Journal of Agricultural Economics最新文献

{"title":"Bridging the Divide Between Agricultural Economics and the Sustainability Sciences","authors":"Thomas W. Hertel","doi":"10.1111/1477-9552.70074","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.70074","url":null,"abstract":"This article is based on several decades of experience engaging in interdisciplinary research and teaching involving agronomists, climate scientists, ecologists, hydrologists and geographers, focused on ensuring the long run sustainability of local and global food systems. Through a series of examples of this research, the paper will underscore several key points. The first is that keeping the economics as simple as possible leaves greater room for interdisciplinary collaboration. The more complex the economic models, the higher the barrier to effective collaboration. Basic economic messages on the role of markets in mediating the impacts of policies, along with producer and consumer responses to changing incentives are invaluable to sustainability analyses and can lend important new insights. This doesn’t mean that the ensuing economic analysis is not sophisticated. Indeed, as will be demonstrated, sophisticated analysis is critically important. But this analysis is at the ‘extensive margin’ of economic science—applying established methods to new application domains. A second point is that economists must work at the same spatial resolution as our science collaborators. For food, land and water sustainability challenges, this is typically the grid cell—geospatial units identified by latitude and longitude coordinates. Economists have been slow on the uptake of the geospatial data revolution. For me personally, this has meant moving, over the last two decades, from national scale general equilibrium modelling to gridded partial equilibrium modelling. Ultimately, these two frameworks can be combined, as I will demonstrate in this paper. Many sustainability analyses must start at the granular level where one can leverage the full expertise of the biophysical scientists. This may take many economists out of their comfort zone. However, our tools can be adapted and brought to bear at fine scale. In this context, the paper highlights the value of the Global‐to‐Local‐to‐Global approach to sustainability analysis. The third key point made in this paper is that economics offers a great organising framework for interdisciplinary projects. Too often we let the biophysical scientists frame the discussion prior to our involvement. This leads to frustration on the part of economists who are relegated to a secondary role in the project. However, if we lead the writing of the proposal and frame the overall discussion in economic terms, this gives rise to a very different dynamic which can facilitate coherent and meaningful economic analyses. Further, when economics is not used in the sustainability sciences, policy prescriptions are often limited at best, and misleading at worst. Finally, I have some suggestions for the teaching of interdisciplinary skills at the graduate level. Here, a well‐constructed course can benefit both the students as well as the instructor, fostering fruitful collaborations on grant applications, as well as generating new ideas for res","PeriodicalId":14994,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural Economics","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2026-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148922635","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A Hundred Years of the Agricultural Economics Society","authors":"David R. Stead","doi":"10.1111/1477-9552.70065","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.70065","url":null,"abstract":"The centenary of the UK‐based Agricultural Economics Society (AES) is an obvious opportunity to provide an updated summary institutional history of its development and achievements. Knowledge of equivalent associations in the US influenced the foundation of the AES in 1926. After a faltering start, the Society's main activities have been organising residential and one‐day conferences and publishing the <jats:italic>Journal of Agricultural Economics</jats:italic> . The last‐mentioned began in 1928 as a conference proceedings. Great growth in AES membership occurred in the 25 years after the Second World War, reflecting recognition of the importance of agricultural economics in that era. With the subsequent erosion of the subject's base in British universities, especially around the turn of the millennium, the twenty‐first‐century AES pursued an outward‐looking strategy. It started co‐producing the outreach periodical <jats:italic>EuroChoices</jats:italic> with the European Association of Agricultural Economists, and holding annual conferences outside Britain. Nowadays AES membership is much more international than in the past but less occupationally diverse, with around three‐quarters of current members drawn from academia. When deemed necessary the Society has occasionally made representations on behalf of the profession, in particular influencing specific aspects of how UK research assessment exercises operate. Numbers of members and annual conference delegates are currently buoyant, and the Executive Committee has launched a £100,000 centenary fund to support postgraduate research students. The AES, then, is well positioned for the opportunities and challenges ahead at the start of its second century.","PeriodicalId":14994,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural Economics","volume":"71 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2026-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148922636","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Directional Peer Effects in Technology Adoption: Influence of Farmer Interactions in Sustaining Rice Production in Thailand","authors":"Boyeong Park, Taeyoon Kim, Donghwan An, Phumsith Mahasuweerachai","doi":"10.1111/1477-9552.70078","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.70078","url":null,"abstract":"This study examines whether Sustainable Rice Platform (SRP) practices in Thailand are driven by directional social peer exposure and physical proximity. Analysing survey data from 1363 rice‐producing households across Thailand's Central and Northeastern regions, we construct a directed social network based on self‐reported information exchanges alongside a spatial network grounded in shared subdistrict locations. Methodologically, the analysis transitions from probit specifications to Spatial Durbin Models that jointly account for spatial peer outcomes and covariates. The results show a robust positive association between the adoption behaviour of physically proximate peers and household SRP adoption. By contrast, the average peer effect in the pooled social network is not statistically significant. Once the social network is decomposed by direction, however, a significant positive peer effect emerges for inward ties—relationships from which farmers receive information—while outward ties remain insignificant. Program participation, irrigation access, and prior use of SRP‐related practices are also positively associated with adoption. These findings suggest that sustainable technology diffusion depends not simply on social connectedness, but on the directional flow of information and the visual observability of practices in physical space. By integrating spatial and directed social networks within a unified framework, this study underscores the critical role of directional heterogeneity in peer‐driven agricultural technology adoption.","PeriodicalId":14994,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural Economics","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2026-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148915650","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The JAE 's Positioning Within Agricultural Economics: A Text‐Based Analysis","authors":"Leonardo Cei, Gianluca Stefani, Edi Defrancesco","doi":"10.1111/1477-9552.70073","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.70073","url":null,"abstract":"On the occasion of the centenary of the Agricultural Economics Society, this study investigates the positioning of the <jats:italic>Journal of Agricultural Economics</jats:italic> (JAE) within the broader landscape of the main agricultural economics journals. We employ a quantitative text analysis approach, estimating a Structural Topic Model (STM) on a unique corpus of 13,140 abstracts from the JAE and six leading peer journals covering the period 1970–2024. Our results suggest that the JAE shares common trends with its peers, such as an increasing segmentation and specialisation of the topics addressed, and a commensurate growth in the use of specialised techniques, such as causal identification and experimental economics. At the same time, features differentiating the JAE from the other journals emerge as well. These include a strong focus on production issues and agricultural policy, as well as on the environmental and natural resource implications of production decisions. This contrasts with the relatively lower attention devoted to food and nutrition aspects, despite greater focus on consumption dynamics, in line with a general trend in the discipline. Overall, this analysis highlights that the JAE maintains a strong connection with core aspects of the discipline, while differentiating itself in specific areas of investigation.","PeriodicalId":14994,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural Economics","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2026-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148909189","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A Century of Farm Household Income Estimation and Comparison","authors":"Paul Wilson, Paul Caskie","doi":"10.1111/1477-9552.70077","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.70077","url":null,"abstract":"Understanding farm household (FHH) income has been a central concern of agricultural economists and policymakers for more than a century. This review traces the evolution of concepts, definitions, data sources, analytical approaches and empirical evidence used to estimate and compare FHH incomes. It argues that the central measurement challenge is the distinction between the farm business and the FHH. Farm business income is often observable, but household economic welfare depends on total income, income composition, household structure, wealth, liquidity and exposure to volatility. The evidence does not support a simple conclusion that FHHs are universally income‐disadvantaged. In many developed‐country contexts, average income differences narrow or disappear once household size and composition, in‐kind benefits and the choice of comparison group are taken into account. However, income variability, low‐income incidence, distributional outcomes and asset‐rich but cash‐constrained households remain important policy concerns. The review highlights the limits of farm accountancy data for evaluating income‐support objectives and argues for stronger household‐level and linked administrative data systems. Improved measurement is essential for credible policy targeting, transparent evaluation and analysis of FHH well‐being, resilience, generational renewal and social sustainability.","PeriodicalId":14994,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural Economics","volume":"43 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2026-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148883640","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Agri‐Food Policymaking in More Turbulent Times: Reflections at the Centenary of the Agricultural Economics Society","authors":"Alan Matthews","doi":"10.1111/1477-9552.70068","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.70068","url":null,"abstract":"Agricultural and food policy is increasingly shaped by geopolitical instability, ecological constraints, technological disruption, political polarisation and declining trust in expertise. At the same time, calls for food system transformation have gained prominence as evidence accumulates on the environmental, health and social shortcomings of current food systems. Yet reform has frequently stalled despite extensive scientific analysis and broad recognition of the need for change. This paper examines why. After reviewing some traditional explanations for policy persistence, the paper introduces the concept of policy ontologies: underlying ways of understanding what the food system is, how it functions, what it is ultimately for and how change occurs. Three ideal‐type ontologies are identified: a productivity ontology, a power‐focused ontology and an ecological ontology. These ontologies shape the definition of policy problems and the selection of preferred policy responses, helping to explain why stakeholders often appear to talk past one another. As the Society begins its second century in a more turbulent and contested policy environment, the profession's central role remains the production of rigorous evidence. That contribution will be strengthened by a greater awareness of the different ways in which food systems are understood and of how these perspectives shape both policy debates and the interpretation of evidence. Recognising these underlying assumptions can help agricultural economists contribute more effectively to policy debate as honest brokers of policy alternatives.","PeriodicalId":14994,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural Economics","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2026-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148675350","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Revisiting the Political Economy of Agriculture in 21st Century Food Systems","authors":"Danielle Resnick, Johan Swinnen","doi":"10.1111/1477-9552.70069","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.70069","url":null,"abstract":"In 1932, Joseph Duncan argued in the <jats:italic>Journal of Agricultural Economics</jats:italic> that agricultural economists should engage more explicitly with politics. Nearly a century later, the political economy of food and agriculture has expanded in both scope and complexity. This paper revisits the evolution of political economy perspectives on agricultural policy, tracing the shift from early interest‐based explanations centered on farmers and consumers to broader frameworks that incorporate institutions, ideas and the interactions among diverse policy actors. We argue that contemporary transitions from an agricultural policy paradigm to a food systems one require a further rethinking of political economy analysis. Specifically, contemporary food systems pursue multiple and often competing objectives, including productivity, nutrition, environmental sustainability, resilience and equity, while involving a far wider array of stakeholders, from multinational corporations and transnational advocacy networks to technology firms and global governance institutions. At the same time, rising political polarization, populism, digital misinformation and the fragmentation of multilateral governance increasingly shape how policy preferences are formed, coalitions are constructed, and policy compromises are negotiated. These developments complicate traditional assumptions that preferences are driven primarily by material interests and that institutions can reliably facilitate collective action. We illustrate these changing dynamics through brief case studies of the 2024 European farmer protests, Brazil's Amazon Soy Moratorium and Mexico's genetically modified corn dispute. Each case highlights tensions between national sovereignty, global integration, environmental sustainability, and agricultural livelihoods. We conclude that understanding twenty‐first century food policy requires political economy frameworks that integrate interests, institutions, ideas and the changing geopolitical and informational context in which food system decisions are made.","PeriodicalId":14994,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural Economics","volume":"-1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2026-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148675112","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Reflections on Adoption of New Agricultural Practices","authors":"David J. Pannell","doi":"10.1111/1477-9552.70064","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.70064","url":null,"abstract":"Research on adoption of new practices, technologies and systems in agriculture has generated thousands of publications over the past 70 years, covering uptake of agricultural practices spanning more than 100 years. This paper contains selected key lessons from the results of this enormous research effort, drawn from numerous reviews of the literature and shaped by personal experience. The lessons include that trialling is not adoption, that extension is not necessarily the key to increasing adoption, that each new farming practice has its own adoption story, and that adoption is often slower than practice advocates expect, typically taking multiple decades. The identified lessons are juxtaposed with a number of flawed assumptions and misconceptions commonly held by people working in agricultural agencies. A number of methodological weaknesses are still common in existing studies, including neglect or poor representation of key variables, compromising the potential for the research to generate real understanding of adoption. This also inhibits comparison of studies and the application of meta‐analyses. Suggestions are made on ways to add value to the existing research and improve the quality of future research, including the collection and curation of good‐quality adoption data sets, the development of a searchable database of adoption studies, and the creation of best‐practice guidelines for the conduct of adoption research.","PeriodicalId":14994,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural Economics","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2026-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148596245","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"JAE 2025: Report of the Editor‐in‐Chief","authors":"Jonathan Brooks","doi":"10.1111/1477-9552.70056","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.70056","url":null,"abstract":"Submissions increased in 2025 to 386 original manuscripts, similar to levels preceding the Covid period. The Journal's acceptance rate increased from 11% to 13%, which contrasts with rates of less than 10% in the preceding few years. The Journal's Impact Factor increased from 3.4 to 4.2, which compares favourably with similar field journals. This is my final report as Editor‐in‐Chief, with Frederic Ang due to succeed me following publication of the final edition of the year, which will contain principally invited articles marking the centenary of the Agricultural Economics Society.","PeriodicalId":14994,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural Economics","volume":"34 1","pages":"832-837"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2026-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148288525","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Contract Labour, Job Quality and Turnover Intention—Evidence From Nigeria","authors":"Olayinka Aremu,&nbsp;Patrick Illien,&nbsp;Adeola Oluwafunmiso Olajide,&nbsp;Eva-Marie Meemken","doi":"10.1111/1477-9552.70028","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1477-9552.70028","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Labour contracting, where intermediaries provide farmers with migrant workers, plays a central role in meeting the demand for seasonal labour on labour-intensive farms. Yet this system poses underresearched challenges for both workers and farmers. A few studies, mostly qualitative, link labour contracting to exploitative conditions, raising concerns about workers' welfare (Sustainable Development Goal 8). However, poor working conditions are widespread in agriculture, and notably, quantitative comparisons between contract and non-contract workers are lacking. For farmers, these precarious conditions pose a production risk if they lead to higher turnover. However, such links have so far been mainly documented in high-skilled settings. Here, we address these gaps and provide the first empirical evidence on the links between contract labour, job quality and turnover intention. We use matched worker–employer survey data, rarely available in agricultural research, complemented with qualitative insights from a well-suited case study: Nigeria's labour-intensive tomato sector, where farmers recruit workers through personal networks and labour contractors. Using decomposition analysis—commonly used to examine gender gaps—in a novel way, we assess disparities in working conditions between contract and non-contract workers. Our findings show that contract labour is associated with structural disparities in working conditions. Complementary qualitative insights show how rules, norms and practices embedded in labour contracting systems contribute to these structural inequalities. Paradoxically, despite poorer conditions, contract workers report job satisfaction levels similar to non-contract workers—likely reflecting limited alternatives. Consequently, turnover intentions are comparable across both groups, with job satisfaction being the primary driver of turnover intentions.</p>","PeriodicalId":14994,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural Economics","volume":"77 2","pages":"513-528"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2026-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1477-9552.70028","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145986495","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}