The effects of digital agriculture on the knowledge and skills are widely debated. This exploratory literature review disentangles “digital agriculture” and explores its impacts from five perspectives: (1) the farmers, (2) the farm, (3) the farm workers, (4) the agricultural value chain, and (5) the agricultural knowledge and innovation systems (AKIS). Taking these interrelated but distinct perspectives allows for a holistic exploration of broader implications, including how impacts on knowledge and skills reshape power dynamics along value chains. Disentangling “digital agriculture” shows that the digitalization–skills nexus is as relevant in the Global North and Global South. Moreover, it shows that sweeping statements and generalizations about knowledge and skill effects can be simplistic and misleading, as the impacts depend on several factors: the capabilities of the specific form of digital agriculture in terms of sensing, analytics, and automation; its design, specifically, whether it positions users as passive recipients or active participants; the underlying business model, which is linked to who developed the tool; the digital proficiency and literacy of users; social and environmental contexts; and broader institutional framework conditions. Studies tend to emphasize either the risks of deskilling (e.g. erosion of experiential knowledge, reduced decision-making capacities over time) or the opportunities for reskilling and upskilling (e.g. access to new data, powerful analytical aids, learning opportunities) depending on whether they take a more constructivist perspective, which highlights the importance of experiential, traditional knowledge, or positivist, objectivist perspective, which values scientific approaches to knowledge. While valuable empirical studies exist, there is a need for further research, including quantitative studies. There is a need for policies and regulations as well as efforts within AKIS to promote digital proficiency and literacy, and initiatives related to responsible innovation and emancipatory smart farming, to ensure that digital agriculture contributes to skilling.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thomas Daum (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: