marijn Poortvliet & Miranda P M Meuwissen, 2022. "Quantifying the resilience of European farms using FADN," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(1), pages 121-150.
    14. Robert Huber & Hang Xiong & Kevin Keller & Robert Finger, 2022. "Bridging behavioural factors and standard bio‐economic modelling in an agent‐based modelling framework," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 35-63, February.
    15. Willemijn Vroege & Robert Finger, 2020. "Insuring Weather Risks in European Agriculture," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 19(2), pages 54-62, August.
    16. Meuwissen, Miranda P. M. & Feindt, Peter H. & Spiegel, Alisa & Paas, Wim & Soriano, Bárbara & Mathijs, Erik & Balmann, Alfons & Urquhart, Julie & Kopainsky, Birgit & Garrido, Alberto & Reidsma, Pytrik, 2022. "SURE-Farm approach to assess the resilience of European farming systems," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 1-17.
    17. Mukesh Kumar & Rakesh D. Raut & Mahak Sharma & Vikas Kumar Choubey & Sanjoy Kumar Paul, 2022. "Enablers for resilience and pandemic preparedness in food supply chain," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 1198-1223, December.
    18. Townsend, T.J. & Sparkes, D.L. & Ramsden, S.J. & Glithero, N.J. & Wilson, P., 2018. "Wheat straw availability for bioenergy in England," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 349-357.
    19. Howley, Peter & Breen, James P. & Donoghue, Cathal O. & Hennessy, Thia, 2012. "Does the single farm payment affect farmers’ behaviour? A macro and micro analysis," International Journal of Agricultural Management, Institute of Agricultural Management, vol. 2(1), pages 1-8, October.
    20. Veronika Hannus & Johannes Sauer, 2021. "Understanding Farmers’ Intention to Use a Sustainability Standard: The Role of Economic Rewards, Knowledge, and Ease of Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-21, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:eurcho:v:20:y:2021:i:2:p:70-75. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.