A B S T R A C T 

With climate change accelerating, agriculture has never had such great challenges as erratic weather patterns, prolonged droughts and soil degradation. The economic viability and scalability of climate resilient agriculture, such as drought resistant crops, smart irrigation technologies, and precision farming systems are evaluated for this paper. The study uses a combination of field data and economic modeling to identify cost effectiveness, potential yield improvements and barriers to adoption. Results show that smart irrigation and precision farming systems can improve water use efficiency by up to 50%, and drought resistant crops increase yield stability under adverse weather. While high initial investment costs appear to be the case, the long term benefits of these strategies outweigh the expense, which is essential for sustainable agriculture. Economic models and policy recommendations are presented in the study for stimulating adoption to offset climate change impacts on food security around the globe.

1. Introduction

1.1. Background and Importance of the Research

Amongst all, agriculture is the backbone of human civilization which provides food to ensure food security, sources of employment, contributes significantly to the country's economic stability and supports the ongoing green revolution in the country. Traditional farms are so thrown off by climate change it is as if they are being challenged as they’ve never been before (Islam et al., 2022). Agricultural productivity continues to suffer as in vulnerable rain fed farming regions from rising temperatures, erratically rainfall patterns and intensifying extreme weather events. Global agricultural yields could decline by more than 10 percent, or by as much as 25 percent, by 2050 if adaptation measures aren't taken.

Rather than just causing crop productivity to deteriorate, actually it increases environmental degradation. Soil erosion, water scarcity and nutrient depletion, together with adverse weather conditions, accelerate soil erosion rendering most farms areas economically and ecologically unsustainable in the long run. We need transformative strategies to build more resilient agriculture to climate variability with economic and environmental sustainability (Jamil et al., 2021). There are viable solutions that are both productive and resource efficient: agricultural practices more resilient to the climate.

1.2. Climate Resilient Agricultural Practices

Farmers’ adaptive practices to climate resilience include those that help the farmers to resist the climatic shocks while still sustaining the same production levels. Among the most promising strategies are:

1.2.1. Drought-Resistant Crops 

The science of genetic improvement of drought resistant crop varieties ensures that these crops can withstand water scarcity and hot temperatures without damaging yield. These crops, especially in arid and semi-arid regions, are very valuable as conventional varieties are coming place regularly during long drought periods (Zong et al., 2022). Analysis shows these crops have likewise increased yield stability by 20 to 30 per cent and reduced dramatically the risk of crop failure under adverse conditions.

1.2.2. Smart Irrigation Systems

Smart irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and automated watering all use smart, precise amounts of water to the zone that the roots are which they are only going to where they’re needed (to get the plant or the field completely hydrated). Water wastage is minimized and water use efficiency is increased in these systems using real time data from soil sensors and weather forecasts (Islam et al., 2022). Proven to cut water consumption up to 50 or more percent, smart irrigation is a necessary tool for those areas of water scarcity.

1.2.3. Precision Farming

Precision agriculture combines drones, gps, and remote sensing to monitor crop health, soil condition and resource application. Precision farming has always been about optimizing inputs: Fertilizers and pesticides, for instance, in order to minimize expenses, decrease environmental effects and raise productivity. Precision farming can reduce nitrogen fertilizer use by 20–30% resulting in reductions of greenhouse gas emissions, input costs and agronomic consequences.

1.3. Environmental Benefits of Climate Resilient Agriculture 

Not only do climate resilient practices have economic benefits but they also have environmental benefits through conservation of resources and lowering greenhouse gas emissions. For instance, smart irrigation systems take the pressure away from water resources and allow for the long term availability of water in places such as areas that are vulnerable to drought (Islam et al., 2022)). Precision farming reduces chemical input overuse and decrease risk of soil and water contamination. Another form of mitigation to climate change is drought resistant crops such as limited carbon footprint because they use less irrigation and fertilizer inputs and therefore less energy. For instance, such crops are 25 percent less or more emissive than conventional varieties (Zong et al., 2022). Together, these are the achieved collective alignment of agricultural systems to global sustainability goals, to cover the adaptation and mitigation needs alike.

1.4. Barriers to Adoption

Despite their benefits, several barriers hinder the widespread adoption of climate-resilient agricultural practices:

1.4.1. High Initial Costs 

High investment technologies are smart irrigation and precision farming. They are prohibitive for smallholders operating on fairly tight budgets.

1.4.2. Knowledge Gaps

It is crucial to mention that many farmers do not have the technical information required to utilize and control most of the state of the art technologies (Jamil et al., 2021). Let’s say for example, the precision agriculture tools have their learning curve and can be a huge obstacle for untrained farmer to start using. 

1.4.3. Policy and Market Constraints

Market structures remain inadequate as do policy supports. Low scale climate resilient practices lack subsidies, financing options and market access for value added products.

1.5. Objectives of the Study

This study investigates the cost benefits and scalability of climate resilient agricultural practices emphasizing drought resistive crops, smart irrigation technologies, and precision farming systems. Specifically, the research seeks to:

• Assess the economic viability of these practices by calculating cost-benefit ratios, payback periods, and yield improvements.
• Quantify environmental co-benefits such as reductions in water use and greenhouse gas emissions.
• Identify barriers to adoption and propose actionable recommendations to address these challenges. 

It is therefore intended to enable actionable insights that help improve upon these objectives for policy makers, agricultural stakeholders and researchers (Singh et al., 2021). The results will provide guidance for sustainable strategies aimed at securing food and economic growth in a changing climate for both climate resilient agriculture.

2. Materials and Methods 

2.1. Study Design

In this study, quantitative data analysis is complemented with qualitative field surveys of the cost effectiveness and scalability of climate resilient agricultural practices. The primary focus was on three strategies: precision farming technologies, smart irrigation systems, and drought resistant crops. The aim of the study comprised the evaluation, from the perspectives of both economics and of environmental benefits, on these practices as facing the challenge of adoption by farmers and on the ease with which they are economically viable. To make comprehensive study of each practice data were collected from different sources (case studies, field survey and secondary data of agricultural extension services).

2.2. Data Collection

Data was collected collating field surveys, interviews with farmers and analysing secondary reports on climate resilient agriculture. The study involved 80 farms located in climatic locations in the U.S. Midwest, sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. For a lot of agricultural context where climate change is having its tolls, they wanted to represent.

2.2.1. Field Surveys and Interviews
 Surveys were conducted with 50 farmers who were adapting one or a subset of several climate resilient practices. Questions to the surveys were about farming practices, cost structures, yield change and the use of climate resilient technologies, observed benefits and challenges associated with such technologies (Hellin et al., 2023). The in-depth interview with 30 farmers was also done to get qualitative insights on how the usage of drought resistant crops, smart irrigation system and precision farming tools. We interviewed people interested in or who already adopted these technologies, answering questions about the barriers to this adoption: related to lack of financial resources, technical knowledge gaps, and availability of infrastructure for implantation.

2.2.2. Case Studies

Climate resilient practices were already integrated into the farms to select case studies from. Some of these were smart programs for irrigation (and other precision farming equipment) being used by California farms (US), Kenya and India on drought resistant crops. The data from the case studies served to illuminate more closely the effects of such practices on small and large scale farms, in terms of their economic and environmental impacts. Yield improvements, cost savings, water use efficiency and reductions in greenhouse gas emissions were considered in the case study data.

2.2.3. Secondary Data 

Secondary data used were Government and international organisation reports whether FAO, World Bank, local agricultural extension services. This is all the data here, including rates of climate resilient technology usage, water usage measurements, and trends of crop yields compared to a changing climate. Sources from which to feed these findings included contextualizing the findings from the primary data collection and gaining a broader view of the trends and challenges facing the agricultural sector internationally.

2.3. Analytical Framework

An extensive analytical framework which encompasses economic and environmental assessments was applied to this study. The economic analysis dealt with determining the benefits (cost benefit ratios) and returns on investment, together with estimated paybacks of the various climate resilient practices. And each practice was also evaluated on how it reduced its water usage, greenhouse gas emissions, and increased soil health.

2.3.1. Economic Analysis

Initial investment costs, operating costs and revenue generation as savings for five years were considered in a cost benefit analysis for each practice. The costs were seed, … and other inputs to crop establishment for drought resistant crops. Installation cost, maintenance cost and potential water and input usage savings were used to evaluate smart irrigation systems and precision farming technologies. Further, the cost benefit model predicted profitability of adopting those practices based on yield improvements.

2.3.2. Environmental Analysis

A second specifically investigated how the scheduled practices reduced water consumption and GHG emissions through adoption and assessed environmental impacts. Study compare water use efficiency of smart irrigation farms with automated irrigation systems to traditional irrigation methods. Precision farming (which uses less fertilizer and pesticide than conventional farming) was estimated to lead to GHG emissions reductions. Using drought resistant crops, we assessed the environmental benefits of required reductions in irrigation volume and stable yields in the event of water scarcity.

2.4. Data Analysis 

Data was analyzed using SPSS in order to examine relations between adaptation to climate resilient practices and economic impacts using regression analysis. Descriptive statistics (normally means and standard deviations) were summarized to summarize data on cost savings, yield improvements, and environmental impact. I then produced results in a straightforward format as visualizations: bar charts, pie charts, and line graphs on Excel.

2.5. Limitations of the Study

While the study offers many valuable insights into the economic and environmental consequences of climate resilient practice, it also has some limitations. In the first place, the very small sample had data from only 80 farms spread across 3 regions. Such a limited space range, however, raises question about generalizability of the empirical findings, particularly in a region which has different climatic conditions as well as farming systems. Second, the data used in the work were from literature and reports that wouldn’t fully capture the complexity of variations in the impacts on the climate and the economy of the particular region (Azadi et al., 2021). Average cost estimates and market fluctuations of cost of technology and inputs can influence the long term financial feasibility of these practices.

2.6. Ethical Considerations 

The data was collected according to ethical standards, all participating farmers provided informed consent. We kept participants’ privacy by maintaining confidentiality and anonymizing all data throughout the study. Secondary data used was tested for copyright compliance by using the secondary data from publicly available reports and publications.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Economic Impact of Climate-Resilient Practices

Results of the economic analysis indicate that adopting climate resilient agricultural practices led to succeeded financial benefits. Among these three practices studied, smart irrigation systems were proved to be able to provide the earliest cost savings. On the farms that have automated irrigation, we have seen a 30 percent reduction in energy costs and a 40 percent reduction in water use, which means that farms have been making $200 to $500 per acre per year in financial savings. These systems also optimized water use: In allowing farms to continue producing even under drought, and to remain economically viable into the future.

Adoption of precision farming systems was second most cost effective practice. GPS and soil sensors, however, used them as precision agriculture technological implements that reported order of 25–30 percent input cost reductions, chiefly reduce their use of fertilizers and pesticides. An initial investment of $8,000 to $15,000 per acre was needed to offset these savings. Precision farming data provided real time information that led to input savings as well as 10 to 15 percent yield increases from the precision farming. It was estimated to be a long term alternative to farmers for precision farming in capital intensive region of 2 – 3 years.

Areas characteristic of water deficiency demonstrated crop yield increases of 20 to 30 percent generated by drought resistant crops. These seeds are costly to buy: $500 to $2,000 per acre — but neither do they need to be irrigated, nor do their yields depend on the amount of water during drought making net benefit particularly relevant in places with scarce water supplies (Huyer, 2021). Drought resistant crops were a 'no brainer' on a cost curve basis, but we have the technology and infrastructure where the immediate financial 'return' is greater with smart irrigation and precision farming systems, but the lower immediate investment is a factor in part because of the lower investment in technology and infrastructure.

3.2. Environmental Benefits of Climate-Resilient Practices

Climate resilient agricultural practices lead to huge economic gains as well as large environmental gains. Decreasing water consumption would be one of the most noted results. On average, we found smart irrigation systems lowered water use by 40 per cent versus conventional systems. That is especially important in an era where more and more water is becoming scarce in some parts of the world and competition for water is fierce. Climate-resistant practices enable farmers to use water efficiently. Also, precision farming did reduce the use of chemical inputs. Precision agriculture reduced chemical use by 20–30%. In addition, it reduced the cost of the input and the extent to which it contributed to risk of nutrient runoff and water contamination, improving the local water resources.

Table 2. Environmental Benefits of Climate-Resilient Practices

3.3. Barriers to Adoption

There are in fact several barriers that get in the way of climate resilient practices becoming popular, though the economic and environmental benefits are so obvious. The major barrier was high initial investment of smart irrigation systems and precision farming technologies as exhibited through surveys and case studies. Many smallholder farmers got a large, long term savings for using these systems, but the up-front costs were too high.

There was also a large gap in technical knowledge. For instance, farmers not trained for the utilization of latest technologies, such as GPS and automated irrigation could often encounter difficulty in adopting precision farming and smart irrigation. Training programs and extension services were not generally available in many regions, including developing countries.

Also, there were infrastructure problems in several regions. For regions with old, or non-existent infrastructure, it required the installations of pipes, automated systems, and sensors, to ensure adoption of smart technologies. However, they were limited in their scalability by infrastructure challenges in some areas and climate resilient practices.

The benefits of drought resistant crops were particularly in carbon sequestration. In regions where water scarcity is common, sequestration in these crops averaged 1.5–2.0 tons CO₂ per acre per year (Goswami et al., 2023). Carbon sequestration in these systems is not only a means to mitigate climate change, it also sustains long term agricultural productivity and soil organic matter and fertility in addition to generating coproducts that provide income and livelihood opportunities for smallholders.

3.4. Policy and Market Implications 

Governments have to support policies at the level that facilitates the adoption of climate resilient practices, which must be overcome with barriers at government level. Grants, low interest loans and subsidies can reduce the high upfront costs of things such as smart irrigation and precision farming. Also, farmers must be trained how to adopt these practices by means of giving technical training and extension service. Market development for the consumption of products derived from both promotion of drought tolerant crop production and value addition from precision farming is also necessary to promote drought tolerant crop production and value addition from precision farming. Farmers will only adopt these technologies if there are stable markets for these crops and these products.

4. 0 Conclusion

Smart irrigation, precision farming and drought resistant crops generate economic and environmental benefits as innovative resilient agricultural practices. In fact, these are practices that increase water use efficiency, lower input cost and improve yield stability and are important in mitigating the impact of climate change on agriculture. It is an initial, big investment for precision farming and smart irrigation, but a farmer will have long term savings, a high productivity rate to go along with it. As a solution for water scarce regions, drought resistant crops reduce irrigation needs as well as sustain yields during state induced droughts. However, the adoption is still hindered, even by these barriers of high back end costs, limited technical understanding and infrastructure problems especially amongst smallholder farmers. Therefore, these challenges must be addressed through financial incentives, trainings programs and infrastructure investments. Through the use of supportive policies and market development strategies, sustainable and climate adaptive agriculture in the face of an increasingly global environment can be achieved through scaling the adoption of climate resilient practices.

Journal of Information Technology Management and Business Horizons reserves the right to do the final formatting of your paper.

1.1. Subsection 01

Authors should follow these guidelines in writing their papers. Paper must be customized to A4 size. The body text should be aligned in double column to “justified” style and line spacing must be single.

Font type Times New Roman, size 10 pt. should be used throughout the text (also for the line spaces).

There should not be any underlined words. Spacing on the first page must be adjusted as follows: starting from the first line, enter the title of the paper (16 pt, Bold), enter single spaces and write name and surname of the authors as shown above (10 pt), enter single space and write the affiliation of each author on a separate line (09 pt.), enter double spaces and write the title “Abstract” (12 pt., Bold). At the end of the abstract, enter 1 space and write the title “Keywords” (09 pt., Bold, Italic, include maximum 4 keywords), enter 2 spaces and write the first section heading “Introduction”. Information on numbering and format for headings are given in the next section.

Type each section heading in 12 pt., Bold and number sequentially except for the References section. Enter Single line spaces between section titles and preceding paragraphs.

SI (international system) units must be used throughout the whole text.

1.1.1. Subsection 02 

Subsection 02 should be in times new roman, italic, bold and 10pt fond size. There should be no additional line gap between the subsection title and the preceding paragraph.

2. Materials and Methods 

Use the times new roman format with 9pt for plain text in table and figure captions. The content of the table should also be in times new roman and 9pt font size.

If the table or figure is too large to fit in a double-column formatting style, then they must be placed in a single-column setting for better visualization as well as for better readability. The figure should not be stretched, and a high-resolution figure is recommended for publishing in this journal. Also, the axis title and data label should be clearly readable.

Tables and figures must also be separated by 1 line space from both the plain text. Both tables and figures should be adjusted to “in-line text” format and must be formatted to 

3. Results and Discussion 

Equations should be written using “Microsoft Word Equation Editor”. All Greek and Latin symbols in the equations must be typed in “Times New Roman” style.

Equations must be formatted to be “in-line-text” using a default indentation of 1.27 cm, with the equation number aligned to the far right of the page width. As in the format of tables and figures, there should be 1 line space between equations and both preceding and following paragraphs.

4. Conclusions

This section will contain the final impact of your outcome and the summary of the whole research work. You may write down your findings in bullet points or describe them in one or more paragraphs.

CRediT Authorship Statement

Declare the credit and contribution of each author in this research. For example:

First author: Conceptualization, writing original draft, methodology. Second author: data curation, writing original draft, validation, analysis. 

sit horizontally centered (please see Table 1&2 and Figure 1&2).

Funding: Funding should mention according to the project

Acknowledgments: It is recommended to provide all acknowledgements

Conflicts of interest: Mention any financial or personal conflict of interest about the work and with the authors.

References

Azadi, H., Movahhed Moghaddam, S., Burkart, S., Mahmoudi, H., Van Passel, S., Kurban, A., & Lopez-Carr, D. (2021). Rethinking resilient agriculture: From Climate-Smart Agriculture to Vulnerable-Smart Agriculture. Journal of Cleaner Production, 319, 128602. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128602

Goswami, M., Gupta, A. K., Kishan, R., Baidya, S., Khan, Y. D. I., Prakash, S., Premkumar, A., & Nautiyal, S. (2023). An evaluation of climate resilient agricultural practices in India: a narrative synthesis of literature. Environmental Sustainability, 6(1), 7-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42398-022-00255-4

Hellin, J., Fisher, E., Taylor, M., Bhasme, S., & Loboguerrero, A. M. (2023). Transformative adaptation: from climatesmart to climate-resilient agriculture. CABI Agriculture and Bioscience, 4(1), 30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43170-023-00172-4

Islam, Z., Sabiha, N. E., & Salim, R. (2022). Integrated environment-smart agricultural practices: A strategy towards climate-resilient agriculture. Economic Analysis and Policy, 76, 59-72. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2022.07.011 

Jamil, I., Jun, W., Mughal, B., Waheed, J., Hussain, H., & Waseem, M. (2021). Agricultural Innovation: A comparative analysis of economic benefits gained by farmers under climate resilient and conventional agricultural practices. Land Use Policy, 108, 105581. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105581

Singh, N. P., Anand, B., Singh, S., Srivastava, S. K., Rao, C. S., Rao, K. V., & Bal, S. K. (2021). Synergies and tradeoffs for climate-resilient agriculture in India: an agroclimatic zone assessment. Climatic Change, 164(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-02969-6

Zong, X., Liu, X., Chen, G., & Yin, Y. (2022). A deepunderstanding framework and assessment indicator system for climate-resilient agriculture. Ecological Indicators, 136, 108597. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.108597