IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zib/zbfaer/v3y2024i1p32-39.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comprehensive Review Of Redefining Agricultural Economics For Sustainable Development: Overcoming Challenges And Seizing Opportunities In A Changing World

Author

Listed:
  • Faith Ibukun Babalola

    (The Pennsylvania State University, USA)

  • Gbolahan Olaoluwa Oladayo

    (University of Texas at San Antonio, USA)

  • Emmanuel Osamuyimen Eboigbe

    (Department of Economics, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada)

  • Rosita Eberechukwu Daraojimba

    (Department of Business Administration, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria)

Abstract

This paper critically examines the evolving field of agricultural economics and its imperative to transition towards sustainable development. Traditional agricultural practices have often been associated with environmental degradation, resource depletion, and social inequities. This paper reviews the current state of agricultural economics, identifies key challenges, and proposes a framework for redefining the discipline to align with the principles of sustainable development. It provides a comprehensive overview of the topic, demonstrating a clear understanding of the issues and challenges in agricultural economics. It offers valuable insights into the role of agricultural economics in promoting sustainable development and provides a well-structured framework for redefining the discipline to meet the needs of the future. The study highlights the evolving role of agricultural economics in achieving sustainable development, with a focus on both challenges and opportunities. The methods involve a thorough literature review, analyzing principles of sustainable agriculture, economic instruments, technological innovations, and social dimensions. Case studies from diverse regions illustrate successful implementations of sustainable practices. The findings underscore the significance of agroecology, economic incentives, and market mechanisms in promoting sustainable agriculture. Precision agriculture and biotechnology emerge as pivotal technologies, but ethical considerations are paramount. Social dimensions, including rural development and gender equity, play crucial roles in achieving sustainability. The review identifies barriers to adoption and proposes future research directions to advance the field. Overall, the review advocates for a paradigm shift in agricultural economics, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive, interdisciplinary, and sustainable approach to address global challenges and contribute to a more sustainable future.

Suggested Citation

  • Faith Ibukun Babalola & Gbolahan Olaoluwa Oladayo & Emmanuel Osamuyimen Eboigbe & Rosita Eberechukwu Daraojimba, 2024. "A Comprehensive Review Of Redefining Agricultural Economics For Sustainable Development: Overcoming Challenges And Seizing Opportunities In A Changing World," Food and Agri Economics Review (FAER), Zibeline International Publishing, vol. 3(1), pages 32-39, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:zib:zbfaer:v:3:y:2024:i:1:p:32-39
    DOI: 10.26480/faer.01.2023.32.39
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://faer.com.my/archive/1faer2023/1faer2023-32-39.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.26480/faer.01.2023.32.39?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. Doss, Cheryl R., 2001. "Designing Agricultural Technology for African Women Farmers: Lessons from 25 Years of Experience," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(12), pages 2075-2092, December.
    2. Swinton, Scott M. & Lupi, Frank & Robertson, G. Philip & Hamilton, Stephen K., 2007. "Ecosystem services and agriculture: Cultivating agricultural ecosystems for diverse benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 245-252, December.
    3. John P. Reganold & Jerry D. Glover & Preston K. Andrews & Herbert R. Hinman, 2001. "Sustainability of three apple production systems," Nature, Nature, vol. 410(6831), pages 926-930, April.
    4. Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano & Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 663-674, May.
    5. Matin Qaim, 2009. "The Economics of Genetically Modified Crops," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 665-694, September.
    6. Jules Pretty & Tim G. Benton & Zareen Pervez Bharucha & Lynn V. Dicks & Cornelia Butler Flora & H. Charles J. Godfray & Dave Goulson & Sue Hartley & Nic Lampkin & Carol Morris & Gary Pierzynski & P. V, 2018. "Global assessment of agricultural system redesign for sustainable intensification," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 1(8), pages 441-446, August.
    7. Rattan Lal, 2015. "Restoring Soil Quality to Mitigate Soil Degradation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-21, May.
    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. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    2. Tiziano Gomiero, 2016. "Soil Degradation, Land Scarcity and Food Security: Reviewing a Complex Challenge," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-41, March.
    3. Sung Kyu Kim & Fiona Marshall & Neil M. Dawson, 2022. "Revisiting Rwanda’s agricultural intensification policy: benefits of embracing farmer heterogeneity and crop-livestock integration strategies," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 14(3), pages 637-656, June.
    4. Agboola, Oluwagbenga David & Yu, Han, 2023. "Neighborhood-based cross fitting approach to treatment effects with high-dimensional data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    5. Tanaka, K., 2018. "Do Bonus Payments Enhance Agri-environmental Payments? Empirical Findings from Rice Farming in Japan," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277343, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    7. Dennis Junior Choruma & Oghenekaro Nelson Odume, 2019. "Exploring Farmers’ Management Practices and Values of Ecosystem Services in an Agroecosystem Context—A Case Study from the Eastern Cape, South Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-22, November.
    8. Adjognon,Guigonan Serge & Nguyen Huy,Tung & Guthoff,Jonas Christoph & van Soest,Daan, 2022. "Incentivizing Social Learning for the Diffusion of Climate-Smart Agricultural Techniques," Policy Research Working Paper Series 10041, The World Bank.
    9. Aslam, Uzma & Termansen, Mette & Fleskens, Luuk, 2017. "Investigating farmers’ preferences for alternative PES schemes for carbon sequestration in UK agroecosystems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 27(PA), pages 103-112.
    10. Yajuan Chen & Qian Zhang & Wenping Liu & Zhenrong Yu, 2017. "Analyzing Farmers’ Perceptions of Ecosystem Services and PES Schemes within Agricultural Landscapes in Mengyin County, China: Transforming Trade-Offs into Synergies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-18, August.
    11. Zhen, Huayang & Qiao, Yuhui & Zhao, Haijun & Ju, Xuehai & Zanoli, Raffaele & Waqas, Muhammad Ahmed & Lun, Fei & Knudsen, Marie Trydeman, 2022. "Developing a conceptual model to quantify eco-compensation based on environmental and economic cost-benefit analysis for promoting the ecologically intensified agriculture," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    12. Byrne, Anne T. & Hadrich, Joleen C. & Robinson, Brian E. & Han, Guodong, 2020. "A factor-income approach to estimating grassland protection subsidy payments to livestock herders in Inner Mongolia, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    13. Bauer, Dana Marie & Johnston, Robert J., 2013. "Foreword: The Economics of Rural and Agricultural Ecosystem Services: Purism versus Practicality," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 42(01), pages 1-13, April.
    14. Vermunt, D.A. & Wojtynia, N. & Hekkert, M.P. & Van Dijk, J. & Verburg, R. & Verweij, P.A. & Wassen, M. & Runhaar, H., 2022. "Five mechanisms blocking the transition towards ‘nature-inclusive’ agriculture: A systemic analysis of Dutch dairy farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    15. Kangas, Johanna & Ollikainen, Markku, 2022. "A PES scheme promoting forest biodiversity and carbon sequestration," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    16. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    17. Canessa, Carolin & Venus, Terese E. & Wiesmeier, Miriam & Mennig, Philipp & Sauer, Johannes, 2023. "Incentives, Rewards or Both in Payments for Ecosystem Services: Drawing a Link Between Farmers' Preferences and Biodiversity Levels," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    18. Ian Hodge & William M. Adams, 2016. "Short-Term Projects versus Adaptive Governance: Conflicting Demands in the Management of Ecological Restoration," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-17, November.
    19. Surun, Clément & Drechsler, Martin, 2018. "Effectiveness of Tradable Permits for the Conservation of Metacommunities With Two Competing Species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 189-196.
    20. Galati, Antonino & Crescimanno, Maria & Gristina, Luciano & Keesstra, Saskia & Novara, Agata, 2016. "Actual provision as an alternative criterion to improve the efficiency of payments for ecosystem services for C sequestration in semiarid vineyards," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 58-64.

    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:zib:zbfaer:v:3:y:2024:i:1:p:32-39. 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: Zibeline International Publishing The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Zibeline International Publishing to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://faer.com.my/ .

    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.