IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2023i1p283-d1309252.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Sustainable Risk Management Model and Instruments for Young Farmers in EU Agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • Aleksandra Figurek

    (GNOSIS Mediterranean Institute for Management Science, School of Business, University of Nicosia, 2417 Nicosia, Cyprus)

  • Katerina Morphi

    (Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, School of Business, University of Nicosia, 2417 Nicosia, Cyprus)

  • Alkis Thrassou

    (GNOSIS Mediterranean Institute for Management Science, School of Business, University of Nicosia, 2417 Nicosia, Cyprus)

Abstract

Young farmers are ready to embrace innovation, smart agriculture, and science-based research to ensure that their work has long-term viability, profitability, and productivity. To prevent the farming population from aging and to ensure farming success, financial support must be provided through instruments that are specifically aimed at young farmers. It is necessary that youth have access to agricultural land policy throughout the EU for the agricultural sector to remain sustainable. In the European Union, young farmers manage farms that are in the lowest-size group. The limited financial possibilities available to young people in the EU exacerbate this. The relationships between risk management instruments and other interventions (such as direct payment and ex-post instruments) and the integration of these tools into national and EU policy frameworks must be thoroughly examined in future policy. Evaluating the possible repercussions of risk management being widely implemented as well as measuring the anticipated variations in farm revenue and the volatility of agricultural commodity prices are equally crucial. Therefore, the present article utilized extant data to conduct a comparative analysis and ultimately present a set of multidisciplinary and quantitative indicators of supportive measures for young farmers in the EU, while also identifying the requisite areas for improvement.

Suggested Citation

  • Aleksandra Figurek & Katerina Morphi & Alkis Thrassou, 2023. "A Sustainable Risk Management Model and Instruments for Young Farmers in EU Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-24, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2023:i:1:p:283-:d:1309252
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/1/283/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/1/283/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ani L. Katchova & Mary Clare Ahearn, 2016. "Dynamics of Farmland Ownership and Leasing: Implications for Young and Beginning Farmers," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 38(2), pages 334-350.
    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. May, Daniel & Arancibia, Sara & Behrendt, Karl & Adams, John, 2019. "Preventing young farmers from leaving the farm: Investigating the effectiveness of the young farmer payment using a behavioural approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 317-327.
    2. Robert Dinterman & Ani L Katchova, 2020. "Property Tax Incidence on Cropland Cash Rent," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(4), pages 739-758, December.
    3. Ar. R. T. Hidayat & Corinthias P. M. Sianipar & Shizuka Hashimoto & Satoshi Hoshino & Muhammad Dimyati & Ahmad E. Yustika, 2023. "Personal Cognition and Implicit Constructs Affecting Preferential Decisions on Farmland Ownership: Multiple Case Studies in Kediri, East Java, Indonesia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, September.
    4. Johanna Jauernig & Stephan Brosig & Silke Hüttel, 2023. "Profession and residency matter: Farmers' preferences for farmland price regulation in Germany," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(3), pages 816-834, September.
    5. Ani L. Katchova & Mary Clare Ahearn, 2017. "Farm entry and exit from US agriculture," Agricultural Finance Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 77(1), pages 50-63, May.
    6. Lars Isenhardt & Stefan Seifert & Silke Hüttel, 2023. "Tenant Favoritism and Right of First Refusals in Farmland Auctions: Competition and Price Effects," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 99(2), pages 302-324.
    7. McDonald, Tia M. & Durst, Ron & Whitt, Christine, 2021. "The Effect on Family Farms of Changing Capital Gains Taxation at Death," Economic Brief 320794, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    8. Adam Calo, 2018. "How knowledge deficit interventions fail to resolve beginning farmer challenges," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(2), pages 367-381, June.
    9. Bauman, Allison & Jablonski, Becca B. R. & Key, Nigel D. & Hadrich, Joleen C., 2022. "Land tenure and profitability outcomes for U.S. beginning farmers and ranchers," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322233, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    10. Burns, Christopher & Key, Nigel & Tulman, Sarah & Borchers, Allison & Weber, Jeremy, 2018. "Farmland Values, Land Ownership, and Returns to Farmland, 2000-2016," Economic Research Report 276249, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    11. Keefe O. Keeley & Kevin J. Wolz & Kaitie I. Adams & Jeannine H. Richards & Erin Hannum & Severine von Tscharner Fleming & Stephen J. Ventura, 2019. "Multi-Party Agroforestry: Emergent Approaches to Trees and Tenure on Farms in the Midwest USA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-22, April.
    12. Adjei, Eugene & Hartarska, Valentina M., 2022. "An Impact Analysis of the Transition Incentive Program on Beginning Farmers and Ranchers in Rural United States," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322506, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    13. Grout, Travis & Ifft, Jennifer & Malinovskaya, Anna, 2021. "Energy income and farm viability: Evidence from USDA farm survey data," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    14. Valliant, Julia C.D. & Ruhf, Kathryn Z. & Gibson, Kevin D. & Brooks, J.R. & Farmer, James R., 2019. "Fostering farm transfers from farm owners to unrelated, new farmers: A qualitative assessment of farm link services," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 438-447.
    15. Tsaiyu Chang, 2021. "Does religious social capital affect farmland transactions? A spatial autoregressive analysis in Taiwan," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 223-245, December.
    16. He, Yiming & Collins, Alan R., 2021. "The effect of information structure on farmland contractual choice: toward a revised theory of share tenancy with new evidence from Guangdong, China," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    17. Rahe, Mallory L. & Tsay, Juo-Han & Low, Sarah A., 2023. "Vendor persistence and sales growth 2019-2021: Evidence from five rural Oregon farmers markets," 2023 Annual Meeting, July 23-25, Washington D.C. 336002, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Callahan, Scott & Hellerstein, Daniel, 2022. "Access to Farmland by Beginning and Socially Disadvantaged Farmers: Issues and Opportunities," USDA Miscellaneous 333543, United States Department of Agriculture.
    19. Alen Mujčinović & Aleksandra Nikolić & Emelj Tuna & Ivana Janeska Stamenkovska & Vesela Radović & Paul Flynn & Veronica McCauley, 2021. "Is It Possible to Tackle Youth Needs with Agricultural and Rural Development Policies?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-15, July.
    20. Becca B. R. Jablonski & Nigel Key & Joleen Hadrich & Allie Bauman & Sarah Campbell & Dawn Thilmany & Martha Sullins, 2022. "Opportunities to support beginning farmers and ranchers in the 2023 Farm Bill," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(3), pages 1177-1194, September.

    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:jsusta:v:16:y:2023:i:1:p:283-:d:1309252. 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.