IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i5p2185-d1352031.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Government Support Mechanisms for Sustainable Agriculture: A Systematic Literature Review and Future Research Agenda

Author

Listed:
  • Marcelo Werneck Barbosa

    (Department of Agricultural Economics, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago 7820436, Chile)

Abstract

Government support for enterprises can be provided in different forms, such as subsidies, tax incentives, or direct public investment. Government support can also be given to develop environmentally and socially responsible initiatives. In the agriculture sector, government support involves providing early-warning information from meteorological monitoring, policies to encourage companies and citizens to engage in sustainable behavior, and the organization of disaster relief activities. A comprehensive view of the government support mechanisms employed in the agriculture industry and their possible effects on the adoption of sustainable initiatives is yet to be provided in the literature. Through a systematic literature review of articles published from 1992 to 2023 in the Web of Science and Scopus databases, this study found that subsidies, programs, regulations, and financial assistance are the main mechanisms used by governments to support sustainable initiatives in agriculture. Moreover, our review also found that the reduction in environmental impacts, the stimulus to organic production, industry growth, and rural development are the most common goals of using government support for sustainable agriculture. We also geographically categorize research in this field by showing where research has been produced and where it should be improved. We call for more research focused on support from governments in South America. We also observed that environmental protection, the supply of organic foods, and urban agriculture are frequently impacted when there is not enough government support. At last, we propose some research questions to guide future studies. We expect that policymakers will use the outcomes of this study to guide the design and implementation of new government support mechanisms aimed at improving the sustainable performance of agriculture firms. The outcomes of this study will also help managers make investment decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcelo Werneck Barbosa, 2024. "Government Support Mechanisms for Sustainable Agriculture: A Systematic Literature Review and Future Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-17, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:5:p:2185-:d:1352031
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/5/2185/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/5/2185/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shi, Tian & Gill, Roderic, 2005. "Developing effective policies for the sustainable development of ecological agriculture in China: the case study of Jinshan County with a systems dynamics model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 223-246, April.
    2. Hochrein, S. & Glock, C. H. & Bogaschewsky, R. & Heider, M., 2015. "Literature reviews in supply chain management: a tertiary study," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 75187, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    3. Julia M. L. Laforge & Colin R. Anderson & Stéphane M. McLachlan, 2017. "Governments, grassroots, and the struggle for local food systems: containing, coopting, contesting and collaborating," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(3), pages 663-681, September.
    4. Jane Dixon & Carol Richards, 2016. "On food security and alternative food networks: understanding and performing food security in the context of urban bias," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 33(1), pages 191-202, March.
    5. repec:dar:wpaper:73318 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. William Ho & Tian Zheng & Hakan Yildiz & Srinivas Talluri, 2015. "Supply chain risk management: a literature review," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(16), pages 5031-5069, August.
    7. Padilla-Bernal, Luz E. & Lara-Herrera, Alfredo & Reyes-Rivas, Elivier & Perez-Veyna, Oscar, 2012. "Competitiveness, Efficiency and Environmental Impact of Protected Agriculture in Zacatecas, Mexico," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 15(4), pages 1-16, November.
    8. Jon Hellin & Jean Balié & Eleanor Fisher & Genowefa Blundo-Canto & Nafees Meah & Ajay Kohli & Melanie Connor, 2020. "Sustainable agriculture for health and prosperity: stakeholders’ roles, legitimacy and modus operandi," Development in Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(7), pages 965-971, October.
    9. Chengli Shu & Kevin Z. Zhou & Yazhen Xiao & Shanxing Gao, 2016. "How Green Management Influences Product Innovation in China: The Role of Institutional Benefits," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 133(3), pages 471-485, February.
    10. Luana Molossi & Aaron Kinyu Hoshide & Daniel Carneiro de Abreu & Ronaldo Alves de Oliveira, 2023. "Agricultural Support and Public Policies Improving Sustainability in Brazil’s Beef Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-19, March.
    11. Sony K. C. & Bishnu Raj Upreti, 2017. "The Political Economy of Cardamom Farming in Eastern Nepal: Crop Disease, Coping Strategies, and Institutional Innovation," SAGE Open, , vol. 7(2), pages 21582440177, May.
    12. J. Wakeford & M. Swilling, 2014. "Implications of increasing world oil scarcity for national food security in South Africa," Agrekon, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(4), pages 68-91, November.
    13. Igors Skute, 2019. "Opening the black box of academic entrepreneurship: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(1), pages 237-265, July.
    14. Glover, J.L. & Champion, D. & Daniels, K.J. & Dainty, A.J.D., 2014. "An Institutional Theory perspective on sustainable practices across the dairy supply chain," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 102-111.
    15. Burhanudin Harahap & Tastaftiyan Risfandy & Inas Nurfadia Futri, 2023. "Islamic Law, Islamic Finance, and Sustainable Development Goals: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-21, April.
    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. Qian Forrest Zhang, 2024. "From Sustainable Agriculture to Sustainable Agrifood Systems: A Comparative Review of Alternative Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-24, November.

    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. Goknur Arzu Akyuz & Guner Gursoy, 2020. "Strategic management perspectives on supply chain," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 70(2), pages 213-241, May.
    2. Marcelo Werneck Barbosa, 2022. "A Critical Appraisal of Review Studies in Circular Economy: a Tertiary Study," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 473-505, June.
    3. Katarzyna Sienkiewicz-Małyjurek & Maciej Szymczak, 2024. "Understanding public service supply chain management: a systematic literature review," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(3), pages 1879-1943, September.
    4. Belhadi, Amine & Kamble, Sachin S. & Venkatesh, Mani & Chiappetta Jabbour, Charbel Jose & Benkhati, Imane, 2022. "Building supply chain resilience and efficiency through additive manufacturing: An ambidextrous perspective on the dynamic capability view," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 249(C).
    5. Amine Belhadi & Sachin S. Kamble & Venkatesh Mani & Charbel Jose Chiappetta Jabbour & Imane Benkhati, 2022. "Building supply chain resilience and efficiency through additive manufacturing : An ambidextrous perspective on the dynamic capability view," Post-Print hal-04325568, HAL.
    6. Naemi Schäfer, 2023. "Making transparency transparent: a systematic literature review to define and frame supply chain transparency in the context of sustainability," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 73(2), pages 579-604, June.
    7. Carla Curado & Mírian Oliveira & Dara G. Schniederjans & Eduardo Kunzel Teixeira, 2024. "Control variable use and reporting in operations management: a systematic literature review and revisit," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(3), pages 1809-1839, September.
    8. Stradner, Sascha & Brunner, Uwe, 2022. "Analysis of potential benefit and maturity level of digital procurement," Chapters from the Proceedings of the Hamburg International Conference of Logistics (HICL), in: Kersten, Wolfgang & Jahn, Carlos & Blecker, Thorsten & Ringle, Christian M. (ed.), Changing Tides: The New Role of Resilience and Sustainability in Logistics and Supply Chain Management – Innovative Approaches for the Shift to a New , volume 33, pages 375-402, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute of Business Logistics and General Management.
    9. Emilia Vann Yaroson & Soumyadeb Chowdhury & Sachin Kumar Mangla & Prasanta Kumar Dey, 2024. "Unearthing the interplay between organisational resources, knowledge and industry 4.0 analytical decision support tools to achieve sustainability and supply chain wellbeing," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 342(2), pages 1321-1368, November.
    10. Febi Jensen & Hans Lööf & Andreas Stephan, 2020. "New ventures in Cleantech: Opportunities, capabilities and innovation outcomes," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 902-917, March.
    11. Bárbara Galleli & Elder Semprebon & Joyce Aparecida Ramos dos Santos & Noah Emanuel Brito Teles & Mateus Santos de Freitas-Martins & Raquel Teodoro da Silva Onevetch, 2021. "Institutional Pressures, Sustainable Development Goals and COVID-19: How Are Organisations Engaging?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, November.
    12. Pasura Aungkulanon & Walailak Atthirawong & Pongchanun Luangpaiboon & Wirachchaya Chanpuypetch, 2024. "Navigating Supply Chain Resilience: A Hybrid Approach to Agri-Food Supplier Selection," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-42, May.
    13. Leonardo de Assis Santos & Leonardo Marques, 2022. "Big data analytics for supply chain risk management: research opportunities at process crossroads," Post-Print hal-03766121, HAL.
    14. Md. Ahashan Habib & Md. Rezaul Karim & Marzia Dulal & Mohammad Shayekh Munir, 2022. "Impact of Institutional Pressure on Cleaner Production and Sustainable Firm Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-25, December.
    15. Sergii Bogachov & Aleksy Kwilinski & Boris Miethlich & Viera Bartosova & Aleksandr Gurnak, 2020. "Artificial intelligence components and fuzzy regulators in entrepreneurship development," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 8(2), pages 487-499, December.
    16. Seipp, Vanessa & Michel, Alex & Siegfried, Patrick, 2020. "Review of International Supply Chain Risk Within Banking Regulations in Asia, US and EU Including Proposals to Improve Cost Efficiency by Meeting Regulatory Compliance," MPRA Paper 111579, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 23 Aug 2020.
    17. Qazi, Abroon & Dickson, Alex & Quigley, John & Gaudenzi, Barbara, 2018. "Supply chain risk network management: A Bayesian belief network and expected utility based approach for managing supply chain risks," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 24-42.
    18. Dmitry Ivanov, 2022. "Viable supply chain model: integrating agility, resilience and sustainability perspectives—lessons from and thinking beyond the COVID-19 pandemic," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 319(1), pages 1411-1431, December.
    19. Jamalnia, Aboozar & Gong, Yu & Govindan, Kannan, 2023. "Sub-supplier's sustainability management in multi-tier supply chains: A systematic literature review on the contingency variables, and a conceptual framework," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 255(C).
    20. Ronja Teschner & Jessica Ruppen & Basil Bornemann & Rony Emmenegger & Lucía Aguirre Sánchez, 2021. "Mapping Sustainable Diets: A Comparison of Sustainability References in Dietary Guidelines of Swiss Food Governance Actors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, November.

    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:16:y:2024:i:5:p:2185-:d:1352031. 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.