Journal Pre-proof

Harvesting sustainability: Innovations and practices in modern agriculture

Özhan Şimşek

PII: S2949-7361(25)00026-0
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.grets.2025.100192
Reference: GRETS 100192
To appear in: Green Technologies and Sustainability
Received date : 22 October 2024
Revised date : 24 January 2025
Accepted date : 22 February 2025

Please cite this article as: Ö. Şimşek, Harvesting sustainability: Innovations and practices in
modern agriculture, Green Technologies and Sustainability (2025), doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.grets.2025.100192.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the
addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive
version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it
is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article.
Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the
content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

© 2025 The Authors. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co.
Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
 Journal Pre-proof

Title Page

1 Harvesting Sustainability: Innovations and Practices in Modern Agriculture

2 Running Head: Innovations and Practices in Agriculture

of
3
4 Özhan Şimşek1*
1
5 Erciyes University, Agriculture Faculty, Horticulture Department, Kayseri, Türkiye
6

pro
7 Corresponding Author:
8 Özhan Şimşek1*
9 Email address: [email protected]
10

re-
lP
rna
Jou
 Journal Pre-proof

Revised Manuscript - Clean Click here to view linked References

1
2
3
4
5 Harvesting Sustainability: Innovations and Practices in Modern Agriculture
6 Running Head: Innovations and Practices in Agriculture

of
7
8
9 Özhan Şimşek1*
10 1
Erciyes University, Agriculture Faculty, Horticulture Department, Kayseri, Türkiye
11
12

pro
13 Corresponding Author:
14
15 Özhan Şimşek1*
16 Email address: [email protected]
17
18
19 Abstract
20 This paper delves into the multifaceted role of sustainable agricultural practices in addressing
21
22 current environmental challenges and advancing global food security. We critically examine the
23 impact of various sustainable farming techniques, including precision agriculture, organic
24
25
26
27
28
re-
farming, and agroforestry, and their contribution to environmental stewardship and ecological
resilience. Technology integration in agriculture, particularly precision agriculture, is explored,
highlighting its role in enhancing productivity, sustainability, and efficiency. The paper also
29 addresses the pivotal role of genetic engineering in developing drought-resistant crops, offering
30 solutions to global water scarcity challenges. The importance of climate-smart agriculture (CSA)
31
is discussed, underscoring its significance in enhancing the resilience of agricultural systems to
lP
32
33 climate change. Additionally, the paper examines the role of sustainable supply chains and
34 community engagement in promoting sustainable agricultural practices, with a special focus on
35
36 the impact of agricultural education on fostering environmentally responsible and economically
37 viable farming methods. Through this comprehensive analysis, the paper contributes to a deeper
38
39 understanding of the complexities and opportunities in sustainable agriculture, emphasizing the
rna

40 need for integrated approaches to ensure long-term environmental sustainability and food
41 security.
42
43 Keywords: agricultural education, agroforestry, organic farming, precision agriculture,
44 sustainable agriculture, sustainable supply chains
45
46
47 1 Introduction
48
49
The current state of global agriculture has significant impacts on the environment, with
implications for biodiversity, greenhouse gas emissions, and ecosystem health. Land clearing and
Jou

50
51 habitat fragmentation threaten biodiversity, while a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions
52
53 result from agricultural activities such as land clearing, crop production, and fertilization.
54 Additionally, agricultural fertilizer use can harm marine, freshwater, and terrestrial ecosystems
55
56
[1]. Climate change further exacerbates these impacts, with projections indicating higher carbon
57 dioxide emissions, rising temperatures, altered precipitation patterns, and changes in glacial run-
58 off, affecting agricultural productivity and environmental sustainability [2]. The environmental
59
60 impacts of agricultural production systems are a cause for concern, as agriculture is a leading
61
62 A
63
64 b
65
s
t
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 contributor to global environmental degradation [3]. The degradation of more than half of the
5
6 global agricultural land presents significant challenges associated with the disturbance of
nitrogen and phosphorus cycles, further highlighting the environmental strain caused by

of
7
8
9 agricultural activities [4]. Moreover, the expansion of agriculture continues to threaten natural
10 ecosystems, with projections indicating the conversion of vast areas of natural ecosystems to
11 agricultural land by 2050 if current consumption patterns persist [5]. Efforts to improve
12
agricultural efficiency have not been sufficient to mitigate environmental impacts, as evidenced

pro
13
14 by the persistence of global nitrogen and phosphorus soil balances, ammonia emissions, and
15
16 other forms of nitrogen loss, even with increasing agricultural efficiency [6]. The increasing
17 competition for natural resources due to growing global populations further intensifies the
18 pressure on agricultural production, exacerbating environmental challenges [7].
19
20 Agricultural policies play a crucial role in shaping the sector's environmental performance, with
21 nutrient surpluses, greenhouse gas emissions, and effects on biodiversity being key areas of
22
23 concern [8]. The importance of managing food demand to mitigate climate change is
24
25
26
27
28
re-
underscored, as further expansion of agriculture is deemed undesirable due to its adverse effects
on biodiversity, climate change, and pollution [9]. Environmental regulations and green
technology innovation are critical factors in influencing agricultural productivity and ecological
efficiency, with the level of regional economic development playing a significant role in shaping
29
30 the impact of environmental regulations on agricultural practices [10]. The globalization of the
31 agriculture industry necessitates a more globalized approach to agricultural education to prepare
lP
32 future professionals for the challenges and opportunities presented by the evolving agricultural
33
34 landscape [11]. The impact of agricultural activities on urbanization, investment in ecological
35 management, and gender dynamics within the agricultural sector also intersect with
36
37 environmental considerations, highlighting the multifaceted nature of the relationship between
38 agriculture and the environment [12-14]. Furthermore, the implications of climate change on
39 agricultural productivity and the need for fundamental reforms in agricultural education systems
rna

40
41 to support global food security and environmental sustainability are critical considerations in
42 addressing the environmental impact of agriculture [15, 16]). In conclusion, the current state of
43
44 global agriculture has significant environmental implications, ranging from biodiversity loss and
45 greenhouse gas emissions to the degradation of agricultural land and the strain on natural
46 ecosystems. Addressing these challenges requires a multifaceted approach encompassing policy
47
48 interventions, technological innovation, education reform, and sustainable practices to ensure the
49 long-term environmental sustainability of agricultural systems.
Jou

50
51
52 2 Survey methodology
53 This study employed a comprehensive literature review to explore the latest innovations and
54
55 practices in modern agriculture. Utilizing databases such as Web of Science, Scopus,
56 ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar, the research identified primary and secondary literature that
57
58 aligns with the paper's themes. Key search terms included "Precision Agriculture," "Organic
59 Farming," "Agroforestry," "Smart Farming Technologies," "Genetic Engineering," "Climate-
60
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 Smart Agriculture," "Sustainable Supply Chains," and "Agricultural Education." The search
5
6 strategy involved combining these terms with operators like "+", "AND", and "OR" to refine and
target the search results effectively. The resulting literature was meticulously selected based on

of
7
8
9 relevance to the paper's focus, ensuring a comprehensive and up-to-date understanding of
10 sustainable agricultural practices and their role in environmental stewardship, technological
11 integration, and educational impact.
12

pro
13
14
3 Sustainable Farming Techniques
15
16 Precision agriculture, characterized by the precise allocation of resources for crop production, is
17 crucial in optimizing resource use and promoting sustainable agricultural practices Sanders et al.
18
19 [17]. It involves the application of advanced technologies, such as sensors and agricultural data,
20 to make informed decisions about resource allocation, leading to improved ecological
21 improvements, reduced environmental burdens, and enhanced production process documentation
22
23 [18]. Precision agriculture also integrates technology and principles to varying inputs and
24
25
26
27
28
re-
practices spatially and temporally, optimizing resource use and promoting environmental
friendliness [19, 20]). The implementation of precision agriculture has been observed in various
regions, such as Sudan, Eastern China, and the Republic of Karakalpakstan, where it has
contributed to the optimization of agricultural land use through the use of GIS technologies and
29
30 the adoption of precision agriculture practices [21, 22]). Furthermore, precision agriculture has
31 been linked to the development of decision support systems for sustainable development and
lP
32
33 environmental protection in agricultural regions, emphasizing the role of technology in
34 optimizing resource allocation and promoting sustainability [23].
35
In the context of agricultural education, adopting sustainable agriculture practices and the
36
37 barriers to adopting precision agriculture competencies have been studied, highlighting the
38 importance of integrating precision agriculture into agricultural education programs to promote
39
sustainable practices and optimize resource use [24]. Additionally, the role of women in
rna

40
41 sustainable agriculture practices has been recognized, emphasizing the significance of gender-
42
inclusive approaches in promoting sustainable agricultural development and resource
43
44 optimization [25]. Moreover, research has focused on investigating the effective factors in
45 achieving sustainable agricultural development, the factors influencing sustainable agricultural
46
47 practices among smallholder farmers, and the value chain of sustainable agricultural practices, all
48 of which underscore the multifaceted nature of precision agriculture and its role in optimizing
49
resource use and promoting sustainability [26-28]). In summary, precision agriculture is pivotal
Jou

50
51 in optimizing resource use and promoting sustainable agricultural practices by leveraging
52 advanced technologies, integrating environmental considerations, and enhancing decision-
53
54 making processes to achieve efficient resource allocation and environmental friendliness.
55 Technological integration in precision agriculture is illustrated in Figure 1.
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4
5
6

of
7
8
9
10
11
12

pro
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
re-
Figure 1. Technological Integration in Precision Agriculture. Satellite imagery for field mapping,
advanced field sensors for monitoring soil and crop conditions, automated tractors for efficient fieldwork,
drones for aerial surveillance of crops, and smart irrigation systems for optimal water management.
29
30
31 Organic farming practices have been shown to have numerous benefits for soil health,
lP
32 contributing to improved biodiversity, soil fertility, and environmental sustainability. Research
33 has consistently demonstrated the positive impact of organic farming on soil health, highlighting
34 its potential to enhance agricultural ecosystems and promote sustainable land management. A
35
36
meta-analysis by Bengtsson et al. [29] revealed that organic farming increases species richness,
37 with an average of 30% higher than conventional farming systems. This increase in species
38 richness indicates improved biodiversity, which is essential for maintaining healthy and resilient
39 ecosystems. Furthermore, Tuck et al. [30] emphasized the importance of precisely quantifying
rna

40 the effect of organic vs. conventional farming on biodiversity, highlighting the ongoing debate
41
42 on the benefits of organic farming to biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. These findings
43 underscore the significance of organic farming in promoting biodiversity and ecosystem health.
44 Organic farming has also been linked to improvements in soil microbial communities. Cho et al.
45 [31] found that organic farming practices resulted in lower ratios of certain microbial markers,
46
47
indicating reduced microbial stress and improved soil microbial communities compared to
48 conventional farming practices. Additionally, Skinner et al. [32] concluded that despite lower
49 yields, organic farming delivers greater ecosystem services and social benefits, highlighting the
Jou

50 positive impact of organic farming on soil-derived greenhouse gas emissions and overall soil
51 health. Applying organic fertilizers is an effective strategy for increasing the level of organic
52
53 matter in soils, with benefits for developing soil microorganisms and plants [33]. Furthermore,
54 long-term organic farming on citrus plantations has been found to result in soil organic carbon
55 recovery, indicating the potential of organic farming to enhance soil fertility and carbon
56 sequestration [34]. In addition to the direct benefits to soil health, organic farming has been
57 associated with broader environmental advantages. It has been recognized as a method to avoid
58
59 the ill effects of chemical farming, such as environmental pollution, soil health degradation, and
60 human health hazards [35]. Furthermore, organic farming has been touted as beneficial for
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 providing ecological goods and services, including clean water, clean air, biodiversity
5
6 conservation, and soil improvements [36]. While organic farming has demonstrated numerous
benefits for soil health and the environment, challenges and barriers to its widespread adoption

of
7
8 persist. Farmers' readiness for organic farming and their attitudes towards its implementation
9 have been identified as areas of concern, with economic viability and knowledge gaps posing
10
11
challenges to adopting organic farming practices [37]. However, research has shown that organic
12 farming practices can sustain better soil quality than conventional farming practices,

pro
13 emphasizing the potential of organic farming to contribute to soil health and long-term
14 sustainability [38]. In conclusion, organic farming practices offer a range of benefits for soil
15 health, including improved biodiversity, soil microbial communities, and soil organic carbon
16
17 recovery. These findings underscore the potential of organic farming to enhance soil fertility,
18 promote sustainable land management, and contribute to environmental conservation. Organic
19 farming vs. conventional farming comparison was presented in Table 1.
20
21 Table 1. Organic Farming vs. Conventional Farming Comparison
22
Aspect Organic Farming Conventional Farming
23
24
25
26
27
28
Fertilizers

Pest Control
manure. re-
Uses natural fertilizers like compost and

Employs natural methods such as

beneficial insects or organic pesticides.
Uses mechanical cultivation and hand
Relies on synthetic fertilizers to
promote plant growth.
Utilizes chemical pesticides to
manage pests and diseases.
Often depends on chemical
29 Weed Management
weeding. herbicides for weed control.
30 Focuses on practices that maintain and
31 Less emphasis on soil health; may
lP
Soil Health improve soil health, like crop rotation and
32 lead to soil degradation over time.
33 cover cropping.
34 Environmental Lower negative impact; promotes Higher potential for environmental
35 Impact biodiversity and reduces pollution. harm due to chemicals used.
36 Generally lower yields compared to Higher yields due to intensive
37 Yield
conventional methods. farming practices.
38 Higher costs due to more labor-intensive Lower production costs, but can
39 Cost
rna

methods. have hidden environmental costs.

40
41 Often considered to have better taste and Focus on quantity and size may
Product Quality
42 nutritional value. impact taste and nutrition.
43 More sustainable in the long term due to Sustainability can be a concern due
Sustainability
44 eco-friendly practices. to reliance on chemicals.
45 Must comply with government
46 Must adhere to specific standards for
Regulations regulations, but no organic
47 organic certification.
standards.
48
49
Jou

50 As an integrated land use management approach, agroforestry has gained recognition for its
51
52
potential to promote sustainability, enhance ecosystem services, and contribute to human well-
53 being. The literature provides substantial evidence supporting the benefits of agroforestry across
54 various dimensions, including environmental, economic, and social aspects. Agroforestry has
55 been shown to improve the resiliency of agricultural systems and mitigate the impacts of climate
56 change Brown et al. [39]. It can prevent environmental degradation, improve agricultural
57
58 productivity, increase carbon sequestration, and support healthy soil and ecosystems [40].
59 Furthermore, agroforestry is recognized as a traditional land use system that may contribute to
60 the solution of environmental problems in agriculture [41]. It can potentially reduce
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 environmental impacts, conserve biodiversity, enhance wildlife habitat, and improve smallholder
5
6 household resilience due to land conversion [42]. Agroforestry is also acknowledged as an
essential component of climate-smart agriculture, contributing to climate change mitigation and

of
7
8 adaptation [43].
9 Agroforestry has the potential to provide stable incomes and other benefits to human welfare
10
11
[40]. It is imperative for livelihood security and can contribute to rural livelihood and
12 environmental benefits [44]. Furthermore, agroforestry systems are sustainable and imperative

pro
13 for local inhabitants' livelihood security [45]. Agroforestry technology supports critical land
14 rehabilitation and provides conditions for longer-term sustainability [46]. Additionally,
15 agroforestry has been shown to improve economic and environmental benefits, although the
16
17 magnitudes slightly differ [47].
18 Agroforestry is essential in reducing global poverty and maintaining environmental sustainability
19 [48]. It promises several benefits to enhance nature’s contributions to people. Agroforestry
20 systems promise some benefits to enhance nature’s contributions to people. Agroforestry is a
21
sustainable land management system that integrates the production of crops, forest trees, and
22
23 animals and is friendly with local populations [49]. It diversifies and sustains production for
24
25
26
27
28
re-
increased social, economic, and environmental benefits for land users at all levels [50].
Overall, agroforestry has the potential to contribute to sustainable land use by providing a range
of environmental, economic, and social benefits. It offers a holistic approach to land
management that integrates trees with crops and/or livestock, promoting resilience, biodiversity
29 conservation, and livelihood security. The evidence presented in the literature underscores the
30 importance of agroforestry as a sustainable approach to land use, with implications for
31 environmental conservation, economic development, and social well-being.
lP
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
rna

40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
Jou

50
51
52
53
54
55 Figure 2. Integrated Agroforestry System
56
57
58 Figure 2 presents a comprehensive view of an Agroforestry System where agricultural practices
59 are harmoniously integrated with forestry. The system includes a variety of trees interspersed
60 with crop fields, illustrating a multifunctional landscape. Livestock can be seen grazing among
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 the trees, depicting the symbiotic relationship between different system elements. Key features
5
6 like a water source, pond, or stream add to the ecosystem's sustainability. This agroforestry
model showcases an innovative approach to land use that enhances biodiversity, improves soil

of
7
8 health, and promotes a balance between agricultural productivity and environmental
9 conservation.
10
11
12 3 Technology and Innovation in Agriculture

pro
13 Smart farming technologies, particularly precision agriculture, represent a paradigm shift in the
14 agricultural sector by enhancing productivity, sustainability, and efficiency. The application of
15
16
precision agriculture, which optimizes resource utilization and crop health monitoring, facilitates
17 informed decision-making for better management of agricultural operations. Research by
18 Lowenberg-DeBoer and Erickson [51] contradicts the notion of slow precision agriculture
19 adoption, pointing out the swift uptake of technologies like Global Navigation Satellite Systems
20 (GNSS) guidance. Yet, variable rate technology is not as widespread, suggesting existing
21
22 barriers to technology integration that warrant further investigation. Stafford [52] underscores the
23 critical role of precision agriculture, particularly in managing arable land in the 21st century, and
24
25
26
27
28
re-
highlights the urgent need for continued research and development to effectively incorporate
smart farming technologies into contemporary agricultural practices. Sanders et al. [17] examine
the influence of precision agriculture in intensifying agricultural production while prioritizing
sustainability. The study acknowledges obstacles such as substantial initial investments,
29 knowledge gaps, and limited broadband access, suggesting the necessity for policy and
30 infrastructure support to enable broader adoption of smart farming technologies. Abuova et al.
31 [53] explore how precision agriculture technologies contribute to the sustainable development of
lP
32
33 crop production, reinforcing the significance of these innovations in enhancing agricultural
34 sustainability and efficiency. Jurišić et al. [18] delve into the benefits of precision agriculture,
35 including ecological improvements, reduced environmental burdens, and better documentation of
36 production processes, emphasizing the comprehensive advantages of precision agriculture in
37
fostering environmental stewardship and operational efficiency. The economic implications of
38
39 precision agriculture are further elaborated by Beznosov et al. [54], tracing the evolution of
rna

40 precision agriculture technologies and their economic impact, offering valuable perspectives on
41 the economic facets of precision agriculture and its influence on agricultural systems. The
42 convergence of drones and satellite imagery in agriculture has revolutionized crop monitoring
43
44 and management, providing detailed insights for precision agriculture, disease detection,
45 irrigation management, and crop yield variability mapping. Veloso et al. [55] emphasize the
46 significant utility of optical satellite images in delivering valuable crop information, from crop
47 area estimates to biophysical parameter assessments, highlighting the integral role of satellite
48 imagery in comprehensive crop management. Katekar and Cheruku [56] demonstrate the
49
versatile applications of drones in agriculture, from soil analysis to disaster management,
Jou

50
51 showcasing the broad utility of drone technology in enhancing various agricultural operations.
52 Mazzia et al. [57] recognize the value of satellite-based imagery in crop mapping and disease
53 assessment, underlining the potential of satellite imagery in providing essential insights for
54
55
effective crop management and disease detection strategies. Nhamo et al. [58] illustrate the
56 advanced data analytics capabilities of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) in facilitating high-
57 resolution, timely crop monitoring, which is crucial for water management and precision
58 agriculture applications. Yang [59] reviews the use of high-resolution satellite imagery in
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 precision agriculture, including crop identification and pest management, highlighting the
5
6 diverse applications of satellite imagery in improving agricultural practices.
In summary, smart farming technologies offer a promising path to revolutionize agricultural

of
7
8 practices, presenting opportunities to enhance sustainability and improve productivity. The
9 collective insights from various studies contribute to a comprehensive understanding of the
10
11
multifaceted benefits, challenges, and implications of smart farming technology adoption in
12 modern agriculture.

pro
13 Genetic engineering has become a cornerstone in the quest for drought-resistant crops, providing
14 an innovative way to address the global challenge of water scarcity in agriculture. By altering
15 plant genomes, scientists have enhanced the resilience of various crops to drought conditions, a
16
17 critical advancement given the increasing frequency of extreme weather events [60]. The work of
18 Polle et al. [61] has been instrumental in demonstrating the application of genetic engineering to
19 forest trees, showing how modified responses to drought can significantly improve tree survival
20 and sustainability. This advancement benefits agriculture and is pivotal for maintaining healthy
21
forest ecosystems. Abdel-Ghany et al. [62] have made significant strides in cereal crops by
22
23 pinpointing specific sorghum genes that confer drought resistance. By employing genetic
24
25
26
27
28
re-
engineering and molecular breeding techniques, new sorghum lines with enhanced drought
tolerance are being developed, paving the way for more resilient crop varieties. Similarly, the
research conducted by Arya et al. [63] elucidates the progress made in soybean cultivation.
Through traditional breeding and genetic engineering, soybean crops with improved drought
29 tolerance have been developed, enhancing their commercial viability and ensuring sustainability
30 under changing climatic conditions. Manavalan et al. [64] further support these findings in their
31 discussion on soybeans, where genetic engineering has played a significant role in developing
lP
32 varieties that can better withstand drought, thus securing a food staple vital to global food
33
34 supplies. The importance of such advancements is also evident in rice cultivation, as illustrated
35 by Khan et al. [65]. Their research into genetically engineered rice varieties presents a promising
36 avenue for agriculture, where the necessity to balance water use and crop productivity is ever-
37 present. Lastly, Jing et al. [66] contribute to this body of knowledge by showcasing how genetic
38
39
engineering is not limited to a single crop species but can be applied across various plant species,
rna

40 including both crops and trees. This broad applicability signifies the potential of genetic
41 engineering to serve as a universal tool in the fight against drought, ensuring the sustenance of
42 diverse agricultural systems. Collectively, these studies underscore the transformative potential
43 of genetic engineering in developing drought-resistant crops, offering hope for more sustainable
44
45 agricultural practices in the face of global climate change. The continued exploration and
46 application of genetic engineering hold the promise of bolstering crop resilience, thereby
47 contributing to global food security and ecosystem health.
48 In recent years, genetic engineering has emerged as a pivotal technology in various sectors,
49
especially in agriculture and medicine. Table 2. provides a comprehensive overview of the dual
Jou

50
51 nature of this technology, outlining both its significant benefits and the concerns it raises. On one
52 hand, genetic engineering promises enhanced disease resistance, improved crop yields, and
53 advanced medical treatments, potentially revolutionizing food security and healthcare. It also
54 offers environmental benefits through reduced reliance on chemical pesticides and herbicides.
55
56 On the other hand, the table underscores the concerns associated with genetic engineering. These
57 include potential threats to biodiversity, the disruption of natural ecosystems, and ethical
58 dilemmas, particularly in the context of altering human or animal genetics. Economic disparities
59 and the emergence of superweeds or pest-resistant strains are additional challenges to consider.
60
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 The ethical and social implications, such as the debate over 'playing God' and altering life forms,
5
6 are also crucial points of discussion.

of
7
8 Table 2. Genetic Engineering Benefits and Concerns
9 Aspect Benefits of Genetic Engineering Concerns Regarding Genetic Engineering
10 Increased resistance to diseases in Unintended harm to other organisms or
11 Disease Resistance
crops and animals. reduced biodiversity.
12
Enhanced crop yields and food Potential dependence on a limited variety of

pro
13 Crop Yields
14 security. enhanced crops.
15 Improved nutritional content of Unpredictable changes in nutritional profiles
Nutritional Content
16 food. of foods.
17 Environmental Reduced need for pesticides and
18 Potential disruption of natural ecosystems.
Impact herbicides.
19 Adaptation to Development of crops resistant to Unknown long-term effects on climate and
20
Climate Change extreme weather conditions. ecosystems.
21
22 Medical Development of new medicines Ethical concerns about 'designer' traits in
23 Advancements and treatments. humans or animals.
24
25
26
27
28
Economic Benefits

Shelf Life
and profitability.
re-
Increased agricultural efficiency

Extended shelf life of produce.

Economic disparities between those who can
access the technology and those who cannot.
Loss of traditional farming practices and
varieties.
Pest and Weed Crops can be engineered to be Development of superweeds or pest
29
30 Control resistant to pests and weeds. resistance.
31 Ethical and Social Potential to address global hunger Ethical concerns about 'playing God' and
lP
32 Issues and malnutrition. altering life forms.
33
34
35
While genetic engineering holds immense potential, it is essential to approach this technology
36 with a balanced understanding of its capabilities and limitations. Continued research, ethical
37 considerations, and regulatory frameworks are imperative to harness its benefits while mitigating
38 the associated risks.
39 In conclusion, the referenced studies collectively underscore the pivotal role of genetic
rna

40
41 engineering in developing drought-resistant crops. The application of genetic engineering in
42 enhancing drought tolerance holds significant promise for addressing water scarcity challenges
43 in agriculture and ensuring sustainable crop production in the face of changing climatic
44 conditions.
45
46
47 4 Climate-Smart Agriculture
48 In the face of escalating climate challenges, the resilience of agricultural systems is paramount to
49 global food security. The transition towards climate-smart agriculture (CSA) practices is a vital
Jou

50
51 response to these challenges, offering a pathway to sustain agricultural productivity and fortify
52 food systems against climate volatility. Insightful research within this domain articulates the
53 complex interplay of factors driving the adoption of CSA practices, the pivotal role of
54 technology in adaptation strategies, and the nuanced impacts of climatic shifts on agricultural
55 outputs. The seminal work of Huang et al. [67] delves into the intricacies of extreme weather
56
57 phenomena on rice yields in China, underscoring the critical role of refined farm management
58 techniques in offsetting the adverse effects of such events. Similarly, Aryal et al. [68] dissect the
59 variables that compel the implementation of CSA practices in India's Indo-Gangetic Plains. Their
60 findings highlight the intersection of economic incentives and adaptive measures, spotlighting
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 the synergy between climate resilience and agricultural viability. Nyasimi et al. [69] traverse the
5
6 landscape of CSA technologies, probing the dissemination vectors that fortify climate-resilient
livelihoods in Tanzania. The study elucidates the imperative for accessible, pertinent information

of
7
8 on CSA practices as a cornerstone for effective climatic adaptation. Ricart et al. [70] navigate the
9 public and agrarian perspectives towards European climate adaptation, pinpointing awareness,
10
11
perceptions, and knowledge as pivotal elements in the climate response narrative. In southern
12 Ethiopia, Sedebo et al. [71] provide an evaluative lens on the influence of smallholder adaptation

pro
13 practices on crop efficiency. Their analysis foregrounds experience, educational outreach, and
14 extension services as instrumental in cultivating adaptive capacities. Complementarily, Katel et
15 al. [72] articulate the multifaceted contributions of CSA to agricultural resilience, underscoring
16
17 the imperative for technological and institutional innovation to attenuate farmer susceptibility to
18 climate risks. Chukwuone et al. [73] offer insights into sustainable land management strategies
19 employed in southeast Nigeria, emphasizing their centrality in constructing a resilient
20 agricultural framework. Das & Ghosh [74] present a comparative study of agricultural resilience
21
in various districts of Odisha, advocating for the essentiality of adaptive resilience in the climate
22
23 change milieu. Collectively, these scholarly contributions weave a narrative that underscores the
24
25
26
27
28
re-
intricate fabric of climate change adaptation in agriculture. They accentuate the salience of
economic incentives, knowledge dissemination, sustainable land management, and technological
integration in buttressing agricultural systems against the capriciousness of climate change. In
sum, the scholarly discourse underlines the indispensability of CSA practices and sustainable
29 land management in the quest for climate resilience. The collective insights from this body of
30 research offer a robust, scholarly foundation for understanding the multifarious challenges and
31 opportunities that define the adaptation of farming practices in a changing climatic landscape.
lP
32 The development and cultivation of resilient crop varieties stand at the vanguard of safeguarding
33
34 food security amidst the escalating perturbations of climate change. These hardy cultivars are
35 pivotal in bolstering agricultural productivity, enhancing resistance to environmental stressors,
36 and underpinning sustainable agricultural methodologies. The scholarly discourse converges on
37 integrating climate-resilient crops within our agricultural paradigms to mitigate the adverse
38
39
impacts of climatic variability and secure a dependable food supply. Yuan [75] delves into the
rna

40 promise held by sophisticated breeding techniques and agronomic practices, positing that such
41 innovations are the keystones in engendering crop varieties characterized by their resilience,
42 yield potential, and nutritional superiority. This line of inquiry accentuates the pressing need for
43 resilient crop development to confront the multifaceted challenges imposed by a dynamic
44
45 climate, thereby reinforcing the foundations of global food security. The study by Castañeda-
46 Álvarez et al. [76] probes the vast genetic reservoir inherent in crop wild relatives, illuminating
47 the prospects of harnessing this genetic variation to forge crop varieties that are not only more
48 productive and nutritious but also robust against environmental vicissitudes. This research
49
underscores the criticality of genetic diversity as a resource for breeding efforts aimed at resilient
Jou

50
51 crop varieties capable of withstanding diverse environmental stressors, thereby bolstering food
52 security. Ficiciyan et al. [77] articulate the critical role of local and adapted crop varieties in
53 constructing agroecosystems resilient to the contemporary challenges of global change. Their
54 findings suggest that access to diverse and adapted crop varieties is indispensable for fostering
55
56 resilience and fortressing food security against environmental flux. Petereit et al. [78] advocate
57 for developing resilient varieties across various crops, including staple, emerging, and so-called
58 'orphan' crops, to cater to the burgeoning global food demand within a shifting climatic
59 landscape. Their insights highlight the imperative for breeding strategies prioritizing resilience,
60
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 thus ensuring food security in climate change. Rideout and Kosatsky [79] explore the symbiosis
5
6 between food security and environmental health, spotlighting the crucial contribution of resilient
crop varieties to sustainable and nutritious food systems. Such varieties are instrumental in

of
7
8 maintaining consistent and high-quality food supplies, which support the environment's and
9 human populations' health. In sum, the scholarly narrative underscores the integral role of
10
11
resilient crop varieties in the narrative of food security. These studies collectively affirm the
12 significance of advancing and disseminating resilient crop varieties as a strategic response to the

pro
13 intertwined challenges of food security, environmental stewardship, and climate change
14 adaptation.
15 Efficient water management is a cornerstone of sustainable agriculture, especially in the context
16
17 of burgeoning water scarcity that threatens the stability of food systems globally. The strategic
18 implementation of advanced irrigation methodologies, conservation technologies, and judicious
19 water usage practices stands as a bulwark against the vulnerabilities imposed by limited water
20 availability. Mancosu et al. [80] examine the intricate web of challenges surrounding water
21
scarcity, focusing on food production and advocating for a paradigm shift towards sustainable
22
23 management of water resources. The crux of their argument lies in the critical need for systemic
24
25
26
27
28
re-
changes to existing water management frameworks to ensure the sustainability of agricultural
outputs. Similarly, Tang et al. [81] delve into the practicalities of farm-level irrigation techniques
designed to conserve water. They underscore the efficacy of these techniques in mitigating risks
associated with erratic water supply, thereby enhancing the resilience of agricultural practices in
29 water-scarce environments. The study by Expósito & Berbel [82] evaluates the role of water
30 pricing as a mechanism to steer irrigation practices towards greater efficiency. In regions where
31 deficit irrigation is prevalent due to water constraints, effective pricing strategies emerge as vital
lP
32 tools for managing irrigation demand, illustrating the intersection of economic policy and water
33
34 conservation. Thorslund et al. [83] address the often-overlooked issue of salinity in irrigation
35 water, examining its impact on water scarcity in agriculturally intensive regions. Their analysis
36 reveals the complex interplay between salinity management and the utilization of water
37 resources, suggesting a nuanced approach to mitigating water scarcity. Musse [84] articulates
38
39
domestic and national strategies to counter water scarcity in the agricultural domain. The
rna

40 emphasis on adaptive water management practices is poised to play a key role in safeguarding
41 food security in fluctuating water availability. Asres [85] contributes to this discourse by
42 presenting alternative irrigation water management techniques that bolster crop water
43 productivity. Such strategies are vital for enhancing the sustainability of water usage within the
44
45 agricultural sector. Hossain et al. [86] focus on measuring water productivity in floodplain areas,
46 accentuating the global imperative to optimize water use in agriculture, thereby addressing the
47 broader issue of water scarcity. Lastly, Kourgialas [87] advocates for a holistic approach that
48 marries technological advancements with management strategies for wastewater treatment.
49
Reusing treated wastewater in agriculture emerges as a viable solution to the pressing challenge
Jou

50
51 of water scarcity. In synthesis, adopting multifaceted water management strategies is beneficial
52 and essential for the contemporary agricultural landscape. The collective insights from the cited
53 body of research provide a robust academic foundation for understanding the nuanced challenges
54 and opportunities in managing water scarcity within agricultural systems. This body of work
55
56 affirms the importance of innovative water management in preserving the integrity of global
57 food production systems amidst climate change and resource limitations.
58
59 5 Sustainable Supply Chains
60
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 The imperatives of sustainable sourcing and the elucidation of supply chain transparency have
5
6 become central to fostering ethical business operations, maintaining product integrity, and
addressing environmental and societal issues. Integrating these practices is fundamental to

of
7
8 cultivating consumer confidence, diminishing ecological footprints, and advocating social
9 accountability. A constellation of research across diverse sectors underscores the salience of
10
11
these practices. Kamilaris et al. [88] expounded that blockchain technology offers a promising
12 frontier in agricultural and food supply chains. This innovation heralds a new era of traceability

pro
13 and accountability, bolstering supply chain transparency and ethical sourcing practices. It reflects
14 a growing consensus on emerging technologies' potential to enhance supply chain transparency
15 significantly. The interplay between sustainable sourcing and supply chain agility is adeptly
16
17 examined by Li et al. [89]. Their work reveals how sustainable sourcing practices, particularly
18 when synergized with organizational ambidexterity and amidst supply chain disruptions,
19 contribute positively to agility performance, showcasing the value of sustainability in enhancing
20 supply chain resilience. Scott [90] contextualizes sustainable sourcing within the ambit of food
21
security, shedding light on the strategic value of land in securing well-being and prosperity. This
22
23 discourse places sustainable sourcing at the heart of food security initiatives, reinforcing the
24
25
26
27
28
re-
necessity of responsible sourcing to support livelihoods and environmental stewardship. In an era
where digitalization is paramount, Liu et al. [91] advocate for a data-driven "Internet +" open
supply chain system for fresh agricultural products. Their study underlines the transformative
role of digital technologies in agricultural supply chains, promoting transparency and efficiency,
29 thereby underscoring the potential of digitalization in advancing sustainability. Furthermore,
30 Feagan [92], Blay-Palmer et al. [93], Perrett & Jackson [94], Kissinger et al. [95], and Berry [96]
31 collectively enhance our comprehension of the spatial dynamics of local food systems, the City
lP
32 Region Food Systems approach, the role of nonprofit food hubs, the investigation of local-
33
34 regional food system strategies, and the holistic perspective on sustainable food systems. These
35 scholarly contributions underscore the multifaceted nature of sustainable sourcing and supply
36 chain transparency, highlighting their pivotal role in underpinning ethical sourcing practices,
37 fostering environmental sustainability, and nurturing community well-being. Mitigating food
38
39
waste via enhanced supply chain management is another facet integral to sustainability efforts.
rna

40 The strategic application of efficient logistics, innovative packaging, and sustainable practices
41 are essential for curtailing food waste and optimizing resource use. Research such as that by Xue
42 et al. [97], Papargyropoulou et al. [98], Gruber et al. [99], Derqui et al. [100], Papargyropoulou
43 et al. [101], Nikolicic et al. [102], and Garcia-Garcia et al. [103] traverses the spectrum of food
44
45 waste management. These studies underscore the significance of precise data collection, the
46 implementation of the food waste hierarchy, the human element in retail food waste, the
47 visibility of waste in food services, and the importance of a structured approach to food waste
48 management. They collectively advocate for targeted, industry-specific strategies and improved
49
logistical operations to address the pervasive issue of food waste. In summation, the
Jou

50
51 amalgamation of sustainable sourcing with transparent supply chains is indispensable for
52 endorsing ethical business conduct, certifying product quality, and tackling environmental and
53 social challenges. The insights from the aforementioned studies provide a comprehensive
54 understanding of the complexities and imperatives of sustainable sourcing and supply chain
55
56 transparency within various industrial frameworks and settings.
57
58 6 Community Engagement and Education
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 Farmers are pivotal agents of change in sustainable agriculture, playing a critical role in
5
6 advancing environmentally sound and economically viable practices. The various studies provide
a rich tapestry of insights into how farmers contribute to and shape the sustainability narrative.

of
7
8 Rodriguez et al. [104] offer a perspective on the obstacles farmers encounter in adopting
9 sustainable practices, particularly the challenges in accessing credible information. This
10
11
underscores the need for clear and actionable knowledge dissemination to facilitate the transition
12 to sustainable agriculture. Osewe et al. [105] provide an encouraging view of smallholder

pro
13 farmers' initiative in expanding irrigated land, exemplifying proactive engagement in sustainable
14 practices. Further, Knutson et al. [106] explore farmers' perceptions regarding sustainable
15 practices and their role in mitigating drought risks. Such insights are vital in understanding
16
17 farmers' on-ground realities and attitudes towards sustainability. Liang et al. [107] delve into the
18 influence of farmer cooperatives in China, highlighting their significant role in promoting
19 sustainable agricultural development. The contribution of farmers extends to seed production as
20 well, as shown by Kansiime et al. [108], who underscore the positive impact of farmer-led seed
21
production on diversifying income and bolstering household economies. The role of women in
22
23 sustainable agriculture, as discussed by Muhaimin et al. [25], brings to light the inclusivity and
24
25
26
27
28
re-
widespread adoption of sustainable practices, including organic and bio-pesticide use. The
cultural dimensions of sustainability, as examined by Wu et al. [109], reveal the nuanced factors
influencing farmers' responses to eco-cultural tourism and sustainable livelihoods. Okori et al.
[110] highlight the critical role of farmers in knowledge and technology diffusion, which is
29 essential for improving agricultural productivity and sustainability. Stevens et al. [111] and
30 Oyewole & Sennuga [27] further emphasize the importance of leadership and the factors driving
31 sustainable practices among farmers, illustrating the broad spectrum of farmer involvement in
lP
32 sustainable agriculture. Complementing the role of farmers is a crucial aspect of agricultural
33
34 education, as elucidated by Manda et al. [112] and Rockström et al. [113]. These studies
35 highlight the impact of education on adopting sustainable practices, emphasizing the need for
36 comprehensive training in various aspects of agriculture. Rodriguez et al. (2008) [104], Wang et
37 al. [114], and Lamm et al. [115] further advocate for the importance of educational resources and
38
39
outreach efforts in promoting and implementing sustainable agricultural practices. Community-
rna

40 supported agriculture (CSA) stands as a testament to the collective effort in sustainable

41 agriculture. As a model linking producers directly with consumers, CSA offers many benefits,
42 from promoting local and sustainable food production to supporting small-scale farmers. It
43 fosters a sense of community, encourages seasonal eating, and provides educational
44
45 opportunities for sustainable farming. CSA's contribution to food security, environmental
46 stewardship, and the economic viability of small-scale farmers highlights its integral role in the
47 sustainable agriculture ecosystem. Essentially, the intertwining roles of farmers, education, and
48 community models like CSA paint a comprehensive picture of the sustainable agriculture
49
landscape. They collectively underscore the multifaceted nature of sustainability in agriculture,
Jou

50
51 emphasizing the need for concerted efforts in promoting environmentally responsible and
52 economically viable farming methods.
53
54 Table 3. Potential Impacts of Agricultural Education on Sustainable Farming and Community
55 Development
56
57 Potential Education Description Potential Impacts
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4
increase in yields reported by
5 Improvement in crop yields due
6 Increase in Crop Yields farmers with formal agricultural
to educated farming practices.
education.

of
7
8 educated farmers implementing
9 Number of farmers adopting
Adoption of Sustainable sustainable practices compared
10 sustainable practices like crop
Practices to those without formal
11 rotation, organic farming, etc.
12
education.

pro
13 reduction in pesticide use
14 Decrease in reliance on
Reduction in Pesticide Use among farmers who received
15 chemical pesticides.
agricultural education.
16
17 Efficiency in water use for Educated farmers in water-
Water Conservation
18 irrigation and other purposes. saving techniques.
19 educated farmers use soil
20 Improvement in soil quality and health-enhancing methods
21 Soil Health Improvement
fertility. versus of uneducated
22
counterparts.
23
24
25
26
27
28
Increase in Farm Income
re-
Rise in income due to efficient
farming practices.

Impact on maintaining diverse

Average income increases for
farmers with agricultural
education.
Educated farmers more likely to
29 Biodiversity Preservation use biodiversity-friendly
ecosystems.
30 farming methods.
31 Implementation of practices to
lP
32 educated farmers use climate-
Adaptation to Climate Change combat the effects of climate
33 resilient farming techniques.
change.
34
35 Reduction in Carbon Decrease in greenhouse gas lower carbon footprint in farms
36 Footprint emissions. managed by educated farmers.
37
Educated farmers contribute to
38 Effects on local communities
39 Community Impact increase in local food security
and economies.
rna

40 and economic stability.

41
42 The table provided offers a structured overview of the multifaceted impact that agricultural
43
44 education can have on sustainable farming practices and broader socio-economic outcomes. Each
45 column presents a different dimension of this impact, starting with the potential educational
46 focus and a description of the impact area, followed by observed or potential impacts
47 substantiated by agricultural education. For instance, the first row emphasizes that an increase in
48 crop yields is often a direct result of applying educated farming practices, highlighting that
49
farmers with formal agricultural education report higher yields. This correlation showcases the
Jou

50
51 tangible benefits of knowledge transfer in agriculture and its capacity to enhance productivity.
52 As you move down the table, adopting sustainable practices, such as crop rotation and organic
53 farming, is notably higher among educated farmers, suggesting that agricultural education is
54
55
pivotal in fostering environmentally responsible farming. Moreover, the table points to
56 significant environmental benefits, including pesticide use reductions and water and soil
57 conservation enhancements, attributable to educational interventions. These improvements
58 contribute to environmental health and the economic viability and resilience of farming
59 communities, as seen in the increase in farm income and community impact sections. In the
60
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 context of global challenges such as climate change, the table also underlines the role of
5
6 educated farmers in adopting climate-resilient farming techniques, thus contributing to
mitigation and adaptation efforts. This table can be interpreted as an evidence-based argument

of
7
8 for integrating education into agricultural development strategies. It suggests that investing in
9 agricultural education can yield substantial dividends across various domains, from enhancing
10
11
crop productivity and environmental stewardship to bolstering community resilience and
12 economic stability. Such a table would provide a strong empirical foundation for a scientific

pro
13 article discussing the systemic benefits of agricultural education.
14
15
16
7 Conclusions
17 In conclusion, this paper underscores the critical role of sustainable agricultural practices in
18 navigating the challenges posed by environmental degradation and climate change. Precision
19
20 agriculture, organic farming, and agroforestry have emerged as key strategies for promoting
21 ecological balance, enhancing soil health, and conserving biodiversity. The adoption of smart
22
23
farming technologies, including drones and satellite imagery, has revolutionized agricultural
24
25
26
27
28
re-
practices, contributing to greater efficiency and environmental sustainability. Furthermore,
developing drought-resistant crops through genetic engineering presents a promising avenue for
addressing water scarcity and ensuring resilient food systems. The study highlights the
importance of CSA practices in fortifying agricultural systems against climate change,
29
30
emphasizing the need for comprehensive and integrated approaches to agriculture. Sustainable
31 supply chains and community engagement are crucial in promoting ethical sourcing practices
lP
32 and supporting small-scale farmers, with agricultural education playing a pivotal role in
33
34 disseminating sustainable practices and knowledge. Overall, the findings of this paper advocate
35 for a holistic approach to agriculture, encompassing technological innovation, policy
36
37
interventions, and educational reforms to achieve sustainable agricultural systems that are
38 environmentally sound, economically viable, and socially equitable.
39
rna

40
41 Acknowledgements
42 The authors would like to thank Eugene Steele, a professional English editor at Erciyes
43
44 University, for editing the manuscript in English.
45
46
47 Conflicts of Interest
48 The authors declare no conflict of interest.
49
Jou

50
51 References
52
53 [1] Tilman, D., Balzer, C., Hill, J., Befort, B., Global food demand and the sustainable
54
55 intensification of agriculture, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 108 (2011) 20260-20264.
56 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1116437108
57 [2] Kaur, B., Singh, S., Kingra, P., Simulating the impact of climate change on maize
58
59
productivity in trans-Gangetic plains using InfoCrop model, Agric. Sci. Dig. Res. J. (2020).
60 https://doi.org/10.18805/ag.d-5079
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 [3] Clark, M., Tilman, D., Comparative analysis of environmental impacts of agricultural
5
6 production systems, agricultural input efficiency, and food choice, Environ. Res. Lett. 12
(2017) 064016. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa6cd5

of
7
8
9 [4] Sergaki, C., Lagunas, B., Lidbury, I., Gifford, M., Schäfer, P., Challenges and approaches
10 in microbiome research: From fundamental to applied, Front. Plant Sci. 9 (2018).
11 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01205
12 [5] Tilman, D., Fargione, J., Wolff, B., D’Antonio, C., Dobson, A., Howarth, R., Swackhamer,

pro
13
14
D., Forecasting agriculturally driven global environmental change, Science 292 (2001)
15 281-284. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1057544
16 [6] Bouwman, A., Beusen, A., Billen, G., Human alteration of the global nitrogen and
17 phosphorus soil balances for the period 1970–2050, Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 23 (2009).
18
19 https://doi.org/10.1029/2009gb003576
20 [7] Caffrey, K., Veal, M., Conducting an agricultural life cycle assessment: Challenges and
21
22
perspectives, Sci. World J. 2013 (2013) 472431. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/472431
23 [8] DeBoe, G., Deconinck, K., Henderson, B., Lankoski, J., Reforming agricultural policies
24
25
26
27
28
[9]
re-
will help to improve environmental performance, Eurochoices 19 (2020) 30-35.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692x.12247
Bajželj, B., Richards, K., Allwood, J., Smith, P., Dennis, J., Curmi, E., Gilligan, C.,
29
Importance of food-demand management for climate mitigation, Nat. Clim. Change 4
30 (2014) 924-929. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2353
31 [10] Sun, Y., Environmental regulation, agricultural green technology innovation, and
lP
32
33
agricultural green total factor productivity, Front. Environ. Sci. 10 (2022).
34 https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.955954
35 [11] Conner, N., Gates, H., Stripling, C., Identifying international agricultural concepts for
36 secondary agricultural education curriculum, J. Agric. Educ. 58 (2017) 118-130.
37
38 https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2017.01118
39 [12] Tripathi, S., Rani, C., The impact of agricultural activities on urbanization: Evidence and
rna

40 implications for India, Int. J. Urban Sci. 22 (2017) 123-144.

41
42 https://doi.org/10.1080/12265934.2017.1361858
43 [13] Zos-Kior, M., Shkurupii, O., Hnatenko, I., Fedrets, O., Shulzhenko, I., Rubezhanska, V.,
44 Modeling of the investment program formation process of ecological management of the
45 agrarian cluster, Eur. J. Sustain. Dev. 10 (2021) 571.
46
47
https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2021.v10n1p571
48 [14] Prügl, E., Gender orders in German agriculture: From the patriarchal welfare state to
49 liberal environmentalism, Sociol. Ruralis 44 (2004) 349-372.
Jou

50 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9523.2004.00281.x
51 [15] Hidefumi, K., Sekine, T., Murayama, S., Aoyagi, T., Mitamura, K., Li, X., Impacts of
52
53 climate change on Japanese radish in Ichihara and their potential implications, Int. J.
54 Environ. Sci. Dev. 7 (2016) 778-782. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijesd.2016.7.10.879
55
56 [16] Acker, D., Improving the quality of higher education in agriculture globally in the 21st
57 century: Constraints and opportunities, J. Int. Agric. Ext. Educ. 6 (1999).
58 https://doi.org/10.5191/jiaee.1999.06206
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 [17] Sanders, C., Gibson, K., Lamm, A., Rural broadband and precision agriculture: A frame
5
6 analysis of United States federal policy outreach under the Biden administration,
Sustainability 14 (2022) 460. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14010460

of
7
8 [18] Jurišić, M., Plaščak, I., Barač, Ž., Radočaj, D., Zimmer, D., Sensors and their application in
9
precision agriculture, Teh. Glas. 15 (2021) 529-533. https://doi.org/10.31803/tg-
10
11 20201015132216
12 [19] Jacobs, A., Tol, J., Preez, C., Farmers perceptions of precision agriculture and the role of

pro
13
14 agricultural extension: A case study of crop farming in the Schweizer-Reneke region,
15 South Africa, S. Afr. J. Agric. Ext. 46 (2018) 107-118. https://doi.org/10.17159/2413-
16
3221/2018/v46n2a484
17
18 [20] Orn, D., Duan, L., Liang, Y., Siy, H., Subramaniam, M., Agro-AI education,
19 https://doi.org/10.1145/3368308.3415457
20 [21] Qiu, Z., He, Y., Li, W., A note on the adoption of precision agriculture in Eastern China,
21
22
Outlook Agric. 36 (2007) 255-257. https://doi.org/10.5367/000000007783418499
23 [22] Hashim, M., Adam, A., Dawoods, M., Fangama, I., Towards implementing the integrated
24
25
26
27
28
re-
technology of precision agriculture in Sudan, J. Agron. Res. 1 (2018) 35-45.
https://doi.org/10.14302/issn.2639-3166.jar-18-2331
[23] Manos, B., Papathanasiou, J., Bournaris, T., Voudouris, K., A DSS for sustainable
development and environmental protection of agricultural regions, Environ. Monit. Assess.
29 164 (2009) 43-52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-009-0873-1
30
31 [24] Alonge, A., Martin, R., Assessment of the adoption of sustainable agriculture practices:
lP
32 Implications for agricultural education, J. Agric. Educ. 36 (1995) 34-42.
33 https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.1995.03034
34
35 [25] Muhaimin, A., Retnoningsih, D., Pariasa, I., The role of women in sustainable agriculture
36 practices: Evidence from East Java Indonesia, IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 1153
37 (2023) 012005. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1153/1/012005
38 [26] Aghdam, M., Investigating the effective factors in achieving sustainable agricultural
39
rna

40 development, Int. J. Food Sci. Agric. 7 (2023) 11-15.

41 https://doi.org/10.26855/ijfsa.2023.03.002
42
43 [27] Oyewole, S., Sennuga, S., Factors influencing sustainable agricultural practices among
44 smallholder farmers in Ogun State of Nigeria, Asian J. Adv. Agric. Res. 14 (2020) 17-24.
45 https://doi.org/10.9734/ajaar/2020/v14i130120
46 [28] Ojadi, F., Sustainable agricultural practices: Value chain of egusi, a local soup condiment
47
48
in Nigeria, https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.109854
49 [29] Bengtsson, J., Ahnström, J., Weibull, A., The effects of organic agriculture on biodiversity
Jou

50 and abundance: A meta‐analysis, J. Appl. Ecol. 42 (2005) 261-269.

51
52
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01005.x
53 [30] Tuck, S., Winqvist, C., Mota, F., Ahnström, J., Turnbull, L., Bengtsson, J., Land‐use
54 intensity and the effects of organic farming on biodiversity: A hierarchical meta‐analysis,
55 J. Appl. Ecol. 51 (2014) 746-755. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12219
56
57 [31] Cho, H., Lee, Y., Choi, S., Seo, D., Min, S., Heo, J., Soil microbial communities of
58 Japanese apricot (Prunus mume) orchard under organic and conventional management,
59 Appl. Biol. Chem. 62 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13765-019-0479-4
60
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 [32] Skinner, C., Gattinger, A., Krauss, M., Krause, H., Mayer, J., Heijden, M., Mäder, P., The
5
6 impact of long-term organic farming on soil-derived greenhouse gas emissions, Sci. Rep. 9
(2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-38207-w

of
7
8 [33] Toleikiene, M., Žvirdauskienė, R., Suproniene, S., Arlauskienė, A., Brophy, C.,
9 Kadziuliene, Z., Soil microbial functional diversity responds to plant-based organic
10
11
fertilizers depending on the group of carbon sources, Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 30 (2021) 2755-
12 2768. https://doi.org/10.15244/pjoes/130292
[34] Novara, A., Pulido, M., Rodrigo‐Comino, J., Prima, S., Smith, P., Gristina, L., Keesstra, S.,

pro
13
14 Long-term organic farming on a citrus plantation results in soil organic carbon recovery,
15 Cuad. Investig. Geogr. 45 (2019) 271-286. https://doi.org/10.18172/cig.3794
16
17 [35] Ghosh, M., Sohel, M., Ara, N., Zahara, F., Nur, S., Hasan, M., Farmers’ attitude towards
18 organic farming: A case study in Chapainawabganj District, Asian J. Adv. Agric. Res. 10
19 (2019) 1-7. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajaar/2019/v10i230026
20
21 [36] Rodrigo, C., Valuing ecological goods and services: An analytical framework for policy
22 makers, Sri Lanka J. Econ. Res. 2 (2014) 91-107. https://doi.org/10.4038/sljer.v2i1.100
23 [37] Malik, N., Singh, M., Kumar, A., Nain, M., Vashishtha, P., Farmers’ readiness for organic
24
25
26
27
28
re-
farming: A study of Aligarh District in Uttar Pradesh, IJEE 59 (2023) 42-45.
https://doi.org/10.48165/ijee.2023.59109
[38] Hartmann, M., Fliessbach, A., Oberholzer, H., Widmer, F., Ranking the magnitude of crop
and farming system effects on soil microbial biomass and genetic structure of bacterial
29
30 communities, FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 57 (2006) 378-388. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-
31 6941.2006.00132.x
lP
32
33
[39] Brown, S., Miller, D., Ordoñez, P., Baylis, K., Evidence for the impacts of agroforestry on
34 agricultural productivity, ecosystem services, and human well-being in high-income
35 countries: A systematic map protocol, Environ. Evid. 7 (2018).
36
37 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-018-0136-0
38 [40] Castle, S., Miller, D., Merten, N., Ordonez, P., Baylis, K., Evidence for the impacts of
39
agroforestry on ecosystem services and human well-being in high-income countries: A
rna

40
41 systematic map, Environ. Evid. 11 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-022-00260-4
42 [41] Pantera, A., Mosquera-Losada, M., Herzog, F., Herder, M., Agroforestry and the
43
44
environment, Agrofor. Syst. 95 (2021) 767-774. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-021-
45 00640-8
46 [42] Ridho, D., Marhaento, H., Imron, M., Susanti, A., Permadi, D., Riyanto, S., Irawan, B.,
47 The diversity of birds in the young oil palm agroforestry plot in Jambi, Indonesia, IOP
48 Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 1145 (2023) 012010. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-
49
1315/1145/1/012010
Jou

50
51 [43] Hashmiu, I., Perceived climate resilience and adoption of cocoa agroforestry in the forest-
52 savannah transition zone of Ghana, Int. J. Environ. Clim. Change 10 (2020) 149-161.
53
54 https://doi.org/10.9734/ijecc/2020/v10i1230292
55 [44] Aryal, K., Thapa, P., Lamichhane, D., Revisiting agroforestry for building climate-resilient
56 communities: A case of package-based integrated agroforestry practices in Nepal, Emerg.
57
58 Sci. J. 3 (2019) 303-311. https://doi.org/10.28991/esj-2019-01193
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 [45] Yadav, R., Sustainable agroforestry systems for livelihood security and their economic
5
6 appraisal in Indian Himalayas, Econ. Aff. 63 (2018). https://doi.org/10.30954/0424-
2513.3.2018.7

of
7
8 [46] Nuddin, A., Arsyad, M., Putera, M., Nuringsih, N., Teshome, T., Making the case for
9 institutional support on designing agroforestry technology models for rehabilitating critical
10
11
lands, For. Soc. 3 (2019) 49. https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v3i1.5975
12 [47] Arifin, B., Impacts of coffee agroforestry and sustainability certification on farmers’
livelihood in Sumatra-Indonesia, Sustain. Sci. Resour. 2 (2022) 77-95.

pro
13
14
15
https://doi.org/10.55168/ssr2809-6029.2022.2005
16 [48] Wijayanto, H., Lo, K., Toiba, H., Rahman, M., Does agroforestry adoption affect
17 subjective well-being? Empirical evidence from smallholder farmers in East Java,
18 Indonesia, Sustainability 14 (2022) 10382. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141610382
19
20 [49] Arage, A., Assessment of farmer’s perception and adoption of agroforestry practices: The
21 case of Assosa District, Western Ethiopia, Am. J. Appl. Sci. Res. 7 (2021) 15.
22 https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajasr.20210702.11
23
24
25
26
27
28
management in Ethiopia,
https://doi.org/10.5897/jhf2018.0570
re-
[50] Ereso, T., The role of Faidherbia albida tree species in parkland agroforestry and its
J. Hortic. For. 11 (2019) 42-47.

[51] Lowenberg‐DeBoer, J., Erickson, B., Setting the record straight on precision agriculture
29 adoption, Agron. J. 111 (2019) 1552-1569. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2018.12.0779
30 [52] Stafford, J., Implementing precision agriculture in the 21st century, J. Agric. Eng. Res. 76
31
(2000) 267-275. https://doi.org/10.1006/jaer.2000.0577
lP
32
33 [53] Abuova, A., Tulkubayeva, S., Tulayev, Y., Somova, S., Kizatova, M., Sustainable
34 development of crop production with elements of precision agriculture in northern
35
36 Kazakhstan, J. Entrep. Sustain. Issues 7 (2020) 3200-3214.
37 https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2020.7.4(41)
38 [54] Beznosov, G., Semin, A., Skvortsov, E., Volkova, S., The economic essence of the
39
category of precision agriculture, in: Int. Sci. Pract. Conf. Digital Agric.-Dev. Strateg.,
rna

40
41 Atlantis Press (2019) 135-138. https://doi.org/10.2991/ispc-19.2019.30
42 [55] Veloso, A., Mermoz, S., Bouvet, A., Toan, T., Planells, M., Dejoux, J., Ceschia, É.,
43 Understanding the temporal behavior of crops using Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2-like data for
44
45
agricultural applications, Remote Sens. Environ. 199 (2017) 415-426.
46 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.07.015
47 [56] Katekar, V., Cheruku, J., The application of drone technology for sustainable agriculture in
48 India, Curr. Agric. Res. J. 10 (2023) 352-365. https://doi.org/10.12944/carj.10.3.19
49
[57] Mazzia, V., Comba, L., Khaliq, A., Chiaberge, M., UAV and machine learning based
Jou

50
51 refinement of a satellite-driven vegetation index for precision agriculture, Sensors 20
52 (2020) 2530. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20092530
53 [58] Nhamo, L., Magidi, J., Nyamugama, A., Clulow, A., Sibanda, M., Chimonyo, V.,
54
55 Mabhaudhi, T., Prospects of improving agricultural and water productivity through
56 unmanned aerial vehicles, Agriculture 10 (2020) 256.
57 https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture10070256
58 [59] Yang, C., High resolution satellite imaging sensors for precision agriculture, Front. Agric.
59
60
Sci. Eng. (2018). https://doi.org/10.15302/j-fase-2018226
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 [60] Şimşek, Ö., Isak, M.A., Dönmez, D., Dalda Şekerci, A., İzgü, T., Kaçar, Y.A., Advanced
5
6 Biotechnological Interventions in Mitigating Drought Stress in Plants. Plants. 2024
13(5):717. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13050717

of
7
8 [61] Polle, A., Chen, S., Eckert, C., Harfouche, A., Engineering drought resistance in forest
9 trees, Front. Plant Sci. 9 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01875
10
11
[62] Abdel‐Ghany, S., Ullah, F., Ben-Hur, A., Reddy, A., Transcriptome analysis of drought-
12 resistant and drought-sensitive sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) genotypes in response to PEG-

pro
13 induced drought stress, Int. J. Mol. Sci. 21 (2020) 772.
14
15 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21030772
16 [63] Arya, H., Singh, M., Bhalla, P., Towards developing drought-smart soybeans, Front. Plant
17
18
Sci. 12 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.750664
19 [64] Manavalan, L., Guttikonda, S., Tran, L., Nguyen, H., Physiological and molecular
20 approaches to improve drought resistance in soybean, Plant Cell Physiol. 50 (2009) 1260-
21 1276. https://doi.org/10.1093/pcp/pcp082
22
23
[65] Khan, M., Palakolanu, S., Chopra, P., Rajurkar, A., Gupta, R., Iqbal, N., Maheshwari, C.,
24
25
26
27
28
re-
Improving drought tolerance in rice: Ensuring food security through multi‐dimensional
approaches, Physiol. Plant. 172 (2020) 645-668. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppl.13223
[66] Jing, X., Yao, J., Ma, X., Yuanling, S., Min, X., Hou, P., Chen, S., Kandelia candel
thioredoxin f confers osmotic stress tolerance in transgenic tobacco, Int. J. Mol. Sci. 21
29 (2020) 3335. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21093335
30 [67] Huang, J., Wang, Y., Wang, J., Farmers' adaptation to extreme weather events through
31
lP
32 farm management and its impacts on the mean and risk of rice yield in China, Am. J.
33 Agric. Econ. 97 (2015) 602-617. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aav005
34
35 [68] Aryal, J., Rahut, D., Maharjan, S., Erenstein, O., Factors affecting the adoption of multiple
36 climate‐smart agricultural practices in the Indo‐Gangetic Plains of India, Nat. Resour.
37 Forum 42 (2018) 141-158. https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-8947.12152
38
39 [69] Nyasimi, M., Kimeli, P., Sayula, G., Radeny, M., Kinyangi, J., Mungai, C., Adoption and
rna

40 dissemination pathways for climate-smart agriculture technologies and practices for

41 climate-resilient livelihoods in Lushoto, Northeast Tanzania, Climate 5 (2017) 63.
42
https://doi.org/10.3390/cli5030063
43
44 [70] Ricart, S., Cantos, J., Amorós, A., Evaluating public attitudes and farmers’ beliefs towards
45 climate change adaptation: Awareness, perception, and populism at European level, Land 8
46 (2018) 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/land8010004
47 [71] Sedebo, D., Li, G., Abebe, K., Etea, B., Ahiapka, J., Ouattara, N., Frimpong, S.,
48
49
Smallholder farmers’ climate change adaptation practices contribute to crop production
efficiency in southern Ethiopia, Agron. J. 113 (2021) 4627-4638.
Jou

50
51 https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.20900
52 [72] Katel, S., Mandal, H., Subedi, D., Koirala, S., Timsina, S., Poudel, A., Climate smart
53
54 agriculture for food security, adaptation, and migration: A review, Turk. J. Agric. Food
55 Sci. Technol. 10 (2022) 1558-1564. https://doi.org/10.24925/turjaf.v10i8.1558-1564.5162
56 [73] Chukwuone, N., Chukwuone, C., Amaechina, E., Sustainable land management practices
57
58 used by farm households for climate change adaptation in Southeast Nigeria, J. Agric. Ext.
59 22 (2018) 185. https://doi.org/10.4314/jae.v22i3.18
60
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 [74] Das, U., Ghosh, S., Contrasting resilience of agriculture to climate change in coastal and
5
6 noncoastal districts of Odisha, Indian J. Agric. Sci. 89 (2019).
https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v89i5.89655

of
7
8
9 [75] Yuan, Y., Supporting crop plant resilience during climate change, Crop Sci. 63 (2023)
10 1816-1828. https://doi.org/10.1002/csc2.21019
11 [76] Castañeda‐Álvarez, N., Khoury, C., Achicanoy, H., Bernau, V., Dempewolf, H., Eastwood,
12 R., Toll, J., Global conservation priorities for crop wild relatives, Nat. Plants 2 (2016).

pro
13
14 https://doi.org/10.1038/nplants.2016.22
15 [77] Ficiciyan, A., Loos, J., Sievers-Glotzbach, S., Tscharntke, T., More than yield: Ecosystem
16
17 services of traditional versus modern crop varieties revisited, Sustainability 10 (2018)
18 2834. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082834
19 [78] Petereit, J., Bayer, P., Thomas, W., Fernandez, C., Amas, J., Zhang, Y., Edwards, D.,
20
21 Pangenomics and crop genome adaptation in a changing climate, Plants 11 (2022) 1949.
22 https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11151949
23 [79] Rideout, K., Kosatsky, T., Food insecurity: A public health issue for BC, BC Med. J. 56
24
25
26
27
28
(2014) 29. re-
[80] Mancosu, N., Snyder, R., Kyriakakis, G., Spano, D., Water scarcity and future challenges
for food production, Water 7 (2015) 975-992. https://doi.org/10.3390/w7030975
[81] Tang, J., Folmer, H., Xue, J., Adoption of farm‐based irrigation water‐saving techniques in
29 the Guanzhong Plain, China, Agric. Econ. 47 (2016) 445-455.
30 https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12243
31
[82] Expósito, A., Berbel, J., Why is water pricing ineffective for deficit irrigation schemes? A
lP
32
33 case study in Southern Spain, Water Resour. Manag. 31 (2016) 1047-1059.
34 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-016-1563-8
35
36 [83] Thorslund, J., Bierkens, M., Scaini, A., Sutanudjaja, E., Vliet, M., Salinity impacts on
37 irrigation water-scarcity in food bowl regions of the US and Australia, Environ. Res. Lett.
38 17 (2022) 084002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac7df4
39
[84] Musse, S., Exploring the cornerstone factors that cause water scarcity in some parts of
rna

40
41 Africa, possible adaptation strategies and quest for food security, Agric. Sci. 12 (2021)
42 700-712. https://doi.org/10.4236/as.2021.126045
43 [85] Asres, L., Alternative techniques of irrigation water management for improving crop water
44
45
productivity, Rev. Agric. Sci. 11 (2023) 36-53. https://doi.org/10.7831/ras.11.0_36
46 [86] Hossain, I., Alam, M., Siwar, C., Mokhtar, M., Measurement of water productivity in
47 seasonal floodplain beel area, https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/q3ayc
48
49 [87] Kourgialas, N., Editorial: Could advances in geoinformatics, irrigation management and
climate adaptive agronomic practices ensure the sustainability of water supply in
Jou

50
51 agriculture? Water Sci. Technol. Water Supply 21 (2021) v-vii.
52 https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2021.244
53
54 [88] Kamilaris, A., Fonts, A., Prenafeta-Boldú, F., The rise of blockchain technology in
55 agriculture and food supply chains, Trends Food Sci. Technol. 91 (2019) 640-652.
56 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2019.07.034
57
58 [89] Li, L., Shan, S., Shou, Y., Kang, M., Park, Y., Sustainable sourcing and agility
59 performance: The moderating effects of organizational ambidexterity and supply chain
60
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 disruption, Aust. J. Manag. 48 (2022) 262-283.
5
6 https://doi.org/10.1177/03128962211071128
[90] Scott, C., Sustainably sourced junk food? Big food and the challenge of sustainable diets,

of
7
8 Glob. Environ. Polit. 18 (2018) 93-113. https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00458
9 [91] Liu, Y., Dang, Z.J., Yao, J., Data driven "Internet+" open supply chain system for fresh
10
11
agricultural products, in: The First Int. Symp. Manag. Soc. Sci. (ISMSS 2019), Atlantis
12 Press (2019) 69-73. https://doi.org/10.2991/ismss-19.2019.14
[92] Feagan, R., The place of food: Mapping out the ‘local’ in local food systems, Prog. Hum.

pro
13
14 Geogr. 31 (2007) 23-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132507073527
15
16 [93] Blay-Palmer, A., Santini, G., Dubbeling, M., Renting, H., Taguchi, M., Giordano, T.,
17 Validating the city region food system approach: Enacting inclusive, transformational city
18
19
region food systems, Sustainability 10 (2018) 1680. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051680
20 [94] Perrett, A., Jackson, C., Local food, food democracy, and food hubs, J. Agric. Food Syst.
21 Community Dev. 6 (2015) 7-18. https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2015.061.003
22 [95] Kissinger, M., Sussmann, C., Dorward, C., Mullinix, K., Local or global: A biophysical
23
24
25
26
27
28
re-
analysis of a regional food system, Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 34 (2018) 523-533.
https://doi.org/10.1017/s1742170518000078
[96] Berry, E., Sustainable food systems and the Mediterranean diet, Nutrients 11 (2019) 2229.
https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11092229
29 [97] Xue, L., Liu, G., Parfitt, J., Liu, X., Herpen, E., Stenmarck, Å., Cheng, S., Missing food,
30 missing data? A critical review of global food losses and food waste data, Environ. Sci.
31 Technol. 51 (2017) 6618-6633. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b00401
lP
32
33
[98] Papargyropoulou, E., Lozano, R., Steinberger, J., Wright, N., Ujang, Z., The food waste
34 hierarchy as a framework for the management of food surplus and food waste, J. Clean.
35 Prod. 76 (2014) 106-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.04.020
36 [99] Gruber, V., Holweg, C., Teller, C., What a waste! Exploring the human reality of food
37
38
waste from the store manager's perspective, J. Public Policy Mark. 35 (2016) 3-25.
39 https://doi.org/10.1509/jppm.14.095
rna

40 [100] Derqui, B., Gardó, T., Fernández, V., Towards a more sustainable food supply chain:
41
42 Opening up invisible waste in food service, Sustainability 8 (2016) 693.
43 https://doi.org/10.3390/su8070693
44
45
[101] Papargyropoulou, E., Wright, N., Lozano, R., Steinberger, J., Padfield, R., Ujang, Z.,
46 Conceptual framework for the study of food waste generation and prevention in the
47 hospitality sector, Waste Manag. 49 (2016) 326-336.
48 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2016.01.017
49 [102] Nikolicic, S., Kilibarda, M., Maslarić, M., Mircetic, D., Bojic, S., Reducing food waste in
Jou

50
51 the retail supply chains by improving efficiency of logistics operations, Sustainability 13
52 (2021) 6511. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13126511
53 [103] Garcia-Garcia, G., Woolley, E., Rahimifard, S., A framework for a more efficient approach
54
to food waste management, ETP Int. J. Food Eng. (2015).
55
56 https://doi.org/10.18178/ijfe.1.1.65-72
57 [104] Rodriguez, J., Molnar, J., Fazio, R., Sydnor, E., Lowe, M., Barriers to adoption of
58
59
sustainable agriculture practices: Change agent perspectives, Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 24
60 (2008) 60-71. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1742170508002421
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

1
2
3
4 [105] Osewe, M., Liu, A., Njagi, T., Farmer-led irrigation and its impacts on smallholder
5
6 farmers’ crop income: Evidence from southern Tanzania, Int. J. Environ. Res. Public
Health 17 (2020) 1512. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17051512

of
7
8 [106] Knutson, C., Haigh, T., Hayes, M., Widhalm, M., Nothwehr, J., Kleinschmidt, M., Graf,
9 L., Farmer perceptions of sustainable agriculture practices and drought risk reduction in
10
11
Nebraska, USA, Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 26 (2011) 255-266.
12 https://doi.org/10.1017/s174217051100010x
[107] Liang, Q., Ma, K., Liu, W., The role of farmer cooperatives in promoting environmentally

pro
13
14 sustainable agricultural development in China: A review, Ann. Public Coop. Econ. 94
15 (2023) 741-759. https://doi.org/10.1111/apce.12444
16
17 [108] Kansiime, M., Bundi, M., Nicodemus, J., Ochieng, J., Marandu, D., Njau, S., Romney, D.,
18 Assessing sustainability factors of farmer seed production: A case of the Good Seed
19 Initiative Project in Tanzania, Agric. Food Secur. 10 (2021).
20
21 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-021-00289-7
22 [109] Wu, J., Zuo, J., Li, L., Liu, S., Evaluation and influencing factors of farmers’ sustainable
23 livelihood response to ecocultural tourism in minority areas of China, Front. Environ. Sci.
24
25
26
27
28
re-
10 (2023). https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.1080277
[110] Okori, P., Munthali, W., Msere, H., Charlie, H., Chitaya, S., Sichali, F., Chirwa, R.,
Improving efficiency of knowledge and technology diffusion using community seed banks
and farmer-to-farmer extension: Experiences from Malawi, Agric. Food Secur. 11 (2022).
29
30
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-022-00375-4
31 [111] Stevens, J., Sustainability of conservation agriculture adoption and the role lead farmers
lP
32 play in Zimbabwe, S. Afr. J. Agric. Ext. 49 (2021) 1-14. https://doi.org/10.17159/2413-
33 3221/2021/v49n2a12783
34 [112] Manda, J., Alene, A., Gardebroek, C., Kassie, M., Tembo, G., Adoption and impacts of
35
36 sustainable agricultural practices on maize yields and incomes: Evidence from rural
37 Zambia, J. Agric. Econ. 67 (2015) 130-153. https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.12127
38 [113] Rockström, J., Williams, J., Daily, G., Noble, A., Matthews, N., Gordon, L., Smith, J.,
39 Sustainable intensification of agriculture for human prosperity and global sustainability,
rna

40
Ambio 46 (2016) 4-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-016-0793-6
41
42 [114] Wang, S., Tian, X., Wang, H., Liu, C., Wang, Z., Song, Q., Forecasting and coupled
43 coordination analysis of supply and demand for sustainable talent in Chinese agriculture,
44 Sustainability 15 (2023) 7127. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097127
45 [115] Lamm, A., Lamm, K., Trojan, S., Sanders, C., Byrd, A., A needs assessment to inform
46
47
research and outreach efforts for sustainable agricultural practices and food production in
48 the western United States, Foods 12 (2023) 1630. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12081630
49
Jou

50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 Journal Pre-proof

Highlights (for review)

Highlights

of
Sustainable Agriculture: A comprehensive review of sustainable agricultural practices and
their role in addressing environmental challenges and enhancing global food security.
Technology Integration in Agriculture: The critical role of technological integration, such as
precision agriculture, in improving agricultural productivity, sustainability, and resource

pro
efficiency is emphasized.
Genetic Engineering: An exploration of the impact of genetic engineering in developing
drought-resistant crops and offering solutions to global water scarcity challenges.
Climate-Smart Agriculture: The significance of Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) practices
in building resilience in agricultural systems against the impacts of climate change is discussed.

re-
lP
rna
Jou
 Journal Pre-proof

Declaration of interests

☒ The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships

of
that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

☐ The author Click here to enter your name is Choose an item for Click here to enter the journal’s name
and was not involved in the editorial review or the decision to publish this article.

pro
☐The authors declare the following financial interests (e.g., any funding for the research
project)/personal relationships (e.g., the author is an employee of a profitable company) which may be
considered as potential competing interests:

Click here to enter your full declaration

re-
lP
rna
Jou