Open research questions in Agricultural Innovations and Practices

What the literature leaves open

• Future research should investigate the long-term economic impacts of TC adoption and assess impacts of intensified banana cultivation.

  Determinants of Tissue Culture Technology Adoption in Banana Cultivation: Evidence from Chitwan District, Nepal · 2026 · DOI

• • Strengthen Input and Seed Supply: Ensure timely delivery of high-quality seeds, fertilizers, and other essential inputs to support cluster-based production. Improve Mechanization and Labor Support: Facilitate access to small-scale machinery and labor-saving technologies to reduce labor intensity and improve efficiency. • • Enhance Market Linkages: Develop stronger connections with agro-processors, cooperatives, and export channels to ensure fair prices for surplus production. • Expand Extension Services: Provide targeted advisory services on both agronomic practices and market information to support informed decision-making. • Promote Crop Diversification: Encourage rotation and inclusion of pulses, vegetables, and other crops to reduce risks associated with mono-cropping. • Strengthen Institutional Coordination: Improve the capacity of cooperatives, Farmer Training Centers, and other to support cluster organization, input delivery, credit access, and collective activities.

  Understanding the Perceptions and Challenges of Cluster Farming Approach in Enhancing Agricultural Productivity and Commercialization: Insights from Ethiopia’s Central Highlands · 2026 · DOI

• 1. Subsidized Leasing Windows: Government and private providers should introduce tiered pricing models to reduce entry barriers for low-income farmers (GRZ, 2022). 2. Collateral Reform: Adoption of alternative collateral mechanisms such as group guarantees can enhance inclusion (Beck & Demirgüç-Kunt, 2008). 3. Institutional Strengthening: Extension services should integrate leasing literacy programs to bridge awareness-utilization gaps. 4. Gender and Youth Targeting: Dedicated leasing quotas or financial support schemes should be introduced to enhance equitable access. 18 5. Public–Private Partnerships: Stronger collaboration between government and leasing firms can reduce bureaucratic inefficiencies and improve service delivery.

  Examining the Challenges and Opportunities for Farmers in Accessing Farm Equipment Leases from Agricultural and Leasing Companies in Mumbwa District, Zambia · 2026 · DOI

• 4 Study Limitations This study is constrained by its cross-sectional design, which limits the ability to draw causal inferences over time. Social desirability bias also merits consideration: respondents may have underreported dependency-related attitudes or overstated productivity outcomes due to perceived social norms around self-reliance, which could result in a conservative estimate of dependency levels.

  The Post-Donor Agricultural Extension Service Dependency and Smallholder Productivity in Liberia · 2026 · DOI

• These findings may have important implications ARTICLE IN PRESS smart agriculture (CSA) practices, namely straw return, varietal improvement and agrochemical reduction, have been considered in this paper; other equally important CSA strategies such as mixed cropping and land-use management have not yet been fully explored, and subsequent studies should further consider and analyze in- depth the effects of and prospects for the application of these practices.

  Can agricultural cooperatives promote farmers’ adoption of climate-smart agriculture practices? Evidence from three provinces in Central and Western China · 2026 · DOI

• Based on the findings, the study offers the following recommendations for policy, practice, and further research: • Scale-Up of the Epicentre Strategy: Government agencies, local governments, and civil society organisations should expand the implementation of the Epicentre Strategy across rural Uganda. The methodology’s emphasis on consciousness-raising, participatory planning, and demonstrated measurable impacts on household welfare, community structures, and socio-economic transformation.

  Mindset Change and Rural Transformation: Evidence from the URDT Epicentre Strategy in Kagadi, Uganda · 2026 · DOI

• The study had a limitation of relying on cross-sectional data. While the study tried to control for heteroskedesticity through using robust standard error, further study involving experimental or panel data designs would be needed to prop- erly account for potential bias from unobserved heterogeneity and to test this Hypothesis. Furthermore, while the PPI is a recognized tool, it does not necessarily reflect short-term food security problems, seasonal deprivation, or nutritional losses resulting from forced sales.

  DISTRESS SALES AS LIVELIHOOD STRATEGY: COMMERCIALIZATION AND THE PERSISTENCE OF POVERTY AMONG WIDOWED FARMERS IN CONFLICT-AFFECTED NIGERIA · 2026 · DOI

• socioeconomic realities, particularly regarding labour availability and access to specialised tools. At the post-harvest stage, adoption was highest (88.1%), with none of the formal information channels showing a significant effect. However, experiential learning emerged as the dominant driver, with each additional year of farming experience increasing adoption (β = 0.001, p < 0.01), confirming the centrality of indigenous knowledge in ICMPs. farmers’ Across all stages, education consistently amplified adoption outcomes. Tertiary education exerted the strongest effect in the nursery (β = 0.30), with additional positive effects on on-farm (β = 0.08) and post-harvest (β = 0.06) practices, highlighting the role of human capital in interpreting, adapting, and integrating diverse knowledge sources.

  Stage-Contingent Information Efficacy: Disaggregating the Impact of Advisory Channels on Cocoa Management Practices in Southwest Nigeria · 2026 · DOI

• The findings suggest that there is a significant limitation in technology adoption, farm characteristics, geographic factors, institutional factors, climatic, and market shocks affect smallholders’ access to AES, and the service has the potential to promote CSA practices in the study area.

  Smallholders’ perception, access, and impacts of agricultural extension services on climate-smart agriculture in South Gondar Zone, Ethiopia · 2026 · DOI

• The following recommendations were made from the findings of the study: - Extension services should seek to deploy intervention programmes that will intensify dissemination land management strategies in improving crop farming practices for increased productivity among farmers. information on - There should be strict compliance to land use act and town planning master plan as designed by the government planning authorities, such that lands are not committed to the purpose they are not meant for.

  Effect of Land Speculators Activities on Crop Farming Management Practices in Akinyele Local Government Area, Oyo State · 2026 · DOI

• 1 Reconciling contradictory findings: a multi-level framework Our results present an apparent paradox: strong positive correlations between innova- tion and institutions (PLS-SEM β = 0.

  The dual role of institutions and regulation in shaping agricultural innovation in Sub-Saharan Africa · 2026 · DOI

• While climate-smart agriculture (CSA) is widely advocated as a key solution, the drivers of sustained commitment among smallholder communities, particularly in highly vulnerable, flood-prone ecosystems remain underexplored.

  Beyond adoption: smallholder intentions for sustained engagement with climate-smart agriculture · 2026 · DOI

• i. Government and agricultural stakeholders should improve access to agricultural resources such as irrigation systems, improved seed, mechanization, and climate-smart inputs. ii. Agricultural institutions should strengthen continuous technical training for agronomists in sustainable and climatesmart agricultural practices. iii. Policymakers should promote adoption of modern agricultural technologies through improved infrastructure and affordable agricultural financing. iv. The Ministry of Agriculture should strengthen implementation and monitoring of agricultural support policies to enhance sustainability objectives. v. Future studies should include larger samples and multiple districts to generate broader evidence on sustainable agriculture promotion in Zambia. REFERENCES Adamu, F., & Wambui, C. (2021). Sustainable agriculture in Africa: Current trends and challenges. African Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 9(1), 45–58. Aker, J. C. (2011). Dial “A” for agriculture: Using information and communication technologies for agricultural extension in developing countries. Agricultural Economics, 42(6), 631–647. Alubi, T., Tembo, A., & Daka, A. (2024). Access to agrometeorological information among smallholder farmers in Chongwe District: A demographic and socio-economic analysis. Journal of Environment, Climate, and Ecology, 1(1), 38-45. Anderson, J. R., & Feder, G. (2007). Agricultural extension. In R. Evenson & P. Pingali (Eds.), Handbook of agricultural economics, 3. 2343–2378). Elsevier. Barrett, C. B., Christiaensen, L., Sheahan, M., & Shimeles, A. (2020). On the structural transformation of rural Africa. Journal of African Economies, 26(Suppl. 1), i11–i35. Below, T. B., Mutabazi, K. D., Kirschke, D., Franke, C., Sieber, S., Siebert, R., & Tscherning, K. (2012). Can farmers’ adaptation to climate change be explained by socio-economic household-level variables? Global Environmental Change, 22(1), 223–235. Black, S. (2022). Conducting in-depth interviews in rural areas (1st ed.). University of Zambia Press. Brown, R. (2022). Using SPSS for statistical analysis in agricultural research (3rd ed.). Wiley. Burke, W. J., Jayne, T. S., & Black, J. R. (2012). Factors explaining the low and variable profitability of fertilizer application to maize in Zambia. Agricultural Economics, 43(6), 659–670. Chambers, R. (1994). Participatory rural appraisal (PRA): Analysis of experience. World Development, 22(9), 1253–1268. Chanda, M. (2022). The role of agronomists in promoting sustainable agriculture in Zambia. Zambia Journal of Agronomy 10(3), 78–94. Chen, L., & Patel, M. (2020). Promoting sustainable agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa: Strategies and barriers. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 15(2), 102–118. Chileshe, L., & Mwale, N. (2020).

  Challenges Facing Agronomists and Effective Strategies for Promoting Sustainable Agriculture in Zambia’s Modern Agriculture: Insights from Mkushi District, Zambia · 2026 · DOI

• Main conclusions The empirical results suggest that digital technology adoption not only improves agricultural production performance statistically but also reshapes farmers’ production behavior and risk management strategies. By reducing information search costs, improving access to production services, and strengthening market connectivity, digital technologies enable farmers to optimize production decisions under uncertainty. The findings therefore reflect broader changes in agricultural organization and adaptive livelihood strategies rather than merely numerical productivity gains. Based on the information effect theory and the sustainable livelihoods analytical framework, this article systematically examines the impact of digital technology adoption on agricultural production efficiency and its underlying mechanisms using household panel data from the China Family Panel Studies (CFPS) spanning 2014 to 2022. It further tests the transmission effect of production efficiency improvement on farmers’ livelihood resilience. The main conclusions are as follows: First, digital technology adoption significantly improves farmers’ agricultural production efficiency. Baseline regression results show that the digital technology adoption index has a significant positive effect on output per mu, technical efficiency, and total factor productivity. This conclusion remains robust after instrumental variable estimation, propensity score matching, lagged variable models, and a series of robustness tests. The effect is both statistically and economically significant: a one standard deviation increase in the digital technology adoption index increases output per mu by approximately 4.37%, equivalent to an increase of about 51.8 yuan per mu. This indicates that digital technology effectively promotes agricultural production efficiency improvement by reducing information asymmetry, optimizing production decisions, and enhancing factor allocation efficiency. Second, digital technology promotes production efficiency improvement through three mechanisms. Mechanism tests reveal that: (1) Technical efficiency improvement pathway.

  Digital technology adoption, agricultural production efficiency, and farmers’ livelihood resilience · 2026 · DOI

• This study, while offering valuable insights into the determinants and dimensions of multidimensional poverty among smallholder tomato farmers in Nigeria, is not without limitations. One key limitation lies in the cross-sectional nature of the data, which restricts the ability to establish causality between explanatory variables and multidimensional poverty outcomes. Although the fractional response model cap- tures associations between poverty and its determinants, longitudinal data would have provided deeper insights into how poverty dynamics evolve and how changes in access to resources or institutional support influence welfare outcomes. Another limi- tation concerns the geographical scope of the study, which focused on tomato farmers within specific regions of Nigeria. While this focus allows for context-specific analy- sis, it limits the generalizability of the findings to other agricultural sectors or regions with different socioeconomic or agroecological characteristics. Future research could extend the analysis to include other farming systems or a nationally representative sample to capture broader spatial variations in multidimensional poverty. Addition- ally, the study relied heavily on self-reported data, which may be subject to recall bias and social desirability bias. Respondents might have over- or under-reported certain socioeconomic indicators, such as income, asset ownership, or access to services, potentially affecting the accuracy of the MPI calculations. Complementary data from administrative sources or observational methods could improve reliability. The measurement of multidimensional poverty itself, though based on the Alkire- Foster approach, is limited by the choice and availability of indicators. Some poten- tially important dimensions, such as empowerment, environmental sustainability, or access to agricultural insurance, were not included due to data constraints. Finally, the study does not fully account for external factors such as climate shocks, price volatility, and policy changes that may influence poverty outcomes. Incorporating these dynamic variables in future studies would provide a more comprehensive understanding of the complex drivers of rural poverty. Despite these limitations, the study provides a robust and contextually grounded analysis that contributes signifi- cantly to the discourse on multidimensional poverty and rural livelihoods in Nigeria.

  Enhancing access to market information for multidimensional poverty reduction among smallholder tomato farmers in Nigeria · 2026 · DOI

• Improving access to agricultural information for urban and peri-urban farmers requires coordinated efforts among several actors within the agricultural knowledge and innovation system. Government institutions responsible for agricultural extension should expand advisory services to better include urban and peri-urban farming communities where agricultural activities are increasingly practiced. Increasing the visibility and accessibility of extension services in these areas would improve farmers’ access to technical knowledge and strengthen linkages between farmers and agricultural research institutions.

  Agricultural information needs and sources for smallholder farmers in Urban and Peri-Urban Morogoro, Tanzania · 2026 · DOI

• Future research should focus on empirical assessments of youth led alternative livestock enterprises to better understand enterprise performance, risk dynamics, and livelihood outcomes over time. Comparative studies across provinces and alternative livestock subsectors would provide further insight into how institutional capacity and market structure shape inclusivity. In addition, primary research involving youth producers, industry stakeholders, and policymakers would deepen understanding of the lived experiences and practical constraints facing young entrants. Such research would strengthen evidence-based policy design and support more inclusive agricultural diversification strategies.

  Youth Participation and the Economic Viability of Ostrich Farming in Limpopo Province, South Africa · 2026 · DOI

• The findings of the present study indicate that low-cost farming technologies possess considerable potential to strengthen agricultural productivity, sustainability, and rural development in India. However, realizing this potential requires coordinated managerial, institutional, and governance-oriented interventions capable of supporting innovation diffusion, farmer participation, and long-term agricultural transformation. The following recommendations are proposed to strengthen innovation-driven agricultural management within the Indian agricultural sector. One of the most important requirements is the development of decentralized agricultural innovation ecosystems at regional and local levels. Rural agricultural conditions vary significantly across India, and therefore innovation systems should encourage localized adaptation rather than relying exclusively on standardized technological models. District-level innovation centers, rural fabrication hubs, and community-based agricultural technology laboratories can help farmers and rural entrepreneurs develop affordable technologies according to local operational requirements. Such decentralized systems may improve contextual relevance and strengthen grassroots participation in agricultural innovation processes. The study also recommends strengthening institutional support mechanisms for grassroots innovators and rural entrepreneurs. Several practical agricultural technologies remain confined to limited geographical areas because innovators lack access to financing systems, technical standardization assistance, manufacturing support, and commercialization opportunities. Government agencies, agricultural universities, innovation foundations, and rural development institutions should establish specialized support programs for farmer-led innovations. Simplified patent assistance, innovation incubation schemes, prototype development support, and rural technology financing can significantly improve the scalability of affordable agricultural innovations. Agricultural extension systems require substantial modernization and expansion in order to improve technology diffusion within rural regions. Existing extension mechanisms in many areas continue to suffer from limited outreach, insufficient training capacity, and weak field-level engagement. Demonstrationbased extension models should be encouraged so that farmers can directly observe the practical functioning of agricultural technologies before adoption. Farmer training programs should additionally focus on operational maintenance, technological adaptation, and sustainable farming practices rather than only theoretical awareness generation. Another important recommendation involves integrating participatory innovation approaches within agricultural policy implementation.

  Innovation-Driven Agricultural Management: Examining the Role of Low-Cost Farming Technologies in India · 2026 · DOI

• These findings may reflect selection bias to an extent. While a majority of FPPI participants responded to this survey, it may be that participants who had positive experiences with their respective FPPI and in agriculture were more likely to fill out the survey. To situate respondents among all FPPI participants, the information the FPPI programs were able to provide about their participants’ farming operations allowed us only to make limited comparisons between FPPI participants as a whole and the survey respondents. Further, this research did not learn from those who attempted to utilize these programs, but were unable. These FPPI farmer respondents could represent a distinctive population that is not generalizable to the farming populations of their states. Farmers interested in farmland protection and purchase may have a greater entrepreneurial capacity, inclination toward diversified direct and intermediated marketing, as well as implementing conservation practices. A final limitation is that since the study did not gather core data about the FPPI farms’ revenues or other farm incomes or other direct indicators of the viability of their farming operations, the methods were only able to indirectly infer the state of the FPPI farms’ success.

  U.S. states' coupled investments in young farmers' land access, ownership, and farmland protection: farmer survey evidence of food systems contributions · 2026 · DOI

• The study is based on cross-sectional data and relies on self- reported perceptions of farmers regarding ICT effectiveness. The absence of baseline data, control groups, or longitudinal assessment limits the ability to establish causal impact. Additionally, the dichoto- mous measurement format may reduce sensitivity in capturing varia- tions in effectiveness perceptions. Therefore, findings should be interpreted as associative rather than causal relationships.

  An analysis of the associative relationship between ICT and agricultural decision-making · 2026 · DOI

• Based on the SLF, this study explores the impact of livelihood capital on farmers’ willingness to participate in traceability systems. Using multiple and binary logit regression models, the study analyzes the influence of various forms of livelihood capital and their specific indicators on farmers’ willingness. Combined with interpretive structural modeling, the study further reveals the interrelationships and hierarchical structures among significant indicators. The findings show that livelihood capital has a significant positive impact on farmers’ willingness, particularly in the areas of physical capital, financial capital, human capital, and social capital. Specifically, indicators such as orchard size, number of land parcels, financial accessibility, living standards, labor capacity, skills training, social networks, and familiarity with village cadres significantly enhance farmers’ willingness, while age has a significant negative effect. These significant indicators can be categorized into three layers: the first layer includes direct influencing indicators such as financial accessibility, living standards, and labor capacity; the second layer includes indirect influencing indicators such as orchard size, skills training, social networks, and familiarity with village cadres; and the third layer includes root indicators such as the number of land parcels and age. These indicators are further divided into four impact pathways. This study provides empirical evidence for improving farmers’ livelihoods and optimizing livelihood capital allocation, offering important references for formulating targeted policies and interventions to promote traceability systems. The following policy recommendations can be drawn from the study findings.

  Exploring the impact of livelihood capital on farmers’ willingness to participate in traceability systems · 2026 · DOI

• This study has several limitations that should be acknowledged. First, the use of purposive (non-probability) sampling in a typical agri- cultural region in central China may limit the statistical generaliz- ability of the findings. Although the sample is appropriate for exploring the relationships between livelihood capital and farmers’ willingness to participate in traceability systems, caution is warranted when extending the results to other regions or broader populations with different institutional and socioeconomic conditions. Future research could employ probability-based sampling strategies or multi- region datasets to enhance external validity. Second, due to data constraints, several potentially relevant con- trol variables—such as education level, off-farm employment, distance to markets or extension services, digital literacy (e.g., smartphone use), certification or regulatory exposure, and risk preferences—were not included in the empirical models. The omission of these variables may introduce bias. For instance, education and digital literacy are likely to be positively associated with both livelihood capital and par- ticipation willingness, potentially leading to an overestimation of cer- tain effects. Similarly, factors such as off-farm employment and market accessibility may jointly influence resource endowment and participa- tion decisions, which could result in omitted variable bias. Future studies could incorporate these factors and adopt more rigorous iden- tification strategies to improve causal inference. Finally, the empirical results show that natural capital is not sta- tistically significant at the aggregate level, which may reflect limita- tions in measurement or aggregation methods. It is possible that the composite index masks heterogeneous effects of individual natural capital indicators, or that its influence operates indirectly through other forms of capital. Future research could refine the measurement of natural capital, explore nonlinear or interaction effects, and exam- ine its role using alternative analytical approaches or longitudinal data to better capture its dynamic impact on farmers’ behavior.

  Exploring the impact of livelihood capital on farmers’ willingness to participate in traceability systems · 2026 · DOI

• This study is subject to several limitations. First, it is based on a qualitative case study of a single district, which limits the gener- alisability of the findings beyond similar rural contexts. Second, reliance on self-reported data may introduce recall or social desir- ability bias. Third, the cross-sectional design captures youth agency and participation at one point in time, limiting insight into how these dynamics evolve. Nonetheless, the study provides in-depth, context-sensitive insights that offer strong analytical and theoreti- cal relevance.

  Youth agency and participatory pathways in advancing sustainable agriculture entrepreneurship · 2026 · DOI

• The data obtained from the study shows that the majority (81.3% of PxD farmers and 81.8% CSC farmers) are willing to pay for the RCM recommendations. The remaining 18.7% of PxD farmers and 18.2% of CSC farmers were not willing to pay (Table 10). Among those who are willing to pay, 74.6% of PxD farmers and 53.9% of CSC farm- ers agreed to pay between ₹10–20. Also, 16.4% of PxD farmers and 20% of CSC farmers agreed to pay whatever is charged by the staff for this service. But at the same time, some of the willing farmers also stated that they would make the payment on the condition that their yield would increase after following the recommendations. However, the farmers not willing to pay stated that they do not need the recommendations as they are satisfied with their current yield. A few (7.2%) stated they are getting messages free of cost on their phone, so they do not need to pay for additional information. 3.7 Farmer recommendations on the way forward Farmers were asked to suggest methods that can help in improving the adoption rate of RCM (Table 11). On-farm demonstrations were proposed to be the best strategy for the farmers to increase the adop- tion of RCM recommendations. Demonstration of RCM among farm- ers at their village or district levels would be very effective to showcase the benefits and to create awareness on RCM. Another important strat- egy is to conduct interactive sessions with the experts and scientists seasonally. Exposure visits to RCM demonstration fields are the next important activity which can be done. In addition to this, many farm- ers are not getting the required inputs recommended by RCM, such as fertilizers, chemicals etc., on time, and efforts should be made to resolve these issues of unavailability of important fertilizers (Table 12).

  Evaluating the effects of in-person and virtual agro-advisories dissemination on farmer adoption rates—a case study of Rice Crop Manager, Odisha, India · 2026 · DOI

• The majority of the adopters (85.3% of the CSC sample and the entire PxD sample) felt that the field-specific fertilizer application recommendations by RCM were very specific or specific (Table 10). Very specific meant that the recommendations on fertilizer management were to the point, and farmers were not confused in terms of understanding. On average, 45% of non-adopters in both groups reported that the recommendations were very specific and specific.

  Evaluating the effects of in-person and virtual agro-advisories dissemination on farmer adoption rates—a case study of Rice Crop Manager, Odisha, India · 2026 · DOI

Most-cited papers in Agricultural Innovations and Practices

• Adoption of agricultural technology in the developing world: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature · World Development · 2021 · 475 citations
• Drivers of farmers’ intention to adopt technological innovations in Italy: The role of information sources, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of use · Journal of Rural Studies · 2020 · 290 citations
• Agri-food Value Chain Revolutions in Low- and Middle-Income Countries · Journal of Economic Literature · 2022 · 246 citations
• Digital innovations for sustainable and resilient agricultural systems · European Review of Agricultural Economics · 2023 · 237 citations
• Influence of a new agricultural technology extension mode on farmers' technology adoption behavior in China · Journal of Rural Studies · 2020 · 214 citations
• Smart farming technologies adoption: Which factors play a role in the digital transition? · Technology in Society · 2022 · 206 citations
• Agricultural Technology in Africa · The Journal of Economic Perspectives · 2022 · 184 citations
• Does cooperative membership increase and accelerate agricultural technology adoption? Empirical evidence from Zambia · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · 2020 · 181 citations
• Do farmers gain internet dividends from E-commerce adoption? Evidence from China · Food Policy · 2021 · 162 citations
• Impact of environmental regulation perception on farmers' agricultural green production technology adoption: A new perspective of social capital · Technology in Society · 2022 · 159 citations

Most recent work

• Journal of Agribusiness and Rural Development · Journal of Agribusiness and Rural Development · 2026
• The Façade of Pluralization in Africa’s Agriculture Extension Innovation Ecosystems · Politics and Governance · 2026
• The great divide: how the gap between mainstream and farm media attention to agriculture has Widened – lessons from Irish newspapers · The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension · 2026
• Understanding the Perceptions and Challenges of Cluster Farming Approach in Enhancing Agricultural Productivity and Commercialization: Insights from Ethiopia’s Central Highlands · Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology · 2026
• Determinant of Agricultural Lime Technology Adoption by Smallholder Farmers in Ejere District of West Shewa Zone of Oromia Region, Ethiopia · Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology · 2026
• Determinants of Tissue Culture Technology Adoption in Banana Cultivation: Evidence from Chitwan District, Nepal · Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology · 2026
• Evaluating the effects of in-person and virtual agro-advisories dissemination on farmer adoption rates—a case study of Rice Crop Manager, Odisha, India · Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems · 2026
• Technology Adoption, Market Access, and Income Performance of Agro-Processing Enterprises: Determinants and Constraints in Edo State, Nigeria · Journal of Biology and Nature · 2026
• ASSESSMENT OF FARMERS’ KNOWLEDGE ON CONTRACT FARMING IN KWARA STATE, NIGERIA. · FUDMA Journal of Agriculture and Agricultural Technology · 2026
• Socially inclusive governance and technical advances can unlock the power of agricultural data · Environmental Research Letters · 2026

Related topics in Agricultural and Biological Sciences