IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v14y2024i11p2087-d1524564.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of Organic and Conventional Agriculture in the Czech Republic: A Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • Hana Vašková

    (Functional Diversity in Agro-Ecosystems, Crop Research Institute, Drnovská 507, 161 00 Prague 6-Ruzyně, Czech Republic)

  • Pavel Saska

    (Functional Diversity in Agro-Ecosystems, Crop Research Institute, Drnovská 507, 161 00 Prague 6-Ruzyně, Czech Republic)

Abstract

This systematic review aims to comprehensively examine publications that compared conventional and organic agriculture in the Czech Republic. Agriculture in the Czech Republic is unique because of considerable variability in natural and climatic conditions and from a historical context. The ultimate objective of this systematic review was to identify possible research gaps that could serve as a background for updating national research policy. The search for suitable publications was performed in Scopus and Web of Science, and screening for eligibility followed the PRISMA approach. In total, 65 publications satisfied the inclusion criteria, the extraction of which provided 380 data records. Crop production appeared to be the most frequent research theme (204 records), followed by economy (122 records), biodiversity (n = 30), animal production (n = 18) and food (n = 6). Unfortunately, numerous records suffer from methodological and statistical flaws. The research gaps identified in this systematic review include important crops, comparisons between varieties and individual practices, topics related to drought, biodiversity-oriented research including ecosystem services, and meat or egg production. We propose that, to obtain robust comparisons between the two farming systems across multiple areas of research, one large experiment covering several organic and conventional farms across the country is needed.

Suggested Citation

  • Hana Vašková & Pavel Saska, 2024. "Comparison of Organic and Conventional Agriculture in the Czech Republic: A Systematic Review," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-17, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:14:y:2024:i:11:p:2087-:d:1524564
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/14/11/2087/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/14/11/2087/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Filip Hampl, 2020. "A statistical analysis of the financial performance of organic and conventional farms in the Czech Republic with respect to their size," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 66(1), pages 1-9.
    2. Radka Redlichová & Gabriela Chmelíková & Ivana Blažková & Eliška Svobodová & Inez Naaki Vanderpuje, 2021. "Organic Food Needs More Land and Direct Energy to Be Produced Compared to Food from Conventional Farming: Empirical Evidence from the Czech Republic," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-19, August.
    3. Josef KRAUSE & Ondrej MACHEK, 2018. "A comparative analysis of organic and conventional farmers in the Czech Republic," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 64(1), pages 1-8.
    4. Filippo Sgroi & Matteo Candela & Anna Maria Di Trapani & Mario Foderà & Riccardo Squatrito & Riccardo Testa & Salvatore Tudisca, 2015. "Economic and Financial Comparison between Organic and Conventional Farming in Sicilian Lemon Orchards," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-15, January.
    5. K. Hamouz & J. Lachman & K. Pazderů & K. Hejtmánková & J. Cimr & J. Musilová & V. Pivec & M. Orsák & A. Svobodová, 2013. "Effect of cultivar, location and method of cultivation on the content of chlorogenic acid in potatoes with different flesh colour," Plant, Soil and Environment, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 59(10), pages 465-471.
    6. Karel Šrédl & Marie Prášilová & Lucie Severová & Roman Svoboda & Michal Štěbeták, 2021. "Social and Economic Aspects of Sustainable Development of Livestock Production and Meat Consumption in the Czech Republic," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-23, January.
    7. de Ponti, Tomek & Rijk, Bert & van Ittersum, Martin K., 2012. "The crop yield gap between organic and conventional agriculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 1-9.
    8. Jana Králová & Jana Hajšlová & Jan Poustka & Miroslav Hochman & Marie Bjelková & Lenka Odstrčilová, 2006. "Occurrence of Alternaria toxins in fibre flax, linseed, and peas grown in organic and conventional farms: Monitoring pilot study," Czech Journal of Food Sciences, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 24(6), pages 288-296.
    9. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    10. Timothy C. Durham & Tamás Mizik, 2021. "Comparative Economics of Conventional, Organic, and Alternative Agricultural Production Systems," Economies, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-22, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bang, Rasmus & Hansen, Bjørn Gunnar & Guajardo, Mario & Sommerseth, Jon Kristian & Flaten, Ola & Asheim, Leif Jarle, 2024. "Conventional or organic cattle farming? Trade-offs between crop yield, livestock capacity, organic premiums, and government payments," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    2. Zuzana Fuksová & Iveta Bošková & Jana Hlaváčková & Marek Novák, 2025. "The economic aspects of organic farms selling their products to organic or conventional market," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 71(4), pages 218-227.
    3. Debuschewitz, Emil & Sanders, Jürn, 2021. "Bewertung der Umweltwirkungen des ökologischen Landbaus im Kontext der kontroversen wissenschaftlichen Diskurse," 61st Annual Conference, Berlin, Germany, September 22-24, 2021 317076, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    4. Marek Zieliński & Wioletta Wrzaszcz & Jolanta Sobierajewska & Marcin Adamski, 2024. "Development and Effects of Organic Farms in Poland, Taking into Account Their Location in Areas Facing Natural or Other Specific Constraints," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-17, February.
    5. Tiffany L. Fess & Vagner A. Benedito, 2018. "Organic versus Conventional Cropping Sustainability: A Comparative System Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-42, January.
    6. Beadle, Brian, 2023. "The design and application of an agricultural sustainability index using item response theory," EconStor Theses, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, number 278112.
    7. Rebecca Buttinelli & Raffaele Cortignani & Gabriele Dono, 2021. "Financial sustainability in Italian Organic Farms: An analysis of the FADN Sample," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 23(3), pages 1-32.
    8. Leonardo Cei & Gianluca Stefani & Luca Rossetto, 2024. "Twenty Years of Socio-Economic Research on Organic Agriculture Across the World: Looking at the Past to Be Ready for the Future," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-23, October.
    9. İlkay Unay-Gailhard & Mark A. Brennen, 2022. "How digital communications contribute to shaping the career paths of youth: a review study focused on farming as a career option," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(4), pages 1491-1508, December.
    10. Mahin Ghafari & Vali Baigi & Zahra Cheraghi & Amin Doosti-Irani, 2016. "The Prevalence of Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Iranian Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-10, June.
    11. Santos Urbina & Sofía Villatoro & Jesús Salinas, 2021. "Self-Regulated Learning and Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments in Higher Education: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-12, June.
    12. Nadine Desrochers & Adèle Paul‐Hus & Jen Pecoskie, 2017. "Five decades of gratitude: A meta‐synthesis of acknowledgments research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2821-2833, December.
    13. Maryono, Maryono & Killoes, Aditya Marendra & Adhikari, Rajendra & Abdul Aziz, Ammar, 2024. "Agriculture development through multi-stakeholder partnerships in developing countries: A systematic literature review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    14. Alene Sze Jing Yong & Yi Heng Lim & Mark Wing Loong Cheong & Ednin Hamzah & Siew Li Teoh, 2022. "Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(6), pages 1037-1057, August.
    15. Agnieszka A. Tubis & Katarzyna Grzybowska, 2022. "In Search of Industry 4.0 and Logistics 4.0 in Small-Medium Enterprises—A State of the Art Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-26, November.
    16. García-Poole, Chloe & Byrne, Sonia & Rodrigo, María José, 2019. "How do communities intervene with adolescents at psychosocial risk? A systematic review of positive development programs," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 194-209.
    17. Qing Ye & Bao-Xin Qian & Wei-Li Yin & Feng-Mei Wang & Tao Han, 2016. "Association between the HFE C282Y, H63D Polymorphisms and the Risks of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease, Liver Cirrhosis and Hepatocellular Carcinoma: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis o," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, September.
    18. Bishal Mohindru & David Turner & Tracey Sach & Diana Bilton & Siobhan Carr & Olga Archangelidi & Arjun Bhadhuri & Jennifer A. Whitty, 2020. "Health State Utility Data in Cystic Fibrosis: A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 13-25, March.
    19. Neal R. Haddaway & Matthew J. Page & Chris C. Pritchard & Luke A. McGuinness, 2022. "PRISMA2020: An R package and Shiny app for producing PRISMA 2020‐compliant flow diagrams, with interactivity for optimised digital transparency and Open Synthesis," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), June.
    20. Ding Zhu & Mindan Wu & Yuan Cao & Shihua Lin & Nanxia Xuan & Chen Zhu & Wen Li & Huahao Shen, 2018. "Heated humidification did not improve compliance of positive airway pressure and subjective daytime sleepiness in obstructive sleep apnea syndrome: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-16, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:14:y:2024:i:11:p:2087-:d:1524564. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.