Search results

This paper provides one of the first and most detailed accounts of the large modern dairy farms that are emerging in the dairy sector in India. Qualitative interviews are used to understand how these farms differ from their traditional smallholder counterparts and how well integrated they are into the value chains.

Snowball sampling was used to identify large farmers. In total, 49 in-depth interviews were conducted with large commercial modern farms in Punjab. A detailed description of the main characteristics of these modern dairy farms is provided. Data from previous studies conducted in Punjab is used to compare the new farms with traditional smallholder farms.

The modern dairy farms are much more advanced in their use of technology compared to their traditional counterparts. These large commercial modern farms are very well integrated into the value chains. They often, but not exclusively, sell milk to formal supply chains, sometimes on a contractual basis.

Most of the literature on the Indian dairy sector focuses on smallholders. However, understanding and acknowledging the emergence of modern dairy farms is very important in understanding the development of value chains not only in the dairy sector in India, but in domestic food sectors in developing countries in general. This qualitative data analysis is a necessary first step if more large-scale representative information is to be collected in the future.

This chapter deals with family/household relevance as a stakeholder institution in rural (farm) communities. The data collection approach is qualitative. Families in Japan and the Philippines’ rice-cultivating communities were the subjects of the study. Results revealed that households in the two sites were experiencing a unique ontological crisis vis-á-vis farming communities. The crisis pointed to the problem of farm families’ relegation as secondary stakeholders in the farming sector. Despite the struggle for survival in the farm sector, farm families were differently adaptive and enduring in dealing with the modern development – that is, selective technology adoption, farmland redefinition, struggle and resistance against farm policies, and community group accommodation, to name a few. This endurance contributes to farm family persistence as a relevant institution in Japan and the Philippines.

Interest in generational research has garnered a lot of attention, as the workplace is seeing multiple generations (i.e., the Silent Generation, Baby Boomers, Gen Xers, and Millennials) working side-by-side for the first time. However, it is unclear how multiple generations of workers interact with each other and affect the workplace. Although there is extant literature on generational differences, some scholars have argued that the effect sizes are small and the differences are not meaningful. The focal aim of this chapter is to present the current state of literature on generational research. We present the relevant conceptualizations and theoretical frameworks that establish generational research. We then review evidence from existing research studies to establish the areas of differences that may exist among the different generations. In our review, we identify the issues arising from generational differences that are relevant to human resource management (HRM) practices, including new workforce entrants, aging workers, the changing nature of work and organizations, and leadership development. We conclude with several directions for future research on modernizing workplace policies and practices, ensuring sustainability in current employment models, facilitating future empirical research, and integrating the effects of globalization in generational research.

Beginning Farmer and Rancher programs are available for operators with ten years of experience or less on any farm. These programs support farmers who are starting operations, often without an initial asset allocation. However, some beginning farmers acquire operations that are already established, with substantial assets in place. The authors investigate whether a profitability gap exists between beginning farmers entering the industry ex novo and those operating a preexisting operation and if so, what factors contribute to the gap.

The authors utilize the Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition to determine what drives financial differences between first-generation beginning farmers, second-generation beginning farmers and established farmers using a unique farm-level panel dataset from 1997 to 2021.

Results indicate that first- and second-generation beginning farmers have similar operating profit margins, but first-generation beginning farmers have a statistically higher rate of return on assets than second-generation beginning farmers. Established farmers outperform second-generation beginning farmers on both the operating profit margin and rate of return on assets. These results suggest that economic viability for beginning farmers differs depending upon the initial status of their operation, suggesting that heterogenous policies may be more impactful in supporting various pathways to enter agriculture.

This analysis is the first to identify beginning farmers that enter the industry without an asset base and those that take over a principal operator role on an established farm through an assumed farm transition. The authors quantify differences in financial performance using detailed accrual-based financial data that tracks farms over time in one dataset.

This study aims to address demographic variables believed likely to restrain or modify homogeneous attitudes and values purported as inherent in each generational cohort and associated with divergence of workplace preferences and expectations.

Using a subsample of data collected from a larger study conducted as part of the General Social Survey and supported by the National Science Foundation, this study contributes to the emerging generational differences in literature by using Kruskal–Wallis tests in the analysis of five generational research questions.

In one sense, the results of this study appear to reflect the mixed and confusing disarray of evidence regarding the influence of generational differences on job preferences and workplace behaviors. On only two of the five job characteristics in this study did generational cohort membership demonstrate beyond random chance divergence in generational preference. However, the analysis of the interaction of cohort membership and demographic covariates on these two job characteristics points toward merit in further examination of relationship of subgroup differences relative to overarching assumptions about generational attitudes and norms of behavior.

A number of limitations to the interpretation of this study merit reflection. First, given that the data for this study were cross-sectional in nature, the relationships in our study may be subject to temporal change. Second, the data were secured by self-report and is subject to all the limitations of self-reported data. Third, some of the demographic variables in this study were the result of aggregation in an attempt to secure adequate observations in each cell, and as such, important variance may have been concealed. Fourth, the study did not control for the confounding influence of age difference on cohort preferences.

In a rush to adapt and develop different approaches to human resource management in hope of meeting the needs of successive generational cohorts, it behooves scholars and practitioners alike to acknowledge the confused state of research on generational cohorts and to question the assumed monolithic model of generational cohort job-related likes and dislikes.

This study would suggest that the assumed homogeneity of generational values and attitudes and their influence on the US workplace frequently fails to consider the heterogeneity evolving from the rural/urban characteristics where cohort members experienced adolescence.

Scholars will appreciate the broad perspective presented in this study and the potential new avenues for research. For practitioners, the study provides valuable insights into the three dominant generational cohorts currently in the workplace, thus enabling practitioners to understand the underpinnings of performance and work climate with greater depth and breadth of perspective.

This article examines challenges and strategies related to police relationships and engagement with rural communities in England and Wales, Australia and France. It aims to bridge a gap in knowledge around how police balance public demands with organisational and contextual constraints, exploring the role of communication technology in overcoming geographical and cultural barriers in rural policing.

The research draws upon 121 semi-structured interviews conducted across three distinct jurisdictions. In the United Kingdom and Australia, interviews were conducted via Microsoft Teams, while face-to-face interviews were conducted in France. Participants were recruited through the purposive sampling of police working in rural areas. The data were thematically analysed using NVivo Software.

Rural communities have low expectations of policing services, a consequence of geography, organisational structures and limited resource allocation. Building relationships can be challenging owing to isolation and terrain, the need for officers to have local and cultural knowledge, and difficulties in recruiting officers in rural posts. Technology-mediated communication has played a part in the solutions (e.g. social media). However, this may not always be suitable owing to limited connectivity, citizen and police preferences for communication and engagement, and the institutional and cultural nuances surrounding the application of technology.

This article provides empirical insights into the attitudes and experiences of rural police officers, highlighting the distinctive policing context and engagement needs of rural communities. The research underscores the necessity for contextually aware engagement. It suggests that while technology-mediated communication offers some solutions to spatial challenges, its effectiveness may be limited by access, generational preferences and the adaptability of police institutions and cultures.

Generation Z comprises the newest cohort to enter the workforce, and they not content to be the Millennials’ younger sibling. Born between 1997 and 2012, Gen Z’s identity is shaped by being the first generation to come into a post-9/11 world, by the effects of the Great Recession on their parents’ and families’ economic well-being, by the proliferation of technology and social media, by the specter of school shootings and violence, and by the current period of reckoning with past and present racial injustice. The defining moment for this generation, however, is entering adulthood during or in the wake of a global pandemic that significantly changed both education and industry. The confluence of this new generation of career entrants, the dramatically shifting job forms and careers (e.g., contingent work and the gig economy), and the post-COVID landscape of work provides a rich and compelling research agenda for management and human resource management as Gen Z enters workplace and progresses through their careers. Little academic research has examined this generation and its complexity, but the business community is very interested in preparing for the influx of Gen Z into their organizations and as consumers. Gen Z is diverse, global, and mobile. They are defined by their almost symbiotic relationship with technology, but surprisingly desire in-person connection. This generation was hard hit by the COVID-19 pandemic, in their education, finances, relationships, and well-being. They are a generation in flux. Future research directions are explored and presented.

The paper contributes to the debate about local food and conceptualization of rural entrepreneurship by analysing the performance of small-scale dairies departing from their relation to innovations, innovative activities and risk.

The authors use phenomenography to identify representative categories, and to draw conclusions about how these are consistent or different from dominant definitions of rural entrepreneurship and self-employment. The authors conducted semi-structured interviews, participatory workshops and compiled a database of all small-scale dairies established between 1968 and 2020.

A focus on innovations contributes to differentiate between rural entrepreneurship and self-employment and how these interact in the process of economic growth. Innovations are seldom disruptive. Instead, innovative behaviour is strongly related to business models and to imitation. Social capital and collective action play a key role for the innovative capacity of small businesses, especially to realize disruptive innovations, such as the establishment of a new market.

The innovative capacity of rural businesses can be understood through their ability to break patterns, alter institutions and turn embededdness into assets. Rural entrepreneurship and self-employment are intertwined in the economic growth process.

Innovative behaviour is a significant aspect for firm survival over time, and it is also strongly related to new business models. Most rural firms can be characterized as self-employment, the latter are essential because they provide rural livelihoods and help bring maturity to newly established markets.

The right type of support, e.g. adopting enabling industrial regulations and granting access to constructive experiences of others, contributes to the innovative behaviour of small-scale rural firms.

This study differentiates rural entrepreneurship from rural self-employment by analysing the role of innovation. The authors show how innovations and innovative behaviour work their way through the process of economic growth and how innovation can break patterns by turning rural embeddedness into assets; and how innovative behaviour related to self-employments contributes to the creation of value and interacts with entrepreneurship in the process of economic growth.

The current article investigates the impact of generational diversity on knowledge sharing and group performance. It, further, explores the moderating effects of intergenerational climate, boundary-spanning leadership, and respect in facilitating greater knowledge sharing and enhanced group performance.

The authors applied partial least square structural equation modeling to test the model, using a sample of 635 employees working in the banking industry.

Results indicate that generational diversity negatively influences knowledge sharing among employees at work. However, the moderating roles of intergenerational climate and boundary-spanning leadership aid in mitigating this negative affect and facilitate knowledge sharing among employees, thereby, resulting in better group performance.

The study extends extant literature on generational diversity and differences by examining its impact on knowledge sharing and group performance. Further, the study also contributes by highlighting intergenerational climate and boundary-spanning leadership as key facilitators in promoting knowledge sharing among employees. Future research may include other industries/contexts to widen the generalizability of the findings and a longitudinal design to ascertain the causal effects.

This study identifies the need to effectively manage multigenerational workforce to capitalize on the unique benefits of each generation. An intergenerational climate free from ageist attitudes and employing leaders possessing boundary-spanning abilities would help organizations to create an inclusive workplace.

The authors attempt to explore the relationship between generational diversity, knowledge sharing, and group performance through the moderating effects of intergenerational climate and boundary-spanning leadership, which has not been studied in the past.