A three-pronged approach to the digitalization–innovation–sustainable rural development nexus among Italian farms

Marcello De Rosa; Luca Bartoli; Concetta Cardillo; Chrysanthi Charatsari; Evagelos D. Lioutas; Marcello De Rosa; Luca Bartoli; Concetta Cardillo; Chrysanthi Charatsari; Evagelos D. Lioutas

doi:10.3934/agrfood.2025041

AIMS Agriculture and Food

2025, Volume 10, Issue 3: 790-802. doi: 10.3934/agrfood.2025041

Previous Article Next Article

Research article Special Issues

A three-pronged approach to the digitalization–innovation–sustainable rural development nexus among Italian farms

1.
University of Cassino and Southern Lazio, Department of Economics and law, Cassino, Italy
2.
CREA—Council for Research in Agriculture and Economics Agricultural Analysis—Centre for Policies and Bioeconomy, Rome, Italy
3.
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, School of Agriculture, Department of Agricultural Economics, Thessaloniki, Greece
4.
Department of Supply Chain Management, International Hellenic University, Katerini, Greece

Received: 20 May 2025 Revised: 13 August 2025 Accepted: 20 August 2025 Published: 30 September 2025

Recent studies have pointed out how digital innovations may boost more sustainable farming systems and have positive impacts on supporting the trajectories of smart rural development. The present work aims to analyze possible connections among digitalization, innovation and sustainable rural development through a three-pronged nexus thinking approach. This link is examined from a "discrete context" perspective, by assuming heterogeneity (which means that differences among farms may emerge in the process of adopting innovation) as a characteristic in adopting innovation and by investigating the potential impacts on local rural development. The empirical analysis draws on secondary sources, taking farms from the last Italian census of agriculture into account. Through a multivariate analysis, farms are grouped into homogenous clusters according to different types of nexuses. The results reveal a very interesting reality characterized by high levels of territorial heterogeneity in the adoption of digital and innovative solutions, bringing about scattered geographies of nexuses in the Italian farming system.
- digitalization–innovation–sustainability nexus,
- Italian agriculture,
- smart rural development
Citation: Marcello De Rosa, Luca Bartoli, Concetta Cardillo, Chrysanthi Charatsari, Evagelos D. Lioutas. A three-pronged approach to the digitalization–innovation–sustainable rural development nexus among Italian farms[J]. AIMS Agriculture and Food, 2025, 10(3): 790-802. doi: 10.3934/agrfood.2025041

Related Papers:

Abstract

Recent studies have pointed out how digital innovations may boost more sustainable farming systems and have positive impacts on supporting the trajectories of smart rural development. The present work aims to analyze possible connections among digitalization, innovation and sustainable rural development through a three-pronged nexus thinking approach. This link is examined from a "discrete context" perspective, by assuming heterogeneity (which means that differences among farms may emerge in the process of adopting innovation) as a characteristic in adopting innovation and by investigating the potential impacts on local rural development. The empirical analysis draws on secondary sources, taking farms from the last Italian census of agriculture into account. Through a multivariate analysis, farms are grouped into homogenous clusters according to different types of nexuses. The results reveal a very interesting reality characterized by high levels of territorial heterogeneity in the adoption of digital and innovative solutions, bringing about scattered geographies of nexuses in the Italian farming system.

References

[1]	Lichtenthaler U (2021) Digitainability: The combined effects of the megatrends digitalization and sustainability. J Innovation Manage 9: 64–80. https://doi.org/10.24840/2183-0606_009.002_0006 doi: 10.24840/2183-0606_009.002_0006
[2]	Torre A, Wallet F, Corsi S, et al. (2021) Is there a smart development for rural areas? In: Torre A, Corsi S, Steiner M, et al. (Eds.), Smart development for rural areas, London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429354670
[3]	Marangon F, Bertossi A, Troiano S (2023) Valuing for sustainability: Hidden costs and benefits in multidimensional agriculture. Ital Re Agric Econ (REA) 78: 53–65. https://doi.org/10.36253/rea-14613 doi: 10.36253/rea-14613
[4]	Timpanaro G, Foti VT, Cascone G, et al. (2024) Living lab for the diffusion of enabling technologies in agriculture: The case of sicily in the Mediterranean context. Agriculture 14: 2347. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14122347 doi: 10.3390/agriculture14122347
[5]	Falter M, Thór Jóhannesson G, Ren C (2023) Hacking Hekla: Exploring the dynamics of digital innovation in rural areas. Sociologia Ruralis 63: 328–347. https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12412 doi: 10.1111/soru.12412
[6]	Klerkx L (2020) Advisory services and transformation, plurality and disruption of agriculture and food systems: Towards a new research agenda for agricultural education and extension studies. J Agric Educ Ext 26: 131–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2020.1738046 doi: 10.1080/1389224X.2020.1738046
[7]	Schnebelin E (2022) Linking the diversity of ecologisation models to farmers' digital use profiles. Ecol Econ 196: 107422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2022.107422 doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2022.107422
[8]	Schnebelin E, Labarthe P, Touzard JM (2021) How digitalisation interacts with ecologisation? Perspectives from actors of the French agricultural innovation system. J Rural Stud 46: 599–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.07.023 doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.07.023
[9]	Fraser A (2023) Up in the air: the challenge of conceptualizing and crafting a post-carbon planetary politics to confront climate change. J Peasant Stud 50: 2113779. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2022.2113779 doi: 10.1080/03066150.2022.2113779
[10]	Benegiamo M, Corrado A, Fama M (2023) Agricultural digitalisation and just transition: a framework for the analysis. Ital Rev Agric Econ 78: 5–17. https://doi.org/10.36253/rea-14491 doi: 10.36253/rea-14491
[11]	Brunori G (2022) Agriculture and rural areas facing the "twin transition": Principles for a sustainable rural digitalisation. Ital Rev Agric Econ 77: 3–14. https://doi.org/10.36253/rea-13983 doi: 10.36253/rea-13983
[12]	Brunori G, Muro M (2025) Transformative innovation for the ecological transition of food systems. Policy Brief, Institute for European Environmental Policy, Brussels.
[13]	Heiman A, Ferguson J, Zilberman D (2020) Marketing and technology adoption and diffusion. Appl Econ Perspect Policy 42: 21–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13005 doi: 10.1002/aepp.13005
[14]	Ponce Oliva RD, Fernández FJ, Vasquez-Lavín F, et al. (2021) Nexus thinking at river basin scale: Food, water and welfare. Water 13: 1000. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13071000 doi: 10.3390/w13071000
[15]	Albrecht TR, Crootof A, Scott CA (2018) The water-energy-food nexus: A systematic review of methods for nexus assessment. Environ Res Let 13: 043002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaa9c6 doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/aaa9c6
[16]	Vik J, McElwee G (2011) Diversification and the entrepreneurial motivations of farmers in Norway. J Small Bus Manage 49: 390–410. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-627X.2011.00327.x doi: 10.1111/j.1540-627X.2011.00327.x
[17]	Froning P, Stotten R (2024) Shaping territorial agri-food systems through social innovations: The example of Valposchiavo, Switzerland. Ital Rev Agric Econ 79: 33–46. https://doi.org/10.36253/rea-14833 doi: 10.36253/rea-14833
[18]	van der Ploeg JD (2024) Rural studies: A new paradigm that integrates previously separated disciplines. Ital Rev Agric Econ 79: 5–17. https://doi.org/10.36253/rea-15324 doi: 10.36253/rea-15324
[19]	Renting H, Rossing WAK, Groot JJC, et al. (2009) Exploring multifunctional agriculture. A review of conceptual approaches and prospects for an integrative transitional framework. J Environ Manage 90: S112–S123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.11.014 doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.11.014
[20]	van der Ploeg JD, Renting H, Brunori G, et al. (2000) Rural development: From practices and policies towards theory. Soc Rural 40: 391–408. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9523.00156 doi: 10.1111/1467-9523.00156
[21]	van der Ploeg JD, Long A, Banks J (2002) Living Countrysides. Rural development processes in Europe: The state of the art, Doetinchem: Elsevier.
[22]	Klerkx L, Rose D (2020) Dealing with the game-changing technologies of Agriculture 4.0: How do we manage diversity and responsibility in food system transition pathways? Global Food Secur 24: 100347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2019.100347 doi: 10.1016/j.gfs.2019.100347
[23]	Welter F (2011) Contextualizing entrepreneurship—Conceptual challenges and ways forward. Entrep Theory Pract 35: 165–184. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00427.x doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00427.x
[24]	ISTAT (2020) 7th general census of agriculture. Rome.
[25]	Vandecandelaere E, Arfini F, Belletti G, et al. (2009) Linking people, place and products. FAO, Rome.
[26]	Lamine C, Renting H, Rossi A, et al. (2012) Agri-Food systems and territorial development: Innovations, new dynamics and changing governance mechanisms. In: Darnhofer D, Gibbon D, Dedieu B (Eds.), Farming Systems Research into the 21st Century: The New Dynamic, Dordrecht, Springer, 229–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4503-2_11
[27]	European Commission (2021) A long-term Vision for the EU's Rural Areas—Towards stronger, connected, resilient and prosperous rural areas by 2040. Brussels 30: 2021.
[28]	Benzecri JP (1973) L'analyse des données (parts 1 and 2), Paris, Dunod.
[29]	Fabbris L (1983) Analisi esplorativa di dati multidimensionali, Padova: Cleup editore.
[30]	Greenacre MJ (1984) Theory and Applications of Correspondence Analysis. London: Academic Press.
[31]	Wilson GA (2008) From 'weak' to 'strong' multifunctionality: Conceptualising farm-level multifunctional transitional pathways, J Rural Stud 24: 367–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2007.12.010 doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2007.12.010
[32]	Arcuri S, Brunori G, Rolandi S (2023) Digitalisation in rural areas: exploring perspectives and main challenges ahead. Ital Rev Agric Econ 78: 19–28. https://doi.org/10.36253/rea-14368 doi: 10.36253/rea-14368
[33]	Ronzhin A, Figurek A, Surovtsev V, et al. (2025) Digital transformation and precision farming as catalysts of rural development. Land 14: 1464. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14071464 doi: 10.3390/land14071464
[34]	Timpanaro G, Cascone G, Foti VT (2025) T enabling technologies in citrus farming: A living lab approach to agroecology and sustainable water resource management. Bio-Based Appl Econ Just Accepted. https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-17357
[35]	Dubois MJF, Fourati-Jamoussi F, Dantan J, et al. (2019) The agricultural innovation under digitalization. In: Business Transformations in the Era of Digitalization, Publisher: IGI Global, 276–303. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-7262-6.ch015
[36]	Choruma DJ, Dirwai TL, Mutenje MJ, et al. (2024) Digitalisation in agriculture: A scoping review of technologies in practice, challenges, and opportunities for smallholder farmers in sub-saharan Africa. J Agric Food Res 18: 101286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2024.101286 doi: 10.1016/j.jafr.2024.101286
[37]	Lioutas ED, Charatsari C (2022) Innovating digitally: The new texture of practices in agriculture 4.0. Sociologia Ruralis 62: 250–278. https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12356 doi: 10.1111/soru.12356

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2025 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)