Digital Technologies Research and Applications

Article

Digital Technology-Enabled Resource Decoupling and Economic Growth Quality in Ecological Agricultural Integration: Global Pathways

Downloads

https://doi.org/10.54963/dtra.v5i2.2325
Pang, N. (2026). Digital Technology-Enabled Resource Decoupling and Economic Growth Quality in Ecological Agricultural Integration: Global Pathways. Digital Technologies Research and Applications, 5(2), 159–178. https://doi.org/10.54963/dtra.v5i2.2325
Volume 5 Issue 2: June 2026 (in progress)
Copyright (c) 2026 Ning Pang
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright

The authors shall retain the copyright of their work but allow the Publisher to publish, copy, distribute, and convey the work.

License

Digital Technologies Research and Applications (DTRA)  publishes accepted manuscripts under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). Authors who submit their papers for publication by DTRA agree to have the CC BY 4.0 license applied to their work, and that anyone is allowed to reuse the article or part of it free of charge for any purpose, including commercial use. As long as the author and original source are properly cited, anyone may copy, redistribute, reuse, and transform the content.

Authors

  • Ning Pang

    School of Economics and Business, Mongolian University of Life Sciences, Ulaanbaatar 17024, Mongolia

Received: 21 January 2026; Revised: 10 March 2026; Accepted: 24 March 2026; Published: 9 May 2026

Using the three-proof method combining academic papers, policies, patents and so forth, this paper analyzes and compares 15 representative global cases in depth, and finds out for the first time: (1) An ecological element contribution elasticity coefficient of 0.234 proves that natural capital has its own independent economic value, and globally, the synergetic effect level is 0.86, realizing simultaneous output growth rate of 6%, resource efficiency promotion degree of 0.83. (2) Environment-friendly, economically feasible industrial concept prototypes were discovered, namely dry fermentation (return on investment ROl 196‰), Dutch factory recycling (ROl 164‰), Israel’s water-saving techniques (ROl 246‰) and so forth, with a payback period of 3–5 years, ROl of 18–25 per thousand. (3) The optimal threshold values are found out respectively for technology development intensity, corporate social responsibility fulfillment amount, and farmer diversification proportion rather than assuming that more is always better. Different development path guidance suggestions are provided for different countries/regions according to their actual situations. It is estimated that applying this framework could increase agricultural resource and energy efficiency by 15–25 percentage points and thus help achieve the SDGs of the UN. In future research, attention should also be paid to issues such as evaluation of system resilience under climate change scenarios, application based on blockchain AI technology integration, consideration of how small-scale producers can participate in integration, etc.

Keywords:

Ecological Agriculture Industrial Integration Synergistic Mechanism Technology-Institution-Market Return on Investment Sustainable Development

References

  1. Wikan, A.P.; Damayanti, N.H.; Annurhutami, F.; et al. Flood susceptibility and post flood agricultural economic losses in flood prone area of Wawar watershed, Purworejo Regency. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2025, 1462, 012050.
  2. Marousek, J.; Gavurova, B.; Marouskova, A. Machine learning enables more efficient (nano)catalyst management, enhancing the competitiveness of (bio)hydrogen production from sewage sludge. Renew. Energy 2026, 256, 124025.
  3. Maroušek, J.; Žáková, K. Techno-economic perspective on the use of pyrolysis oil from digestate in spark-ignition engines. Aircr. Eng. Aerosp. Technol. 2026, 98, 596–604. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/AEAT-01-2025-0020
  4. Li, M. Construction of agricultural economic-level prediction model based on GWO-SVM algorithm. Int. J. Agric. Environ. Inf. Syst. 2025, 16, 1–17.
  5. Ana, U.; Laurentiu, I.P. Forecasting the optimal sustainable development of the Romanian ecological agriculture. Sustainability 2022, 14, 14192.
  6. Ma, S.; Zhuge, M. Ecological agriculture traits: Constructing an integrated agricultural system for sustainable development. Geogr. Res. Bull. 2024, 3, 2–5.
  7. Shebl, A.M.; Owayss, A.A.; Abou-Shaara, H.F. The debate of dwarf honey bee, Apis florea Fab., intruding to Egypt: Is it useful or not to eco-agricultural systems in Africa? Bee World 2023, 100, 24–26.
  8. Obono, M.F.; Naoutissa, L.; Ntamack, S.; et al. Evaluation of the efficacy of an Aloe barbadensis based biological insecticide against pests of Abelmochus esculentus for promoting ecological agriculture (Far-North, Cameroon). Agric. Sci. 2024, 15, 590–603.
  9. Sandu, M.; Strateanu, A.G.; Udrea, L. Analysis of ecological agriculture from the perspective of maintaining the biodiversity of agricultural lands. Ann. Valahia Univ. Targoviste Agric. 2023, 15, 22–26.
  10. Pavolová, H.; Bakalár, T.; Kyšeľa, K.; et al. The analysis of investment into industries based on portfolio managers. Acta Montan. Slovaca 2021, 26, 161–170. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46544/AMS.V26I1.14
  11. Brizmohun, R.; Hillbom, E.; Mahadea-Nemdharry, R.; et al. What is the future of agriculture in small island developing states? The case of Mauritius. Agriculture 2025, 15, 2611. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/AGRICULTURE15242611
  12. Ouala, O.; Essadki, Y.; Oudra, B.; et al. Bibliometric analysis towards industrial-scale use of marine algae and lichens as soil amendments and plant biofertilizers for sustainable agriculture. Phycology 2025, 5, 29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/PHYCOLOGY5030029
  13. Divyanshu; Sharma, S.; Chandel, S.R.; et al. Evidence of transitioning apple farming to an agro-ecological model in Himachal Pradesh. Front. Nutr. 2025, 12, 1611137. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/FNUT.2025.1611137
  14. Cara, G.I.; Rusu, M.; Filip, M.; et al. Exploring ecological and conventional farming practice on plum orchards: Its impact on fruit quality. Horticulturae 2025, 11, 240. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/HORTICULTURAE11030240
  15. Kamau, W.E.; Gitau, R.; Bett, K.H. Driving transformation: The role of institutions in shaping ecological farming adoption in Kiambu County, Kenya. Dev. Pract. 2025, 35, 101–116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2024.2431292
  16. Kang, Z.C.; Liu, Q.S.; Han, X.B.; et al. Development goals and strategies of ecological agriculture of Chinese materia medica. China J. Chin. Mater. Med. 2025, 50, 42–47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19540/J.CNKI.CJCMM.20241014.102 (in Chinese)
  17. Nikitina, O.; Vasylenko, O.; Balabak, A.; et al. Ecological and agrochemical evaluation of continuous mineral fertilizer usage in field crop rotation. J. Ecol. Eng. 2024, 25, 124–133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12911/22998993/192675
  18. Lewicka, K.; Szymanek, I.; Rogacz, D.; et al. Current trends of polymer materials' application in agriculture. Sustainability 2024, 16, 8439. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/SU16198439
  19. Kuang, L. Creating a sustainable narrative: The interplay of ecological agriculture, cultural heritage, and community efficacy in contemporary China. Cult. Text 2024, 2, 13–30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/CAT-2024-0002
  20. Kamau, W.E.; Gitau, R.; Bett, K.H. Effects of adoption of ecological farming practices on farm income in rural households: Evidence from Central Kenya. Heliyon 2024, 10, e34610. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.HELIYON.2024.E34610
  21. Dagoudo, A.B.; Ssekyewa, C.; Ssekandi, J.; et al. From organic farming to agroecology farming, what challenges do organic farmers face in Central Uganda? Discover Agric. 2024, 2, 35.
  22. Ates, C.H. Effects of ecological farms on neighbouring farmers: The example of Lisinia nature ecological farm. Int. J. Sustain. Agric. Manag. Inform. 2024, 10, 443–458. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSAMI.2024.141849
  23. Ingrassia, M.; Bacarella, S.; Bellia, C.; et al. Circular economy and agritourism: a sustainable behavioral model for tourists and farmers in the post-COVID era. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2023, 7, 1174623. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2023.1174623
  24. Carlo, R.; Bethan, T.; Andreas, N.; et al. Uptake of ecological farming practices by EU farms: A pan-European typology. EuroChoices 2022, 21, 64–71.
  25. Sophia, D.; Nathalie, H.; Maria, A.; et al. What does ecological farming mean for farm labour? EuroChoices 2022, 21, 21–26.
  26. Trenčiansky, M.; Štěrbová, M.; Výbošťok, J. The influence of the transition to ecological farming on the quality of runoff water. Sustainability 2022, 14, 15412. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/SU142215412
  27. Nahui, Z.; Yue, Z.; Hong, J.; et al. How coalitions of multiple actors advance policy in China: Ecological agriculture at Danjiangkou. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 2022, 24, 794–806.
  28. Li, L.; Xiong, K.; Huang, X. Research on the influence of transaction costs and social capital on the circulation channels of ecological products in rocky desertification areas. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 30, 89964–89974. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-022-23289-X
  29. Jităreanu, A.F.; Mihăilă, M.; Robu, A.-D.; et al. Dynamic of ecological agriculture certification in Romania facing the EU organic action plan. Sustainability 2022, 14, 11105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/SU141711105
  30. Chitakira, M.; Nhamo, L.; Torquebiau, E.; et al. Opportunities to improve eco-agriculture through transboundary governance in transfrontier conservation areas. Diversity 2022, 14, 461. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/D14060461
  31. Huang, Y.; Ye, Y.; Zhou, M. Empirical analysis on the development of ecological agriculture under the initiative of "sustainable development". Asian J. Agric. Ext. Econ. Sociol. 2022, 130–142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.9734/AJAEES/2022/V40I830946
  32. Phamova, M.; Banout, J.; Verner, V.; et al. Can ecological farming systems positively affect household income from agriculture? A case study of the suburban area of Hanoi, Vietnam. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1466. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/SU14031466
  33. Guo, L.; Jiang, J.; Zhang, X.; et al. Contributions and strategies of eco-agriculture of Chinese medicine services for carbon dioxide peaking and carbon neutrality. China J. Chin. Mater. Med. 2022, 47, 1–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19540/J.CNKI.CJCMM.20211129.101 (in Chinese)
  34. Dale, B. Food sovereignty and the integral state: Institutionalizing ecological farming. Geoforum 2021, 127, 137–150. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GEOFORUM.2021.10.010
  35. Monter, Y.M.F.; Tovar, J.C.C.; Gutiérrez, F.R. Territorial aptitude for ecological cattle production systems and the conservation of jaguar (Panthera onca) and puma (Puma concolor) in Guerrero, Mexico. Appl. Anim. Sci. 2021, 37, 225–237. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15232/AAS.2020-02078
  36. Guo, L.; Kang, C.; Zhou, T.; et al. Ecological agriculture of Chinese materia medica: Update and future perspectives. China J. Chin. Mater. Med. 2021, 46, 1851–1857. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19540/J.CNKI.CJCMM.20210226.102 (in Chinese)
  37. Gunaratne, P.H.L.; Hemachandra, S.K.; Kumudumali, K.M.Y.; et al. Comparative assessment of vegetable crop performances and ecological indicators during transition from conventional to ecological agriculture. Asian Res. J. Agric. 2021, 1–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.9734/ARJA/2021/V14I130113
  38. Kumar, D.; Shekhar, S.; Tewary, T. Editorial: AI and data analytics for climate data management. Front. Environ. Sci. 2025, 13, 1679608. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2025.1679608
  39. Papadopoulos, T.; Balta, M.E. Climate change and big data analytics: Challenges and opportunities. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2022, 63, 102448. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102448
  40. Mak, H.W.L. Application of satellite informatics in mitigating climatic challenges within the atmosphere: Selected case studies of Asian cities. Tech Monit. 2025, 36–47.
  41. Kaasa, A.; Andriani, L. Determinants of institutional trust: The role of cultural context. J. Inst. Econ. 2022, 18, 45–65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744137421000199
  42. Zeng, C.; Lin, C.; Liang, Y.; et al. Unraveling the complex relationship between urbanization and landscape ecological risk: Insights from Chinese cities. Ecosyst. Health Sustain. 2025, 11, 0448. DOI: https://doi.org/10.34133/ehs.0448
  43. Li, J.; Wu, X.; Du, Y. Reframing cultural heritage policy through place-based perspectives: The evolution of China's ICH governance amid historical continuity and global convergence. Land 2025, 14, 1425. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/land14071425