Critical Issues Facing the Agriculture, Forestry, and Natural Resources Industries in the State of Georgia
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Study Framework
1.2. Study Purpose
- Create a comprehensive list of potential critical issues facing the agriculture, forestry, and natural resources industries in the state of Georgia.
- Generate a consensus on the specific critical issues facing the agriculture, forestry, and natural resources industries in the state of Georgia.
- Develop a heuristic thematic grouping of critical issues facing the agriculture, forestry, and natural resources industries in the state of Georgia.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Delphi Technique
2.2. Expert Panel
2.3. Data Collection and Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
4.1. Limitations
4.2. Study Implications for Research and Practice
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Lamm, K.W.; Randall, N.L.; Sherrier, J. Agriculture leaders identify critical issues facing crop production. Agron. J. 2021, 113, 4444–4454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tooke, T. The Challenges Facing the Nation’s Forests and the USDA Forest Service. US Forest Service. Available online: https://www.fs.usda.gov/speeches/challenges-facing-nations-forests-and-usda-forest-service (accessed on 12 October 2022).
- Lamm, K.W.; Randall, N.L.; Fluharty, F.L. Critical issues facing the animal and food industry: A Delphi analysis. Transl. Anim. Sci. 2021, 5, txaa213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jennings, S.F.; Moore, S.A. The rhetoric behind regionalization in Australian natural resource management: Myth, reality and moving forward. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 2000, 2, 177–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- United States Census Bureau. QuickFacts: Georgia. United States Census Bureau. 2022. Available online: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/GA/PST045222 (accessed on 15 May 2023).
- United States Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service. 2021 Cash Receipts by Commodity State Ranking. United States Department of Agriculture ERS. 2023. Available online: https://data.ers.usda.gov/reports.aspx?ID=17844 (accessed on 15 May 2023).
- Georgia Farm Bureau. About Georgia Agriculture. Available online: https://www.gfb.org/education-and-outreach/about-ga-agriculture.cms (accessed on 18 March 2022).
- Hundal, G.S.; Laux, C.M.; Buckmaster, D.; Sutton, M.J.; Langemeier, M. Exploring Barriers to the Adoption of Internet of Things-Based Precision Agriculture Practices. Agriculture 2023, 13, 163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosegrant, M.W.; Cline, S.A. Global Food Security: Challenges and Policies. Science 2003, 302, 1917–1919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Department of Natural Resources Division. Georgia’s Natural Resources. 1 July 2001. Retrieved 18 March. 2022. Available online: https://gadnr.org/resources (accessed on 18 March 2022).
- Georgia Forestry Association. #1 Forestry State. Georgia Forestry Association. Retrieved 18 March. 2022. Available online: https://gfagrow.org/advocate/numberone/ (accessed on 18 March 2022).
- United Nations. Sustainable Development Goals. United Nations. Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/goals (accessed on 28 April 2023).
- Borsotto, P.; Cagliero, R.; Giarè, F.; Giordani, G.; Iacono, R.; Manetti, I.; Sardone, R. Measuring Short Food Supply Chain Sustainability: A Selection of Attributes and Indicators through a Qualitative Approach. Agriculture 2023, 13, 646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernandes, J.; Blache, D.; Maloney, S.K.; Martin, G.B.; Venus, B.; Walker, F.R.; Head, B.; Tilbrook, A. Addressing Animal Welfare through Collaborative Stakeholder Networks. Agriculture 2019, 9, 132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Baker, L.; Chiarelli, C.; Rampold, S.; McLeod-Morin, A.; Lindsey, A. Communication in a pandemic: Concerns of agricultural and natural resources opinion leaders during early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Adv. Agric. Dev. 2021, 2, 72–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Randolph Levy, G., II; Rumble Joy, N.; Carter Hannah, S. Perceptions and Attitudes: Analyzing Opinion Leaders in Relation to Genetically Modified Foods. J. Appl. Commun. 2018, 102, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lamm, K.W.; Lamm, A.J.; Carter, H.S. Bridging water issue knowledge gaps between the general public and opinion leaders. J. Agric. Educ. 2015, 56, 146–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Advancing Georgia’s Leaders in Agriculture and Forestry. Home. Available online: https://site.caes.uga.edu/agl/ (accessed on 18 March 2022).
- Lamm, K.W.; Fuhrman, N.E.; Lamm, A.J.; Carter, H.S. Adult agriculture and natural resource leadership development program participant characteristics: An evaluation of 28 programs. J. Agric. Educ. 2020, 61, 128–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lazarsfeld, P.; Berelson, B.; Gaudet, H. The People’s Choice, 2nd ed.; Columbia University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1948. [Google Scholar]
- Innes, J.E.; Booher, D.E. Consensus building and complex adaptive systems: A framework for evaluating collaborative planning. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 1999, 65, 412–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weissman, A.; Nguyen, T.T.; Nguyen, H.T.; Mathisen, R. The role of the opinion leader research process in informing policy making for improved nutrition: Experience and lessons learned in Southeast Asia. Curr. Dev. Nutr. 2020, 4, nzaa093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Consensus Building. Harvard Law School. Available online: https://www.pon.harvard.edu/tag/consensus-building/ (accessed on 18 March 2022).
- Burgess, H.; Spangler, B. Consensus Building. Beyond Intractability. 13 July 2016. Available online: https://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/consensus_building (accessed on 18 March 2022).
- Gross, J.G. Delphi: A program planning technique. J. Ext. 1981, 19, 23–28. [Google Scholar]
- Dalkey, N.; Helmer, O. An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Manag. Sci. 1963, 9, 458–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- RAND Corporation. Delphi Method. RAND Corporation. Available online: https://www.rand.org/topics/delphi-method.html (accessed on 18 March 2022).
- Andranovich, G. Developing Community Participation and Consensus: The Delphi Technique. 1995. Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/2376/4399 (accessed on 18 March 2022).
- Kroth, M.; Peutz, J. Workplace issues in extension—A Delphi study of Extension educators. J. Ext. 2011, 49, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- Pollard, C.; Pollard, R. Research priorities in educational technology: A Delphi study. J. Res. Technol. Educ. 2004, 37, 145–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Polush, E.Y.; Grudens-Schuck, N.; Exner, D.N.; Karp, R. Delphi survey of needs for on-farm research: Forecasting changes in a farm organization. J. Ext. 2016, 54, 20. [Google Scholar]
- Garson, G.D. The Delphi Method in Quantitative Research; Statistical Associated Publishing: Asheboro, NC, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Glaser, B.G. The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Soc. Probl. 1965, 12, 436–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Silver, E. An overview of heuristic solution methods. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 2004, 55, 936–956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lincoln, Y.S.; Guba, E.G. Naturalistic Inquiry; Sage Publication, Inc.: Newbury Park, CA, USA, 1985. [Google Scholar]
- Li, R.; Yu, Y. Impacts of Green Production Behaviors on the Income Effect of Rice Farmers from the Perspective of Outsourcing Services: Evidence from the Rice Region in Northwest China. Agriculture 2022, 12, 1682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walsh, J.; Parsons, R.; Wang, Q.; Conner, D. What Makes an Organic Dairy Farm Profitable in the United States? Evidence from 10 Years of Farm Level Data in Vermont. Agriculture 2020, 10, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vo, D.H.; Vu, T.N.; Vo, A.T.; McAleer, M. Modeling the Relationship between Crude Oil and Agricultural Commodity Prices. Energies 2019, 12, 1344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lizot, M.; Trojan, F.; Afonso, P. Combining Total Cost of Ownership and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis to Improve Cost Management in Family Farming. Agriculture 2021, 11, 139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, P.; Wei, Y.; Zhong, F.; Song, X.; Wang, B.; Wang, Q. Evaluation of Agricultural Water Resources Carrying Capacity and Its Influencing Factors: A Case Study of Townships in the Arid Region of Northwest China. Agriculture 2022, 12, 700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zainurin, S.N.; Ismail, W.Z.W.; Mahamud, S.N.I.; Ismail, I.; Jamaludin, J.; Ab. Aziz, N.A. Integration of Sensing Framework with A Decision Support System for Monitoring Water Quality in Agriculture. Agriculture 2023, 13, 1000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sitterson, J.M.; Andales, A.A.; Mooney, D.F.; Capurro, M.C.; Brummer, J.E. Developing a Crop Water Production Function for Alfalfa under Deficit Irrigation: A Case Study in Eastern Colorado. Agriculture 2023, 13, 831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martinez, S.W. Policies Supporting Local Food in the United States. Agriculture 2016, 6, 43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Friel, S.; Schram, A.; Townsend, B. The nexus between international trade, food systems, malnutrition and climate change. Nat. Food 2020, 1, 51–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Simoglou, K.B.; Roditakis, E. Consumers’ Benefit—Risk Perception on Pesticides and Food Safety—A Survey in Greece. Agriculture 2022, 12, 192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gu, C.; Huang, T.; Wei, W.; Yang, C.; Chen, J.; Miao, W.; Lin, S.; Sun, H.; Sun, J. The Effect of Using Augmented Reality Technology in Takeaway Food Packaging to Improve Young Consumers’ Negative Evaluations. Agriculture 2023, 13, 335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martinho, V.J.P.D. Food and Consumer Attitude(s): An Overview of the Most Relevant Documents. Agriculture 2021, 11, 1183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rumble, J.N.; Settle, Q.; Irani, T. Assessing the Content of Online Agricultural Awareness Campaigns. J. Appl. Commun. 2016, 100, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Higgins, V.; Lawrence, G. (Eds.) Agricultural Governance: Globalization and the New Politics of Regulation; Routledge: Oxfordshire, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Shoushtarian, F.; Negahban-Azar, M. Worldwide Regulations and Guidelines for Agricultural Water Reuse: A Critical Review. Water 2020, 12, 971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Manzelli, A.; Reimers, J.; Wagner, S.; Armstrong, R.; Hannum, E. Legal Guide for New Hampshire Agricultural Producers; University of New Hampshire: Durham, NH, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Auld, G.; Cashore, B.; Balboa, C.; Bozzi, L.; Renckens, S. Can Technological Innovations Improve Private Regulation in the Global Economy? Bus. Politics 2010, 12, 1–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- United States Department of Agriculture. 2017 Census of Agriculture; United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, USA, 2017.
- Richards, T.J. Immigration reform and farm labor markets. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2018, 100, 1050–1071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gray, R.S. Agriculture, transportation and the COVID-19 crisis. Can. J. Agric. Econ. Rev. Can. D’Agroecon. 2020, 68, 239–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Spöttl, G.; Windelband, L. The 4th industrial revolution—Its impact on vocational skills. J. Educ. Work. 2021, 34, 29–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pandey, S.; Singh, R.K.; Gunasekaran, A. Supply chain risks in Industry 4.0 environment: Review and analysis framework. Prod. Plan. Control. 2021, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Issue | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Mean |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Water quantity | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 8 | 4.46 |
Access to labor | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 4.42 |
Dependable labor | 0 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 6 | 4.38 |
Affordable labor | 0 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 6 | 4.38 |
Regulatory restrictions increasing operating costs | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 4.31 |
Regulatory reform and relief | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 4.31 |
Long term–urban voters and perspectives | 0 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 5 | 4.31 |
Cost of Production | 0 | 0 | 1 | 8 | 5 | 4.29 |
Profitability | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 4 | 4.29 |
Public perception issues | 0 | 0 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 4.23 |
Regulatory issues | 0 | 0 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 4.23 |
Government regulation–State | 0 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 4.23 |
Shifting political alliances–rural to urban | 0 | 0 | 1 | 8 | 4 | 4.23 |
Consumer perception of agriculture and forestry | 0 | 0 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 4.23 |
State leadership | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 4.15 |
Mis-informed consumers | 0 | 0 | 2 | 7 | 4 | 4.15 |
Restrictive Laws | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 4.15 |
Government regulation–National | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 6 | 4.08 |
Fewer voters and legislators understand the industry | 0 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 4 | 4.08 |
Communication of agriculture importance | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 4.08 |
Pesticide restrictions | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 4.08 |
Watering restrictions within horticulture industry during periods of drought | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 4.08 |
Aging workforce in the agricultural sectors | 0 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 4 | 4.08 |
Generational transition in production agriculture | 0 | 0 | 3 | 7 | 3 | 4.00 |
Combating negative information on agriculture production practices | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4.00 |
Labor for production facilities | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 4.00 |
Irrigation rights | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4.00 |
Public and consumer acceptance | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 4.00 |
Return on investments | 0 | 0 | 4 | 6 | 4 | 4.00 |
Water quality | 0 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 4.00 |
Farm viability | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3.93 |
Fair trade | 0 | 1 | 2 | 7 | 3 | 3.92 |
Irrigation permits | 0 | 0 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 3.92 |
Lack of public awareness of importance | 0 | 0 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 3.92 |
Access to markets | 0 | 1 | 2 | 7 | 3 | 3.92 |
Vocational training in our high schools | 0 | 0 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 3.92 |
Immigration issues | 0 | 0 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 3.92 |
Technology | 0 | 0 | 4 | 6 | 3 | 3.92 |
Advocacy | 0 | 0 | 3 | 7 | 2 | 3.92 |
Internet services in rural areas are too slow | 0 | 0 | 6 | 3 | 4 | 3.85 |
Social awareness of issues farmers face | 0 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3.85 |
Succession | 0 | 0 | 4 | 7 | 2 | 3.85 |
CDL [commercial driver’s license] drivers | 0 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3.83 |
Input cost | 0 | 1 | 3 | 8 | 2 | 3.79 |
Commodity prices | 0 | 1 | 4 | 6 | 3 | 3.79 |
Trade policy | 0 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 3 | 3.77 |
Government regulation–Local | 1 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 3 | 3.77 |
Property taxes | 0 | 1 | 4 | 7 | 2 | 3.71 |
Export markets | 0 | 1 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 3.69 |
Salaries vs. other industries | 0 | 0 | 7 | 5 | 2 | 3.64 |
Farm viability of small farms | 0 | 2 | 3 | 7 | 2 | 3.64 |
Transportation | 0 | 1 | 7 | 1 | 4 | 3.62 |
Value added | 0 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3.62 |
New markets | 0 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3.62 |
Environment | 0 | 0 | 7 | 4 | 2 | 3.62 |
Soil resources | 0 | 1 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 3.54 |
Insects/beetles affecting forestland | 0 | 1 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 3.54 |
Capital availability | 0 | 1 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 3.54 |
Sustainability issues | 0 | 0 | 8 | 3 | 2 | 3.54 |
Infrastructure (roads, bridges, etc.) | 0 | 1 | 7 | 3 | 2 | 3.46 |
Land prices | 0 | 1 | 7 | 5 | 1 | 3.43 |
Trade issues | 0 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 3.38 |
Possible tariff war | 0 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 1 | 3.38 |
Truck driver insurance is too high | 0 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 3.31 |
It is hard to get millennials to move to rural areas to work | 1 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 3.31 |
Urban area expansion | 0 | 1 | 9 | 2 | 1 | 3.23 |
Climate change | 2 | 2 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 2.62 |
Issue | Consensus (%) |
---|---|
Public perception issues | 100.00 |
Communication of agriculture importance | 100.00 |
Shifting political alliances–rural to urban | 100.00 |
Long term–urban voters and perspectives | 100.00 |
Fewer voters and legislators understand the industry | 100.00 |
Advocacy | 100.00 |
Access to markets | 100.00 |
Access to labor | 100.00 |
Water quality | 90.91 |
Regulatory issues | 90.91 |
Government regulation–National | 90.91 |
Social awareness of issues farmers face | 90.91 |
Lack of public awareness of importance | 90.91 |
Consumer perception of agriculture and forestry | 90.91 |
Combating negative information on agriculture production practices | 90.91 |
State leadership | 90.91 |
Vocational training in our high schools | 90.91 |
Input cost | 90.91 |
Immigration issues | 90.91 |
Government regulation–State | 90.00 |
Government regulation–Local | 90.00 |
Water quantity | 81.82 |
Irrigation rights | 81.82 |
Regulatory restrictions increasing operating costs | 81.82 |
Public and consumer acceptance | 81.82 |
Aging workforce in the agricultural sectors | 81.82 |
Farm viability | 81.82 |
Affordable labor | 81.82 |
Internet services in rural areas are too slow | 81.82 |
Fair trade | 81.82 |
Restrictive Laws | 80.00 |
Trade policy | 72.73 |
Regulatory reform and relief | 72.73 |
Labor for production facilities | 72.73 |
Cost of Production | 72.73 |
Commodity prices | 72.73 |
Technology | 70.00 |
CDL drivers | 70.00 |
Generational transition in production agriculture | 70.00 |
Profitability | 70.00 |
Pesticide restrictions | 63.64 |
Mis-informed consumers | 63.64 |
Dependable labor | 63.64 |
Return on investments | 60.00 |
Watering restrictions within horticulture industry during periods of drought | 54.55 |
Irrigation permits | 50.00 |
Succession | 50.00 |
Issue | Number of Issues | Number of Issues with 90–100% Agreement |
---|---|---|
Economic Considerations | 5 | 1 |
Commodity prices | ||
Cost of Production | ||
Farm viability | ||
Input cost | ||
Profitability | ||
Operations and Infrastructure | 6 | 2 |
Access to markets | ||
Internet services in rural areas are too slow | ||
Irrigation rights | ||
Technology | ||
Water quality | ||
Water quantity | ||
Policy | 7 | 5 |
Advocacy | ||
Fair trade | ||
Fewer voters and legislators understand the industry | ||
Long term–urban voters and perspectives | ||
Shifting political alliances–rural to urban | ||
State leadership | ||
Trade policy | ||
Public Perceptions | 7 | 6 |
Combating negative information on agriculture production practices | ||
Communication of agriculture importance | ||
Consumer perception of agriculture and forestry | ||
Lack of public awareness of importance | ||
Public and consumer acceptance | ||
Public perception issues | ||
Social awareness of issues farmers face | ||
Regulations | 7 | 4 |
Government regulation–Local | ||
Government regulation–National | ||
Government regulation–State | ||
Regulatory issues | ||
Regulatory reform and relief | ||
Regulatory restrictions increasing operating costs | ||
Restrictive laws | ||
Workforce | 8 | 3 |
Access to labor | ||
Affordable labor | ||
Aging workforce in the agricultural sectors | ||
CDL drivers | ||
Generational transition in production agriculture | ||
Immigration issues | ||
Labor for production facilities | ||
Vocational training in our high schools |
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. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Lamm, K.W.; Pike, L.; Griffeth, L.; Park, J.; Idun, A. Critical Issues Facing the Agriculture, Forestry, and Natural Resources Industries in the State of Georgia. Agriculture 2023, 13, 1194. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13061194
Lamm KW, Pike L, Griffeth L, Park J, Idun A. Critical Issues Facing the Agriculture, Forestry, and Natural Resources Industries in the State of Georgia. Agriculture. 2023; 13(6):1194. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13061194
Chicago/Turabian StyleLamm, Kevan W., Lauren Pike, Lauren Griffeth, Jiyea Park, and Andrews Idun. 2023. "Critical Issues Facing the Agriculture, Forestry, and Natural Resources Industries in the State of Georgia" Agriculture 13, no. 6: 1194. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13061194