Next Article in Journal
Optimisation of Mechanical Characteristics of Alkali-Resistant Glass Fibre Concrete towards Sustainable Construction
Previous Article in Journal
An Evaluation of ANN Algorithm Performance for MPPT Energy Harvesting in Solar PV Systems
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 14
10.3390/su151411148
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

An Agricultural Career through the Lens of Young People

by
Federica Consentino
*,
Gabriella Vindigni
,
Daniela Spina
,
Clara Monaco
and
Iuri Peri
Department of Agriculture, Food and Environment, University of Catania, Via Santa Sofia 100, 95123 Catania, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(14), 11148; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151411148
Submission received: 29 May 2023 / Revised: 3 July 2023 / Accepted: 9 July 2023 / Published: 17 July 2023
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The lack of young people engaged in agriculture threatens future food security and social balance. The agricultural sector and rural areas are experiencing an aging demography. The data confirm the global historical trend of a shortage of young people deciding to pursue careers in agriculture and remaining in rural spaces. Understanding young people’s views on agriculture is the key to supporting their participation in the sector by examining the unattractive factors that influence their perceptions. This study aims to explore these factors through a literature review of the past 10 years, applying the PRISMA model. We used VOSviewer to identify the key elements linked in a co-word map and revealed four clusters that mainly influence young people’s perceptions. The reviewed papers are from developed and developing countries, as our approach seeks to transcend the national boundaries that often delimit analyses on generational renewal. The study brings out the common factors that affect youth’s choice in agriculture, highlighting their perceptions and aspirations. The discussions and conclusion aim to provide a different perspective to understand the decision-making process of young people toward an agricultural career.

1. Introduction

Academic literature and policy debates are focused on the decline of rural areas and agriculture. These two themes are strictly linked because of the relevance of the primary sector for socio-economic resilience and environmental safeguarding in rural spaces. In these, agricultural activity remains the economic mainstay [1]. Data from 2021 show that the world’s rural population drastically declined over the previous 10 years [2]. At the same time, statistical forecasts for 2050 predict that the world’s population will reach 9 billion, and the need to double food production (following the principles of food safety, food security, and environmental sustainability) is a problem of utmost urgency. The same applies to social balance, justice, and inclusion [3]. In this context, involving the younger generation in agriculture is seen as an important springboard to reverse the rural dynamic and ensure food production in a sustainable and innovative way. Policy strategies have been triggered to make the agricultural sector more attractive, incentivizing young people to pursue a career and live in rural places. However, these incentives have not led to a change in trends so far. The labor force statistics provided by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) produce evidence of high youth unemployment and low agricultural employment rates [4]. A contradictory situation is identified, in which young people are turning their backs on agricultural work despite high levels of unemployment [5]. This results in an ageing farmer population, with a spill-over effect on the lack of innovation and entrepreneurship, as well as a decline in rural demography. In Europe, almost one-third of all farmers are older than 65, while only around 10% of farms are run by people younger than 40 [6,7]. The same trend can be seen in developing countries where, according to the World Bank (2020), growth from agriculture could be two-to-four times more effective in increasing the income of the poorest [8].
Becoming a farmer is often a long-drawn and gradual process, influenced by many factors. Coopmans et al. argue the importance of knowing the interplay of factors that influence career choice processes [9]. From this perspective, this study aims to focus on the youth’s perception and aspiration in pursuing an agricultural career, besides the family and national origin contexts. Structural, familial, and cultural factors are observed to understand their influence on young people’s views, and thus their willingness to engage in farming.
The concepts of “perception” and “aspiration” are closely linked in literature [10]. In particular, studies that focus on career choice look at cited concepts concurrently [5,11]. Perception is considered a primary form of cognitive contact with the world around us and its study has always had a significance for philosophy and science. Aspiration refers to a “desire or ambition to realize something” and it is linked to the individuals’ goals for their future. Everyone’s aspiration is built on internal and external sources [12,13,14]. An internal source is defined as originating within the individual (personal interest and abilities), while an external source is defined as originating from someone or something outside the individual (family expectations and needs, life circumstances, etc.) [15]. External sources have to be analyzed including material or economic deprivation (of the individual or family), social relationships within and beyond the community, discrimination based on identity (gender, ethnicity), and broader structural factors, including market agreements and state policies. If one’s perception about a specific career is negative, aspirations also tend to be modified [16]. Duffy affirmed that external and internal factors behave simultaneously [15]. Some studies have shown that when a career is linked to an individual’s simple desires, it tends to be perceived as more satisfying and fulfilling [17,18]. However, defining a clear boundary between external factors and personal desires is complicated. For example, for many lower-middle-class people, external factors, such as life circumstances and family needs, are the primary motivation reason. Hence, traditional career theories may be insufficient to explain how people choose careers [15]. Our study treats internal and external factors simultaneously, without drawing a specific distinction between one and the other.
We conducted research on the Scopus platform that revealed a total number of 71 documents. Applying Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), we selected 41 articles relevant to our research topic, published in the last 10 years. The reviewed articles bring to light evidence from 19 developing and developed countries in the world. This comparative approach seeks to overcome and delimit generational renewal analyses [19]. While we recognize the role of national-level factors in shaping the aspirations of young people, the current approach allows us to signal localized and globalized dynamics at the same time. We created a co-words map using VOS viewer software (v. 1.6.18) that leads to reveal main items affecting perception. Findings show items that cluster in four areas that are common to young people around the world, following the proximity and frequency of the identified keywords [20].
The discussions and conclusions aim to offer a different perspective in understanding the decision-making process of young people toward an agricultural career, focusing on how factual issues influence perceptions.

2. Materials and Method

2.1. Materials

We conducted content analysis of articles from the Scopus database, published over ten-year period, from 2012 to 2023. The selection criteria have been identified assuming a replicable, scientific, and transparent procedure. The search was performed by filling in the “Article title, Abstract, Keywords” fields. An appropriate sequence of keywords, based on the research objectives, was carefully selected (Table 1). In line with previous research, we followed some steps for reaching adequate keywords to apply [21]. We started by selecting the terms used in the titles, abstracts, and keywords of several random and relevant articles included in both academic and grey literature. After that, we applied them and settled the search to obtain a final result in line with the aim of the review article. This allowed us to broaden the choice of the final keywords and at the same time narrow the field, excluding irrelevant articles.
We adopted Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines [21] to overview the relevant literature. The guidelines were primarily devised to promote the rigor of literature reviews in intervention research. As described in the flow chart diagram (Figure 1), we followed the four steps promoted by the guidelines: identification, screening, eligibility, and finally the records included. The result led to the identification of a 71 documents, and the following filters were applied: (1) only documents written in the English language; (2) only articles and review; (3) studies not related to the subject research. Forty-one records were included (Appendix A). The papers were collected on 26 July 2023.

2.2. Method

The analysis of the articles in this study consisted of two parts. First, we used the Tableau software (2023.1) to supplement the text with visual elements to make their data and analysis easily understood. Indeed, Tableau has gained traction in the research community over time for its ability to easily map and query spatial data from a variety of sources and spatial resolutions [22].
The findings from the selected publications have been analyzed using VOSViewer (1.6.18), which is one of the most important and useful software to create, visualize and explore maps based on network data [23]. The technique requires an algorithm for solving an optimization problem. For this purpose, VOSviewer uses a smart local moving algorithm [24]. This software is able to produce a large complex map and process large amount of data, as well as produce clusters containing high similarities between the nodes [25,26]. We chose to perform a co-word map, which is a type of bibliometric map. A bibliometric map is a figurative representation of a scientific field or organization in which elements are associated with topics or themes. This method can unravel the development of one field and its network, evaluate the literature and academic contributions, the influential units and the research trend, as well as popular topics [27]. Co-word maps allow for users to visualize significant words, terms or phrases to identify the major topics and the relationship between them [28,29,30]. This method was tested and validated as a reasonable representation of the cognitive and social relation of the research field [28,31]. Within the co-word map, we can identify clusters, which are evident from the different color. Cluster analysis linked words together according to the strongest occurrence. These words were therefore mapped in close proximity with each other. In addition, the link strength was calculated for each of the words with the highest co-occurrence. The link strength is a measure of the proximity of the words to each other, where a higher link strength indicates the words that are in closer proximity to each other [32]. The results are shown as the following clusters revealed.

3. Results

3.1. Year of Publication

This study analyzed articles published over 10 years. Figure 2 shows the trend of publications over time. The topic of young people’s perceptions toward agriculture has grown significantly in recent years, much more than in previous years. Therefore, individual motivation, aspirations and perception become relevant factors to look at young people’s involvement in farming. The year 2021 is one with the most publications on this issue.

3.2. Geographical Location

The included articles originated from a total of 19 countries (Figure 3). Most were conducted in countries in Africa (South Africa, Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda, Ghana, Morocco, Zambia, Cambodia) and Asia (India, Indonesia, Philippines, Malaysia, Malawi, Thailand). Other testimonies come from Brazil. Only four of the 41 papers reviewed give us evidence on European countries (Spain, Greece, Poland, Lithuania). In line with this, it is possible to observe the perceptions of young people in different socio-economic contexts and the common factors that emerge among them.

3.3. Co-Word Map

VOSviewer software (1.6.18) retrieved a total of 37 keywords using a minimum of three keyword occurrences. Some keywords have been unselected because they were synonyms. The resulting 29 keywords were featured in the co-word map (Figure 4). The software identified the main terms in our pool of papers, highlight the link of relationships in the map [25,26].
Table 2 shows the co-occurrences in the documents and the total strength of the links. All themes are inter-connected; however, four clusters have been identified and they can be visualized by the different colors (blue, red, green, and yellow) [23].

3.3.1. Blue Cluster

Young people recognize the economic importance of agriculture in the area where they live, but do not see this activity as a first choice for their life’s work [33]. This appears to be a trend in both developed [34,35,36,37] and developing countries [38]. Despite the differences in social and cultural contexts of the countries included in the research, the little pride and dignity associated with the agricultural sector is a recurring theme [39,40]. This is incentivized by farming portrayal as being old-fashioned, unprofitable and hard work [39]. It is seen as a labor-intensive and burdensome occupation, with no adequate reward [41]. This is certainly influenced by the spread of agricultural innovation in the country to which we refer. However, we can say that even where technology has advanced, young people may continue to consider agriculture a non-prestigious job [42]. The youth’s point of view looks at social prestige as strictly linked with higher levels of education [40], and there is a widespread perception that schooling and farming are the opposite to this [43,44]. Career choice is influenced by economic and social spillover effects. Those who aspire to work in off-farm-related livelihoods are more ambitious, particularly concerning education [45]. It is likely that off-farm-related livelihoods require specific educational qualifications, while agricultural employment is not usually seen as work for which specific training is necessary [46]. The reward and income of off-farm employment is perceived as more adequate that agricultural ones. Parents, even those who are farmers, tend to inculcate in their offspring the idea that they should not work in agriculture, not necessarily and only because it is an economically unattractive option, but rather because it is symbolically less prestigious and more strenuous than other professions associated with a university degree [33,40,47].

3.3.2. Red Cluster

Youth who come from a family farm may potentially inherit land [12,47,48]. Therefore, managing a family business could be an option in their future career [12,49,50]. For some, this is not seen as an advantage because they feel compelled to do so [49], for others it is perceived as a boon [47]. Positive and negative attitudes about career aspirations in family farming seem to be related to different experiences and positions within the management of the business. Negative perceptions are held by young people who have worked in agriculture as family helpers with very little or no pay during childhood [39,44,45], while positive perceptions are held by those who have been included in the decision-making process from an early age [40]. Young people admit that they have some difficulty in convincing their families to give them their own plot of land [51]. In fact, fathers tend to hang on to their decision of remaining in power into old age [52,53,54].
Youth, therefore, must wait until their father becomes old and tired of farming in order to inherit the farm and be able to decide how to manage and develop their own agricultural business. Moreover, they report parents being hostile to improvements proposed by offspring, insisting on traditional methods defined by them being adequate and optimal enough [44,47,55]. All this causes young people to lose interest in inheriting. On the contrary, the opportunity to manage a farm and organize the business to make improvements increases the career aspiration to be involved in it [36]. Evidence indicates that when a young person is the farm manager, he or she associates the image of the entrepreneur with himself or herself more than that of the farmer, just as in the previous generation [51,56].

3.3.3. Green Cluster

Other cases are related to young people that have agricultural aspirations, but they cannot inherit land. Despite their willingness to pursue a career in the sector, they do not see any opportunities to do so. According to Amon-Armah et al., one’s opportunity space is shaped by personal experience as well as social, economic, and ecological environment [52]. Those who cannot inherit the land perceive acquiring it as extremely complicated. Land is considered expensive and most of the time, young people do not have their own capital to invest [33,57]. When they think about accessing a loan or a regional grant, they feel inadequate or not capable enough to deal with the necessary bureaucracy [58,59,60]. The limited exposure and experience with agriculture makes them feel unsure of their skills in agronomy and agribusiness, even if they have ideas and innovation spirit that may lead to agricultural development [61]. So, becoming an agro-entrepreneur and managing one’s own farm business is regarded as an “unattainable dream” [62]. The only thing they are able to achieve is work for elderly landowners, but the inability to be entrepreneurs and make their own business decisions severely lowers their desire to work in agriculture [36]. All this results in the need and desire to migrate to urban areas, abandoning the idea of running a farming business and living in the rural birthplace.

3.3.4. Yellow Cluster

Young people that aspire to be farmers, or already are, would like to not feel alone and marginalized by their policy makers [63,64,65]. Indeed, they take substantial risks to run their business and admit that they may feel safer and more enticed to do agriculture with support policies. The aid policies that seem to most direct the interest of young people concern support for the adoption of technological innovations, risk management, and rural development [59,62,66]. Because of the strong heterogeneity of rural areas, the order of priority in requesting government approaches differs. These are not merely differences related to the nation of origin, but priorities are dictated by different areas even within the same nation. The widespread innovative tools for making agricultural work less strenuous may improve the perception of the sector, making it more attractive. Indeed, applying technology to the agricultural sector means placing less burden on the physicality of the farmer, but also drives away the idea of old-fashioned work [67,68,69]. High levels of risk in agriculture severely contribute to youth’s fear of starting a farming business. Thinking about working hard and then having to deal with the consequences of a disastrous climate event is one of the first concerns. Perceiving that policies are on young people’s side to overcome such eventualities greatly diminishes the dread of entering a business, banishing the sense of loneliness of the process [70]. Rural development policies are complementary, but equally relevant. Young people living in remote rural settings experience this sense of isolation and second-class status compared to their urban peers [71,72]. They aspire to adopt a lifestyle like their urban peers, with leisure spaces and primary services [46,73]. According to Giuliani and colleagues, the widespread perception of rural youth is that their villages and surroundings are marginalized due to a lack of political will that prevents rural problems from being solved [57].

4. Discussion

As pointed out earlier, this study highlights the perceptions of the world’s youth regarding agriculture. We focused on the existing literature on their perceptions and consequent aspirations. Papers reviewed cross the boundaries of nations and place the world’s youth as a unified category. This work is not intended to exclude socioeconomic contextual differences, but bring to light the common factors that contribute to perceptions of agricultural careers. Case studies, interviews, and focus groups that took place in different parts of the world were reviewed. We emphasize that the evidence concerns different age groups. There is not a univocal definition of young people, especially regarding agriculture. The European Union considers young farmers persons less than 40 years of age. In Indonesia, farmers are considered young if they are between 18 to 30 years old, while in Africa this range is about 15 to 35 years old. For the United Nations and FAO, young farmers are between 15 and 24 years of age. The selected articles group a sample of young people aged between 15 and 40 years. We have decided to follow Ben White’s classification of “youth”, which sees it as the stage in life where people build their dreams for the future, take action to achieve their independence and move into adulthood [64]. Each person experiences this stage that is strongly characterized by choices that are influenced by external factors, as well as internal factors such as personal interests. They are all elements that build individual perception about an argument, in this case about a career choice. As pointed out earlier, defining and drawing a line between external and internal factors is tricky. In this regard, recent literature provides new theories of information processing in the human mind, providing explanations of the motives that drive an individual in observing cultural values and external contexts. An example of this is the mindsponge theory [74,75].
The results of our study reveal how factual factors deal and affect the youth’s idea of agriculture. First, agriculture is not a choice that allows one to achieve and obtain high social prestige, so farming is still perceived as “low-class”. This seems to be strictly linked to the juxtaposition between agriculture and an education degree. It stems from the historical tendency that agriculture does not require high cognitive skills [76]. In contrast, attainment of non-agricultural employment is more often linked to high schooling. The view of unskilled farming is no longer accurate to modern agriculture. In fact, managing a farm requires entrepreneurial abilities and environmental knowledge. Goals such as environmental sustainability and food safety require the participation of educated young people and with a high degree of knowledge [77]. The image of a well-trained farmer can trigger a ripple effect, increasing social prestige and pulling farmers away from the lower classes. Therefore, designing educational programs should include agriculture as modern, innovative, profitable, and interesting. An image of those who are good in farming is changed, and the association to being only a peasantry is note appropriate enough [78]. Evidence about the contraposition between farmers from previous and the current generation is an example of how the idea of farmer has changed. Evidence shows that the past generation was tied to their decision-making role on farms, limiting the entry of younger people who, meanwhile, lose interest in farm management. Young people who come from a farming family are divided between those who want to continue their parents’ career and those who do not, and the choice strongly depends on the experience gained in childhood and the role occupied in decision-making. Being able to contribute creativity and innovation to one’s family business gives young people a sense of belonging and personal attachment to the family business. However, the fact that farming is a “family affair” and that young people’s career aspirations are tied to their parents’ choices to give them primary roles in management influences the final decision. In this regard, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) repeatedly affirms the need to encourage not only the legal transfer of the farm, but especially the transfer of decision-making power from an early age, so as to provide a successors [79].
A different point of view is related to those who do not inherit and do not come from a family farm. The shortage of new generation involvement in farming is often associated with a lack of successors [6,80]. However, recent literature is broadening the discussion of the participation of youth from diverse backgrounds that are commonly named new entrants for the distinguished, and those that are successors or potentially may be [81]. It is about supporting first-generation farms run by young people who lack experience, but are strongly motivated to become their own bosses, and can bring innovative new ideas. Access to land is identified as the first and biggest obstacle for most young people [82]. The FAO has advised governments on the need to manage available land efficiently. Indeed, land is becoming less and less available and plots are becoming smaller and more fragmented, but there is also neglected and abandoned arable land [83]. An equitable distribution is essential to engage young people [84]. Moreover, access to the bureaucracy to apply for land or credit should be easy and affordable at all levels of education. Certainly, different situations pertain to different bureaucracy; nevertheless, the fact that young people feel intimidated by facing long and detailed documentation requests without support is discouraging. In this regards, some authors suggest providing free institutional support figures to all young people who wish to inquire about an agricultural career option [85,86]. Without adequate institutional support, a positive perception and potential aspiration in agriculture may turn into a negative one, and agriculture may be perceived as “difficult to achieve” and an unrealizable dream. Incentivizing new entrants could lead to employment possibilities in their rural areas of origin, preventing migration during the youth stages.
Whether first or second generation, the development of youth enterprises must be accompanied by aid and support policies. Farming is perceived as “risky”. Agriculture is vulnerable in several respects, much more so than other economic sectors [87]. Price volatility, exposure to climate change, and a lack of adequate infrastructure in rural areas where farms are located are just some of the concerns that affect farmers. The step of involving young people needs to be followed by further ones to enable them to do business long-term. Aid policies should be well designed responding to specific needs, depending on the context. They should also be constantly monitored to observe the resulting impact, so as to be implemented in the case of new and specific needs originating from shocks and sudden changes [88]. Policies and strategies should indirectly avert the sense of abandonment, loneliness and isolation that young farmers perceive in farming and the rural context [89]. Governments wanting to encourage young people to lead their aspirations toward agriculture have to make them feel safe and supported on their long path toward entrepreneurship, and satisfied with a rural lifestyle [90].

5. Conclusions

Although Virgil states in the second book of the Georgics that, after the philosopher, the farmer is the happiest man in the world, farmers have been relegated to the lower end of the social hierarchy since the beginning of civilization. This social marginalization has crystallized over the centuries, where the economic progress of nations, expressed in terms of GDP, is accompanied by a steady decline of interest in agriculture. The agricultural sector has advanced differentially among countries. In spite of this, the existing literature shows that there are factors common among young people in both developing and developed countries. Our study aimed to bring these factors to light, revealing four thematic areas following the clusters above. We can therefore summarize the factors shared by the perspectives of young people: (1) farming is low-status; (2) farming is a family affair; (3) farming is difficult to achieve; (4) farming is risky. These conclusions are related to case studies, interviews, and focus groups that took place in different parts of the world and were reviewed by us. What we were interested in was pointing out what factors drive negative perception. The reason is that negative perceptions can turn into a widely held belief over time. The direct association with the agricultural sector as a last-choice employment may lead young people to (not) choose a priori, without taking into account the possible advantages. For this reason, it is highly recommended to consider how perception influences individual decision-making processes, especially in cases where a participatory approach is adopted on the issue of involving the younger generation in agriculture. This approach may emphasize the importance of implementing policy strategies that look at a multi-ideal dimension, in which the social relevance of agricultural occupations is central as the production of food and services.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, I.P. and F.C.; methodology, D.S., F.C. and G.V.; software, F.C.; validation, F.C.; formal analysis, F.C. and C.M.; data curation, D.S.; writing—original draft preparation, I.P. and F.C.; writing—review F.C. and C.M.; editing, C.M.; supervision, I.P.; funding acquisition, G.V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the project “ERRARE—Terre fertili, terre fragili”, under “PIACERI—Piano per la Ricerca di Ateneo 2020–2022”, Linea di intervento 2, Research grant 5A722192165, University of Catania. Responsible: Gabriella Vindigni.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author (F.C.).

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Ruth McAreavey from School of Geography, Politics and Sociology at Newcastle University for providing useful support and suggestions.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Table
Table A1. Paper reviewed.
Table A1. Paper reviewed.
Title AuthorsYearJournal
1“Review on engaging the youth in agribusiness”Ninson, J.; Brobbey, M.K. [12]2023Cogent Social Sciences
2Should I stay or should I go Gender differences and factors influencing family farm business succession in Rio Grande do Sul, BrazilBreitenbach, R.; Foguesatto, C.R. [54]2023Land Use Policy
3What Drives the Young Malaysian Generation to Become Horticulture Farmers? A Qualitative ApproachFirdaus, R. B. R., Ebekozien, A., Samsurijan, M. S., & Rosli, H. [61]2022Millennial Asia
4Engaging youth at school to advance sustainable agriculture and inspire future farming: evidence from CambodiaAlrawashdeh, G.S.; Lindgren, S.; Reyesc, M.;
Pisey, S. [65]		2022The Journal Of Agricultural Education And Extension
5A Typology of Young Cocoa Farmers: Attitudes, Motivations and AspirationsAmon-Armah, F.; Anyidoho, N.A.; Alvin Amoah, I.; Muilerman, S. [52]2022European Journal of Development Research
6Youth’s (Un)willingness to work in agriculture sectorGirdziute, L.; Besuspariene, E.; Nausediene, A.; Novikova, A.; Leppala, J.; Jakob, M. [48]2022Frontiers in Public Health
7Farm Parent and Youth Aspirations on the Generational Succession of Farming: Evidence From South IndiaNandi, R., Pratheepa, C.M., Nedumaran, S., Rao, N., Rengalakshmi, R. [47]2022Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems
8Becoming a Young Farmer in the Digital Age—An Island PerspectiveUnay-Gailhard, İ., Simões, F. [38]2022Rural sociology
9Human Capital Theory and the Defectology of Aspirations in Policy Research on Rural YouthWhite, B. [60]2021 European Journal of Development Research
10Residential Aspirations and Perception of Rural Youth of the Opportunities Offered by their Environment: The Case of a Spanish Inland Rural AreaGonzález, J.J.C., Herrero, J.A.R., Aboitiz, R.J. [33]2021European Countryside
11Youth participation in agriculture: A scoping reviewGeza, W., Ngidi, M., Ojo, T., (…), Slotow, R., Mabhaudhi, T. [70]2021Sustainability (Switzerland)
12Understanding the Aspirations of Farming Communities in Developing Countries: A Systematic Review of the LiteratureNandi, R., Nedumaran, S. [36]2021European Journal of Development Research
13Not All About Farming: Understanding Aspirations Can Challenge Assumptions About Rural DevelopmentMausch, K., Harris, D., Dilley, L., (…), Yim, J., Jones, E. [35]2021European Journal of Development Research
14Who Wants to Farm? Answers Depend on How You Ask: A Case Study on Youth Aspirations in KenyaLaRue, K., Daum, T., Mausch, K., Harris, D. [34]2021European Journal of Development Research
15Determinant of university students’ choices and preferences of agricultural sub-sector engagement in CameroonMkong, C.J., Abdoulaye, T., Dontsop-Nguezet, P.M., (…), Manyong, V., Shu, G. [39]2021Sustainability (Switzerland)
16Farming, Gender and Aspirations Across Young People’s Life Course: Attempting to Keep Things Open While Becoming a FarmerHuijsmans, R., Ambarwati, A., Chazali, C., Vijayabaskar, M. [44]2021European Journal of Development Research
17Barriers and opportunities for the youth engagement in agribusiness: empirical evidence from Zambia and VietnamMulema, J., Mugambi, I., Kansiime, M., (…), Pham, T.X., Oduor, G. [43]2021Development in Practice
18Gender differences in rice value chain participation and career preferences of rural youth in IndiaChellattan Veettil, P., Raghu, P., Mohapatra, B., Mohanty, S. [69]2021Development in Practice
19Generational dynamics of agricultural intensification in Malawi: challenges for the youth and elderly smallholder farmersLindsjö, K., Mulwafu, W., Andersson Djurfeldt, A., Joshua, M.K. [51]2021International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability
20Young people’s perceptions about the difficulties of entrepreneurship and developing rural properties in family agricultureYamaguchi, C.K., Stefenon, S.F., Ramos, N.K., (…), Yamaguchi, S.K.F., de Borba, M.L [62].2020Sustainability (Switzerland)
21Unlocking the potential of agribusiness in Africa through youth participation: An impact evaluation of n-power agro empowerment program in NigeriaOgunmodede, A.M., Ogunsanwo, M.O., Manyong, V. [59]2020Sustainability (Switzerland)
22Strategy for developing the role of youth in agriculture of Soppeng district, South Sulawesi provinceAkbar, Zubair, H., Jamil, M.H. [66]2020IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science
23Young farmers and parents’ perception for the future of agriculture: Socio-spatial integration of Coffee Farmers in Jeneponto Regency Junais, I., Samsuar, Daniel, (…), Syarif, A., Mansyur, M.H. [55]2020IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science
24Bridging youth and gender studies to analyse rural young women and men’s livelihood pathways in Central Uganda Rietveld Anne, A.M., Van der Burg M., M., Groot J.C.J. [64] 2020Journal of Rural Studies
25Youth perceptions of agriculture: influence of cognitive processes on participation in agripreneurship Magagula, B., Tsvakirai, C.Z. [68]2020Development in Practice
26Identity gaps and negotiations among layers of young farmers: Case study in IndonesiaWidiyanti, E., Karsidi, R., Wijaya, M., Utari, P. [45]2020Open Agriculture
27Generational changes in agriculture: The influence of farm characteristics and socio-economic factors Sroka, W., Dudek, M., Wojewodzic, T., Król, K. [49]2019Agriculture (Switzerland)
28We’re ready, the system’s not–youth perspectives on agriculturalcareers in South AfricaMetelerkampa, L.; Reinette, S.; Biggs, R. [58]2019Agricultural Economics Research, Policy and Practice in Southern Africa
29Young people’s willingness to farm under present and improved conditions in Thailand Ruiz Salvago, M., Phiboon, K., Faysse, N., Nguyen, T.P.L. [56]2019Outlook on Agriculture
30Of bulls and bulbs: aspirations, opinions and perceptions of rural adolescents and youth in Zambia Daum, T. [41]2019Development in Practice
31Influence of entrepreneurship education on career aspiration of agriculture undergraduates in Rivers State Ifeanyi-obi, C.C., Ewurum, T. [67]2019Journal of Agricultural Extension
32Young generation’s perception on the agricultural sector Widiyanti, E., Setyowati, N., Ardianto, D.T. [71]2018IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science
33Predicting youth participation in urban agriculture in Malaysia: insights from the theory of planned behavior and the functional approach to volunteer motivation Tiraieyari, N., Krauss, S.E. [72]2018Agriculture and Human Values
34Realities, perceptions, challenges and aspirations of rural youth in dryland agriculture in the Midelt Province, Morocco Giuliani, A., Mengel, S., Paisley, C., (…), Oliveros, O., Wongtschowski, M. [57]2017Sustainability (Switzerland)
35Young people’s perspectives on farming in Ghana: A Q study Sumberg, J., Yeboah, T., Flynn, J., Anyidoho, N.A. [40]2017Food security
36St Vincent Youth and Careers in Agriculture Webster, N. and Ganpat, W. [63]2014 Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension
37Looking for a Specificity of Rural Youth. The Polish Case Szafraniec K. [37]2013 Eastern European countryside
38The agricultural sector as the main power of the green economy in Indonesia Pratiwi, S.N [42]2013International Journal of Green Economics
39Perceptions and Aspirations: A Case Study of Young People in Ghana’s Cocoa Sector Anyidoho, N.A., Leavy, J., Asenso-Okyere, K. [46]2012IDS Bulletin
40Youths’ perceptions of and attitudes towards the Ifugao rice terraces Dizon, J.T.; Calderon, M.M.; Sajise, A.J.U.; Andrada II, R.T.; Salvador, M.G. [53]2012Journal of Environmental Science and Management
41Agriculture and the Generation Problem: Rural Youth, Employment and the Future of Farming White, B. [73]2012IDS Bulletin

References

  1. Trivelli, C.; Berdegué, J.A. Rural Transformation Rural Transformation Looking towards the Future of Latin America and the Caribbean; FAO: Santiago, Chile, 2019; 76p. [Google Scholar]
  2. World Rural Population 1960–2022. Available online: https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/WLD/world/rural-population (accessed on 10 August 2022).
  3. Le Mouël, C.; Forslund, A. How can we feed the world in 2050? A review of the responses from global scenario studies. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 2017, 44, 541–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. OECD. OECD Labour Force Statistics 2007–2016; OECD Publisher: Paris, France, 2017; ISBN 9789264252424. [Google Scholar]
  5. Leavy, J.; Smith, S. Future Farmers: Youth Aspirations, Expectations and Life Choices. Futur. Agric. Discuss. Pap. 2010, 13, 1–15. [Google Scholar]
  6. Zagata, L.; Sutherland, L.A. Deconstructing the “young farmer problem in Europe”: Towards a research agenda. J. Rural Stud. 2015, 38, 39–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Swiaczny, F. Demographic impacts on landscape change—A conceptual view of global demographic trends. In Use of Landscape Sciences for the Assessment of Environmental Security; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2008; pp. 319–328. [Google Scholar]
  8. The World Bank Agriculture and Food. Available online: https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/agriculture/overview (accessed on 29 April 2023).
  9. Coopmans, I.; Dessein, J.; Accatino, F.; Antonioli, F.; Bertolozzi-Caredio, D.; Gavrilescu, C.; Gradziuk, P.; Manevska-Tasevska, G.; Meuwissen, M.; Peneva, M.; et al. Understanding farm generational renewal and its influencing factors in Europe. J. Rural Stud. 2021, 86, 398–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Bandura, A.; Barbaranelli, C.; Caprara, G.V.; Pastorelli, C. Self-efficacy beliefs as shapers of children’s aspirations and career trajectories. Child Dev. 2001, 72, 187–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Al-Bahrani, M.A.; Allawati, S.M.; Abu Shindi, Y.A.; Bakkar, B.S. Career aspiration and related contextual variables. Int. J. Adolesc. Youth 2020, 25, 703–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Ninson, J.; Brobbey, M.K. Review on engaging the youth in agribusiness. Cogent Soc. Sci. 2023, 9, 2193480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Christina, D.; Is, J.; Muljono, P.; Lubis, D.P.; Mulyandari, R.S.H. How to Make Youth Participate in Farming? A Literature Review. Int. J. Progress. Sci. Technol. 2021, 24, 73–83. [Google Scholar]
  14. Tang, M.; Pan, W.; Newmeyer, M.D. Factors Influencing High School Students’ Career Aspirations. Prof. Sch. Couns. 2008, 11, 285–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Duffy, R.D.; Dik, B.J. Beyond the Self: External Influences in the Career Development Process. Career Dev. Q. 2009, 58, 29–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Kosec, K.; Khan, H.; Spielman, D.; Malik, S.; Dorosh, P.; Ahmad, N. Understanding the aspirations of the rural poor. In Agriculture and Rural Poverty Reduction in Pakistan; University of Pennsylvania Press: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2016; pp. 433–474. [Google Scholar]
  17. Garcia-Zamor, J.C. Workplace Spirituality and Organizational Performance. Public Adm. Rev. 2003, 63, 355–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Lips-Wiersma, M. The influence of spiritual “meaning-making” on career behavior. J. Manag. Dev. 2002, 21, 497–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Wimmer, A.; Schiller, N.G. Methodological nationalism and beyond: Nation-state building, migration and the social sciences. Glob. Netw. 2002, 4, 301–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Donthu, N.; Kumar, S.; Mukherjee, D.; Pandey, N.; Lim, W.M. How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 133, 285–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lillemets, J.; Fertő, I.; Viira, A.H. The socioeconomic impacts of the CAP: Systematic literature review. Land Use Policy 2022, 114, 105968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Vindigni, G.; Mosca, A.; Bartoloni, T.; Spina, D. Shedding light on peri-urban ecosystem services using automated content analysis. Sustainability 2021, 13, 9182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Manual de VOSviewer; Univeristeit Leiden: Leiden, The Netherlands, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  24. Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Visualizing Bibliometric Networks; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2014; ISBN 9783319103778. [Google Scholar]
  25. Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Visualizing the computational intelligence field. IEEE Comput. Intell. Mag. 2006, 1, 6–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 2010, 84, 523–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Wu, Y.J.; Goh, M.; Mai, Y. Social innovation and higher education: Evolution and future promise. Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun. 2023, 10, 283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Viedma-Del-Jesus, M.I.; Perakakis, P.; Muñoz, M.Á.; López-Herrera, A.G.; Vila, J. Sketching the first 45 years of the journal Psychophysiology (1964–2008): A co-word-based analysis. Psychophysiology 2011, 48, 1029–1036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Liu, Y.; Goncalves, J.; Ferreira, D.; Xiao, B.; Hosio, S.; Kostakos, V. CHI 1994–2013: Mapping two decades of intellectual progress through co-word analysis. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Toronto, ON, Canada, 26 April–1 May 2014; pp. 3553–3562. [Google Scholar]
  30. Dehdarirad, T.; Villarroya, A.; Barrios, M. Research trends in gender differences in higher education and science: A co-word analysis. Scientometrics 2014, 101, 273–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Waltman, L.; van Eck, N.J.; Noyons, E.C.M. A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks. J. Informetr. 2010, 4, 629–635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Goyal, K.; Kumar, S. Financial literacy: A systematic review and bibliometric analysis. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2021, 45, 80–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. González, J.J.C.; Herrero, J.A.R.; Aboitiz, R.J. Residential Aspirations and Perception of Rural Youth of the Opportunities Offered by their Environment: The Case of a Spanish Inland Rural Area. Eur. Countrys. 2021, 13, 785–805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. LaRue, K.; Daum, T.; Mausch, K.; Harris, D. Who Wants to Farm? Answers Depend on How You Ask: A Case Study on Youth Aspirations in Kenya. Eur. J. Dev. Res. 2021, 33, 885–909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Mausch, K.; Harris, D.; Dilley, L.; Crossland, M.; Pagella, T.; Yim, J.; Jones, E. Not All about Farming: Understanding Aspirations Can Challenge Assumptions about Rural Development. Eur. J. Dev. Res. 2021, 33, 861–884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Nandi, R.; Nedumaran, S. Understanding the Aspirations of Farming Communities in Developing Countries: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Eur. J. Dev. Res. 2021, 33, 809–832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Szafraniec, K. Looking for a specificity of rural youth. The polish case. East. Eur. Countrys. 2013, 19, 29–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Unay-Gailhard, İ.; Simões, F. Becoming a Young Farmer in the Digital Age—An Island Perspective. Rural Sociol. 2022, 87, 144–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Mkong, C.J.; Abdoulaye, T.; Dontsop-Nguezet, P.M.; Bamba, Z.; Manyong, V.; Shu, G. Determinant of university students’ choices and preferences of agricultural sub-sector engagement in cameroon. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Sumberg, J.; Yeboah, T.; Flynn, J.; Anyidoho, N.A. Young people’s perspectives on farming in Ghana: A Q study. Food Secur. 2017, 9, 151–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Daum, T. Of bulls and bulbs: Aspirations, opinions and perceptions of rural adolescents and youth in Zambia. Dev. Pract. 2019, 29, 882–897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Pratiwi, S.N. The agricultural sector as the main power of the green economy in Indonesia. Int. J. Green Econ. 2013, 7, 35–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Mulema, J.; Mugambi, I.; Kansiime, M.; Chan, H.T.; Chimalizeni, M.; Pham, T.X.; Oduor, G. Barriers and opportunities for the youth engagement in agribusiness: Empirical evidence from Zambia and Vietnam. Dev. Pract. 2021, 31, 690–706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Huijsmans, R.; Ambarwati, A.; Chazali, C.; Vijayabaskar, M. Farming, Gender and Aspirations Across Young People’s Life Course: Attempting to Keep Things Open While Becoming a Farmer. Eur. J. Dev. Res. 2021, 33, 71–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Widiyanti, E.; Karsidi, R.; Wijaya, M.; Utari, P. Identity gaps and negotiations among layers of young farmers: Case study in Indonesia. Open Agric. 2020, 5, 361–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Anyidoho, N.A.; Leavy, J.; Asenso-Okyere, K. Perceptions and Aspirations: A Case Study of Young People in Ghana’s Cocoa Sector. IDS Bull. 2012, 43, 20–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Nandi, R.; Pratheepa, C.M.; Nedumaran, S.; Rao, N.; Rengalakshmi, R. Farm Parent and Youth Aspirations on the Generational Succession of Farming: Evidence From South India. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2022, 5, 804581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Girdziute, L.; Besuspariene, E.; Nausediene, A.; Novikova, A.; Leppala, J.; Jakob, M. Youth’s (Un) willingness to work in agriculture sector. Front. Public Health 2022, 10, 937657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Sroka, W.; Dudek, M.; Wojewodzic, T.; Król, K. Generational changes in agriculture: The influence of farm characteristics and socio-economic factors. Agriculture 2019, 9, 264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Cassidy, A.; Mcgrath, B. The Relationship between “Non-successor” Farm Offspring and the Continuity of the Irish Family Farm. Sociol. Ruralis 2014, 54, 399–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Lindsjö, K.; Mulwafu, W.; Andersson Djurfeldt, A.; Joshua, M.K. Generational dynamics of agricultural intensification in Malawi: Challenges for the youth and elderly smallholder farmers. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 2021, 19, 423–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Amon-Armah, F.; Anyidoho, N.A.; Amoah, I.A.; Muilerman, S. A Typology of Young Cocoa Farmers: Attitudes, Motivations and Aspirations. Eur. J. Dev. Res. 2022, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Dizon, J.T.; Calderon, M.M.; Sajise, A.J.U.; Andrada, R.T.; Salvador, M.G. Youths’ perceptions of and attitudes towards the Ifugao rice terraces. J. Environ. Sci. Manag. 2012, 15, 52–58. [Google Scholar]
  54. Breitenbach, R.; Foguesatto, C.R. Should I stay or should I go? Gender differences and factors influencing family farm business succession in Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Land Use Policy 2023, 128, 106597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Junais, I.; Samsuar; Daniel; Ali, H.M.; Yusran; Syarif, A.; Mansyur, M.H. Young farmers and parents’ perception for the future of agriculture: Socio-spatial integration of Coffee Farmers in Jeneponto Regency. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2020, 473, 012017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Ruiz Salvago, M.; Phiboon, K.; Faysse, N.; Nguyen, T.P.L. Young people’s willingness to farm under present and improved conditions in Thailand. Outlook Agric. 2019, 48, 282–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Giuliani, A.; Mengel, S.; Paisley, C.; Perkins, N.; Flink, I.; Oliveros, O.; Wongtschowski, M. Realities, perceptions, challenges and aspirations of rural youth in dryland agriculture in the Midelt Province, Morocco. Sustainability 2017, 9, 871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Metelerkamp, L.; Drimie, S.; Biggs, R. We’re ready, the system’s not–youth perspectives on agricultural careers in South Africa. Agrekon 2019, 58, 154–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Ogunmodede, A.M.; Ogunsanwo, M.O.; Manyong, V. Unlocking the potential of agribusiness in africa through youth participation: An impact evaluation of n-power agro empowerment program in nigeria. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. White, B. Human Capital Theory and the Defectology of Aspirations in Policy Research on Rural Youth. Eur. J. Dev. Res. 2021, 33, 54–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Firdaus, R.B.R.; Ebekozien, A.; Samsurijan, M.S.; Rosli, H. What Drives the Young Malaysian Generation to Become Horticulture Farmers? A Qualitative Approach. Millenn. Asia 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Yamaguchi, C.K.; Stefenon, S.F.; Ramos, N.K.; dos Santos, V.S.; Forbici, F.; Klaar, A.C.R.; Ferreira, F.C.S.; Cassol, A.; Marietto, M.L.; Yamaguchi, S.K.F.; et al. Young people’s perceptions about the difficulties of entrepreneurship and developing rural properties in family agriculture. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Webster, N.; Ganpat, W. St Vincent Youth and Careers in Agriculture. J. Agric. Educ. Ext. 2014, 20, 49–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Rietveld, A.M.; van der Burg, M.; Groot, J.C.J. Bridging youth and gender studies to analyse rural young women and men’s livelihood pathways in Central Uganda. J. Rural Stud. 2020, 75, 152–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Alrawashdeh, G.S.; Lindgren, S.; Reyes, M.; Pisey, S. Engaging youth at school to advance sustainable agriculture and inspire future farming: Evidence from Cambodia. J. Agric. Educ. Ext. 2022, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Akbar; Zubair, H.; Jamil, M.H. Strategy for developing the role of youth in agriculture of Soppeng district, South Sulawesi province. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2020, 473, 012050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Clara, I.C.; Thanksgiving, E. Influence of entrepreneurship education on career aspiration of agriculture undergraduates in rivers state. J. Agric. Ext. 2019, 23, 107–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Magagula, B.; Tsvakirai, C.Z. Youth perceptions of agriculture: Influence of cognitive processes on participation in agripreneurship. Dev. Pract. 2020, 30, 234–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Chellattan Veettil, P.; Raghu, P.; Mohapatra, B.; Mohanty, S. Gender differences in rice value chain participation and career preferences of rural youth in India. Dev. Pract. 2021, 31, 93–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Geza, W.; Ngidi, M.; Ojo, T.; Adetoro, A.A.; Slotow, R.; Mabhaudhi, T. Youth participation in agriculture: A scoping review. Sustainability 2021, 13, 9120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Widiyanti, E.; Setyowati, N.; Ardianto, D.T. Young generation’s perception on the agricultural sector. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2018, 200, 012060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  72. Tiraieyari, N.; Krauss, S.E. Predicting youth participation in urban agriculture in Malaysia: Insights from the theory of planned behavior and the functional approach to Volunteer motivation. Agric. Hum. Values 2018, 35, 637–650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. White, B. Prelims-Agriculture and the Generation Problem. Agric. Gener. Probl. 2020, 43, i–xii. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Van Khuc, Q. Mindspongeconomics. OSF Preprint. 2022, pp. 1–10. Available online: https://osf.io/hnucr/ (accessed on 19 May 2023).
  75. Vuong, Q.-H. Mindsponge Theory; Walter de Gruyter GmbH: Berlin, Germany, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  76. FAO; IFAD; WFP. Developing the Knowledge, Skills and Talent of Youth to Further Food Security; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  77. HLPE. Agroecological and Other Innovative Approaches for Sustainable Agriculture and Food Systems That Enhance Food Security and Nutrition. A Report by The High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition; HLPE: Rome, Italy, 2019; pp. 1–162. [Google Scholar]
  78. Burton, R.J.; Forney, J.; Stock, P.; Sutherland, L.A. The Good Farme: Culture and Identity in Food and Agriculture; Routledge: London, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  79. FAO. Contribution to the 2014 United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) Integration Segment. Build the Future We Want. 2014, pp. 1–7. Available online: https://www.un.org/en/ecosoc/integration/pdf/foodandagricultureorganization.pdf (accessed on 20 April 2023).
  80. Pitson, C.; Bijttebier, J.; Appel, F.; Balmann, A. How Much Farm Succession is Needed to Ensure Resilience of Farming Systems? EuroChoices 2020, 19, 37–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Creaney, R.; Hasler, H.; Sutherland, L.A. What’s in a Name? Defining New Entrants to Farming. EuroChoices 2023, 22, 58–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Montanarella, L.; Badraoui, M.; Chude, V.; Baptista Costa, I.D.S.; Mamo, T.; Yemefack, M.; Singh Aulakh, M.; Yagi, K.; Young Hong, S.; Vijarnsorn, P.; et al. Status of the World’s Soil Resources; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2015; ISBN 9789251090046. [Google Scholar]
  83. FAO. Responsible Governance of Tenure; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2012; ISBN 978-92-5-107277-6. [Google Scholar]
  84. HLPE. Food Losses and Waste in the Context of Sustainable Food Systems; Committee on World Food Security (CFS): Rome, Italy, 2014; pp. 1–117. [Google Scholar]
  85. Balezentis, T.; Ribasauskiene, E.; Morkunas, M.; Volkov, A.; Streimikiene, D.; Toma, P. Young farmers’ support under the Common Agricultural Policy and sustainability of rural regions: Evidence from Lithuania. Land Use Policy 2020, 94, 104542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Coopmans, I.; Dessein, J.; Accatino, F.; Antonioli, F.; Gavrilescu, C.; Gradziuk, P.; Manevska-Tasevska, G.; Meuwissen, M.; Peneva, M.; Soriano, B.; et al. Policy directions to support generational renewal in European farming systems. EuroChoices 2020, 19, 30–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Prosperi, P.; Allen, T.; Cogill, B.; Padilla, M.; Peri, I. Towards metrics of sustainable food systems: A review of the resilience and vulnerability literature. Environ. Syst. Decis. 2016, 36, 3–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Buitenhuis, Y.; Candel, J.J.L.; Termeer, K.J.A.M.; Feindt, P.H. Does the Common Agricultural Policy enhance farming systems’ resilience? Applying the Resilience Assessment Tool (ResAT) to a farming system case study in The Netherlands. J. Rural Stud. 2020, 80, 314–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. McAreavey, R. What is the rural? In Rural Governance in the UK; Towards a Sustainable and Equitable Society; Routledge: London, UK, 2022; pp. 12–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Van Der Ploeg, J.D.; Renting, H.; Brunori, G.; Knickel, K.; Mannion, J.; Marsden, T.; De Roest, K.; Sevilla-Guzmán, E.; Ventura, F. Rural development: From practices and policies towards theory. Rural Crit. Essays Hum. Geogr. 2017, 40, 201–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 15 11148 g001 550
Figure 1. Our elaboration following the PRISMA model.
Figure 1. Our elaboration following the PRISMA model.
Sustainability 15 11148 g001
Sustainability 15 11148 g002 550
Figure 2. Number of papers per year: our elaboration from Tableau.
Figure 2. Number of papers per year: our elaboration from Tableau.
Sustainability 15 11148 g002
Sustainability 15 11148 g003 550
Figure 3. Geographical locations: our elaboration from Tableau.
Figure 3. Geographical locations: our elaboration from Tableau.
Sustainability 15 11148 g003
Sustainability 15 11148 g004 550
Figure 4. Co-word map: our elaboration from VoSViewer.
Figure 4. Co-word map: our elaboration from VoSViewer.
Sustainability 15 11148 g004
Table
Table 1. Keywords applied on the Scopus platform.
Table 1. Keywords applied on the Scopus platform.
Keywords
TITLE-ABS-KEY (young AND people) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (young AND generation) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (youth) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (new AND generation) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY (agriculture) OR TITLE-ABS KEY (agricultural AND business) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (agribusiness) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (agricultural AND sector) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY (rural AND areas) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (rural AND space) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY (perception) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (aspiration) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (motivation)
Table
Table 2. Keyword co-occurrence and network.
Table 2. Keyword co-occurrence and network.
Cluster Keyword Occurrence Total Link Strength
BLUE Agriculture 1737
Agriculture education 47
Economic and social effects 310
Innovation technology 416
Working conditions 38
Income 610
Off-farm employment 38
RED Rural development 519
Career aspiration 417
Entrepreneurship 310
Investment 511
Family farming 630
GREEN Agriculture development 518
Opportunity space 315
Migration 324
Agricultural management 722
Unemployment 318
Willingness to farm 310
Access to land 510
Elderly population 612
YELLOW Perceptions 832
Socioeconomic status 515
Aid development policies 49
Governance approach 512
Rural abandonment 69
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Consentino, F.; Vindigni, G.; Spina, D.; Monaco, C.; Peri, I. An Agricultural Career through the Lens of Young People. Sustainability 2023, 15, 11148. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151411148

AMA Style

Consentino F, Vindigni G, Spina D, Monaco C, Peri I. An Agricultural Career through the Lens of Young People. Sustainability. 2023; 15(14):11148. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151411148

Chicago/Turabian Style

Consentino, Federica, Gabriella Vindigni, Daniela Spina, Clara Monaco, and Iuri Peri. 2023. "An Agricultural Career through the Lens of Young People" Sustainability 15, no. 14: 11148. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151411148

APA Style

Consentino, F., Vindigni, G., Spina, D., Monaco, C., & Peri, I. (2023). An Agricultural Career through the Lens of Young People. Sustainability, 15(14), 11148. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151411148

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop