Abstract The introduction of innovative and digital technologies in the agricultural sector is a key factor in increasing productivity, enterprise sustainability and competitiveness of human capital in the conditions of a modern digital economy. The purpose of the study is to scientifically substantiate and quantify the impact of innovative technologies on the competitiveness of human capital in the agricultural sector, as well as to identify the determining conditions and mechanisms for the development of the intellectual and technological potential of the industry. Theoretical approaches to the interaction of digitalization and human capital are analyzed based on endogenous theories of innovation, concepts of competence development and the Skill-Biased model Technological Change (SBTC). The two-way nature of this relationship is established, where innovations form the need for new skills, and the level of human capital determines the efficiency of technology use. A correlation analysis of economic and technological indicators of the agricultural sector of the EU, USA, Canada and OECD countries was conducted, which showed a close relationship between the level of digitalization, employment and gross value added. Regression analysis of time series confirmed the positive impact of innovation spending on the dynamics of gross value added, especially in the USA and OECD countries. Special attention is paid to the role of digitalization, risk insurance and the development of employee competencies as the main mechanisms for increasing productivity, sustainability and competitiveness of human capital. A basic one-dimensional linear regression model is proposed to quantitatively assess the impact of innovation spending on the change in gross value added (GVA) of the agricultural sector. The need for an integrated policy to support innovation, the development of digital competencies, and financial instruments that ensure stable economic development of the agricultural sector and the strengthening of its human resources potential is emphasized.
PTASHCHENKO et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: