IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i5p4374-d1084313.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Barriers to the Adoption of Innovations for Sustainable Development in the Agricultural Sector—Systematic Literature Review (SLR)

Author

Listed:
  • Laura Restrepo Campuzano

    (School of Engineering, Faculty of Agroindustrial Engineering, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Medellín 050001, Colombia)

  • Gustavo Adolfo Hincapié Llanos

    (School of Engineering, Faculty of Agroindustrial Engineering, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Medellín 050001, Colombia)

  • Jhon Wilder Zartha Sossa

    (School of Engineering, Faculty of Agroindustrial Engineering, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Medellín 050001, Colombia)

  • Gina Lía Orozco Mendoza

    (School of Engineering, Faculty of Agroindustrial Engineering, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Medellín 050001, Colombia)

  • Juan Carlos Palacio

    (School of Engineering, Faculty of Agroindustrial Engineering, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Medellín 050001, Colombia)

  • Mariana Herrera

    (School of Engineering, Faculty of Agroindustrial Engineering, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Medellín 050001, Colombia)

Abstract

In this article, we focused on studying the current barriers to implementing innovations in order for the agricultural sector to become more sustainable. Through a systematic literature review (SLR), 73 scientific articles were obtained with a search equation in SCOPUS. Of these, 48 were analyzed because of the mention of an obstacle preventing the sector from implementing innovations towards sustainability. Information related to the publication year, abstract, authors, keywords, innovation, innovation type, relationship with Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR), identified barrier, nature of the barrier (internal/external), agricultural subsector, country, and methodology of each article was identified, and with VantagePoint software, a technological surveillance technique was applied as a quantitative analysis of the information. The United States is the country with the most publications related to the subject. The most mentioned keywords were “Sustainable Agriculture”, “Agroecology”, “Climate Change”, “Innovation”, and “Organic Farming”. Additionally, a qualitative analysis showed 43 types of innovations, 16 of them related to technology. “Organic Agriculture” is the most mentioned innovation, followed by “Genetic Engineering” and “Precision Agriculture”. In addition, 51 barriers were identified, 28 external to farmers and 23 internal. “Lack of policies that promote that innovation Innovative Practices” is the most mentioned barrier, followed by “Epistemic Closure”, “Unfavorable Regulation”, Climate-Smart Agriculture, and “Unskilled Labor”. This article is intended not only to show trends in the barriers to innovation that prevents the achievement of sustainability that the agricultural sector needs, but also to serve as an input for the development of policies that provide solutions to these impediments. It was shown that 17 out of the 28 external barriers are related to topics that could be solved by formulating policies, laws, incentives, guidelines, and regulations.

Suggested Citation

  • Laura Restrepo Campuzano & Gustavo Adolfo Hincapié Llanos & Jhon Wilder Zartha Sossa & Gina Lía Orozco Mendoza & Juan Carlos Palacio & Mariana Herrera, 2023. "Barriers to the Adoption of Innovations for Sustainable Development in the Agricultural Sector—Systematic Literature Review (SLR)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-23, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:5:p:4374-:d:1084313
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/5/4374/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/5/4374/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cortner, O. & Garrett, R.D. & Valentim, J.F. & Ferreira, J. & Niles, M.T. & Reis, J. & Gil, J., 2019. "Perceptions of integrated crop-livestock systems for sustainable intensification in the Brazilian Amazon," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 841-853.
    2. Mamiya Binte Ahsan & Guo Leifeng & Fardous Mohammad Safiul Azam & Beibei Xu & Shah Johir Rayhan & Abdul Kaium & Wang Wensheng, 2022. "Barriers, Challenges, and Requirements for ICT Usage among Sub-Assistant Agricultural Officers in Bangladesh: Toward Sustainability in Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-27, December.
    3. von Braun, Joachim & Gulati, Ashok & Kharas, Homi, 2017. "Key policy actions for sustainable land and water use to serve people," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 11, pages 1-14.
    4. Vanloqueren, Gaëtan & Baret, Philippe V., 2008. "Why are ecological, low-input, multi-resistant wheat cultivars slow to develop commercially? A Belgian agricultural 'lock-in' case study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 436-446, June.
    5. Lemken, Dominic & Spiller, Achim & von Meyer-Höfer, Marie, 2017. "The Case of Legume-Cereal Crop Mixtures in Modern Agriculture and the Transtheoretical Model of Gradual Adoption," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 20-28.
    6. Douglas H. Constance & Jin Young Choi, 2010. "Overcoming the Barriers to Organic Adoption in the United States: A Look at Pragmatic Conventional Producers in Texas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-26, January.
    7. Antonella Zucchella & Pietro Previtali, 2019. "Circular business models for sustainable development: A “waste is food” restorative ecosystem," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 274-285, February.
    8. Jennifer Blesh & Steven Wolf, 2014. "Transitions to agroecological farming systems in the Mississippi River Basin: toward an integrated socioecological analysis," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 31(4), pages 621-635, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Renata Anibaldi & Sharyn Rundle-Thiele & Patricia David & Carina Roemer, 2021. "Theoretical Underpinnings in Research Investigating Barriers for Implementing Environmentally Sustainable Farming Practices: Insights from a Systematic Literature Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-24, April.
    2. Moisés Barbosa Junior & Eliane Pinheiro & Carla Cristiane Sokulski & Diego Alexis Ramos Huarachi & Antonio Carlos de Francisco, 2022. "How to Identify Barriers to the Adoption of Sustainable Agriculture? A Study Based on a Multi-Criteria Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-18, October.
    3. Pina Puntillo, 2023. "Circular economy business models: Towards achieving sustainable development goals in the waste management sector—Empirical evidence and theoretical implications," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(2), pages 941-954, March.
    4. Ciarli, Tommaso & Ràfols, Ismael, 2019. "The relation between research priorities and societal demands: The case of rice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 949-967.
    5. Matthew Houser, 2022. "Does adopting a nitrogen best management practice reduce nitrogen fertilizer rates?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(1), pages 79-94, March.
    6. Revoyron, Eva & Le Bail, Marianne & Meynard, Jean-Marc & Gunnarsson, Anita & Seghetti, Marco & Colombo, Luca, 2022. "Diversity and drivers of crop diversification pathways of European farms," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    7. Jacquet, Florence & Butault, Jean-Pierre & Guichard, Laurence, 2011. "An economic analysis of the possibility of reducing pesticides in French field crops," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(9), pages 1638-1648, July.
    8. Andrés Fernández-Miguel & Maria Pia Riccardi & Valerio Veglio & Fernando E. García-Muiña & Alfonso P. Fernández del Hoyo & Davide Settembre-Blundo, 2022. "Disruption in Resource-Intensive Supply Chains: Reshoring and Nearshoring as Strategies to Enable Them to Become More Resilient and Sustainable," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-13, August.
    9. Beatrice Dingha & Leah Sandler & Arnab Bhowmik & Clement Akotsen-Mensah & Louis Jackai & Kevin Gibson & Ronald Turco, 2019. "Industrial Hemp Knowledge and Interest among North Carolina Organic Farmers in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, May.
    10. Ryschawy, Julie & Tiffany, Sara & Gaudin, Amélie & Niles, Meredith T. & Garrett, Rachael D., 2021. "Moving niche agroecological initiatives to the mainstream: A case-study of sheep-vineyard integration in California," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    11. Á. Pereira & A. Carballo-Penela & A. Guerra & X. Vence, 2018. "Designing a policy package for the promotion of servicising: A case study of vineyard crop protection in Galicia (Spain)," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(2), pages 348-369, January.
    12. Magrini, Marie-Benoit & Anton, Marc & Cholez, Célia & Corre-Hellou, Guenaelle & Duc, Gérard & Jeuffroy, Marie-Hélène & Meynard, Jean-Marc & Pelzer, Elise & Voisin, Anne-Sophie & Walrand, Stéphane, 2016. "Why are grain-legumes rarely present in cropping systems despite their environmental and nutritional benefits? Analyzing lock-in in the French agrifood system," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 152-162.
    13. Jo Crotty & Diane Holt, 2021. "Towards a typology of strategic corporate social responsibility through camouflage and courtship analogies," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(3), pages 980-991, May.
    14. Sibylle Bui & Ionara Costa & Olivier De Schutter & Tom Dedeurwaerdere & Marek Hudon & Marlene Feyereisen, 2019. "Systemic ethics and inclusive governance: two key prerequisites for sustainability transitions of agri-food systems," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 36(2), pages 277-288, June.
    15. Dominic Lemken & Mandy Knigge & Stephan Meyerding & Achim Spiller, 2017. "The Value of Environmental and Health Claims on New Legume Products: A Non-Hypothetical Online Auction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-18, July.
    16. Fabio A. Madau & Brunella Arru & Roberto Furesi & Pietro Pulina, 2020. "Insect Farming for Feed and Food Production from a Circular Business Model Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-15, July.
    17. Féménia, Fabienne & Letort, Elodie, 2016. "How to achieve significant reduction in pesticide use? An empirical evaluation of the impacts of pesticide taxation associated to a change in cropping practice," Working Papers 233482, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    18. Marcos Ferasso & Tatiana Beliaeva & Sascha Kraus & Thomas Clauss & Domingo Ribeiro‐Soriano, 2020. "Circular economy business models: The state of research and avenues ahead," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 3006-3024, December.
    19. Rohe, Sebastian & Oltmer, Marie & Wolter, Hendrik & Gmeiner, Nina & Tschersich , Julia, 2022. "Forever Niche: Why do organic vegetable varieties not diffuse?," Papers in Innovation Studies 2022/8, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    20. Aurélie Cardona & Cristiana Carusi & Michael Mayerfeld Bell, 2021. "Engaged Intermediaries to Bridge the Gap between Scientists, Educational Practitioners and Farmers to Develop Sustainable Agri-Food Innovation Systems: A US Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-13, October.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:5:p:4374-:d:1084313. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.