<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Current and Future Opportunities of Digital Transformation in the Agrifood Sector</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Alessandro Scuderi</string-name>
          <email>alessandro.scuderi@unict.it</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Giovanni La Via</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Giuseppe Timpanaro</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Luisa Sturiale</string-name>
          <email>luisa.sturiale@dica.unict.it</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Department of Agrifood and Environmental Systems and Management (Di3A), University of Catania</institution>
          ,
          <country country="IT">Italy</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture (DICAR), University of Catania</institution>
          ,
          <country country="IT">Italy</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date>
        <year>2019</year>
      </pub-date>
      <fpage>317</fpage>
      <lpage>326</lpage>
      <abstract>
        <p>Digital transformation is a process determined by new technologies that not only enhances traditional processes of innovation and development but creates new forms of innovation in every segment of society. It in the agro-food sector plays a crucial role in counteracting the critical factors of globalization and the growing environmental impact. In Italy, the growth potential of the "Agriculture 4.0" and "Farming 4.0" solutions market is very high, but the adoption of related technological innovations is still reduced. Italian companies are increasingly aware of the opportunities offered by the 4.0 paradigm, but there are still cultural and technological limitations for a full development of the phenomenon. The research aims to provide a first contribution to the perception that Italian agricultural operators have about the opportunities and limits of the adoption of smart agrifood. The first results, obtained from a multicriteria analysis approach, will be presented to define possible future scenarios deriving from the implementation of Digital transformation.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>smart agrifood</kwd>
        <kwd>Internet of Things</kwd>
        <kwd>Agriculture 4</kwd>
        <kwd>0</kwd>
        <kwd>Farming 4</kwd>
        <kwd>0</kwd>
        <kwd>multicriteria analysis</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>1 Introduction</title>
      <p>
        Digital transformation is a process that influences every aspect of human society. It
is a transformation determined by new technologies that not only enhances traditional
processes of innovation and development, but creates new forms of innovation
characterized by clear and rapid changes, and affects every segment of society, such
as the economy, communication tools, government, information, art, medicine and
science
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref26 ref27">(Weiss et al., 2005; Zheng et al., 2016)</xref>
        . From the economic point of view,
digital transformation can be defined as the process that redesigns and makes the
company's overall offer more competitive, through the transformation of production
processes, analysis and listening to market needs using digital technologies (McAfee,
2014).
      </p>
      <p>
        The definition highlights the importance of the innovative aspect of Digital
Transformation linked to the originality of the transformation. In order to understand
the Digital Transformation process, it is necessary to analyze some enabling
technologies, distinct in product-service and process innovations, which assume a
strategic economic significance
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">(Janvier, 2012)</xref>
        . In particular, it is useful to give some
hints on the key concepts: Internet of Things and Big Data.
      </p>
      <p>"Internet of Things" (IoT) is a neologism referring to the extension of the Internet
to the world of objects and concrete places, equipped with a more or less permanent
connection to the Internet as well as sensors and other devices capable of monitoring
and recording people's actions and habits. The connection of these objects (IoT
devices) to the Internet allows the exchange, storage, sharing, processing of huge flows
of information and data.</p>
      <p>The term "Big Data" refers to the set of data with dimensions that go beyond the
capacity of commonly used software tools. Digital technologies have multiplied the
available data at an exponential rate, generated by sensors, social media, transactions,
smartphones and other sources. Big Data" can represent a real asset for companies,
whose potential can only be expressed through their intelligent use.</p>
      <p>
        The digital transformation is proceeding at an increasing pace but in a diversified
manner in the individual countries
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref22">(Spielman, 2006)</xref>
        . As far as the European Union is
concerned, a picture of the situation of this phenomenon can be taken from the Digital
Economy and Society Index (DESI). The DESI is a composite index that summarizes
relevant indicators on Europe's digital performance and tracks the progress of EU
Member States in digital competitiveness. The five dimensions of the DESI are:
connectivity; human capital; use of internet; integration of digital technology; digital
public services. As reported in Fig. 1, Italy still has a large gap to catch up, in fact, it
is in 24th place in the ranking of the 28 EU Member States. Instead, in the first places
are Finland, Sweden, Holland, Denmark.
      </p>
      <p>Source: DESI, 2019</p>
      <p>
        In general, in Italy companies are slow to understand the potential of the network:
40% of entrepreneurs declare that it is not useful to their activity. Many entrepreneurs
are still not aware of the potential offered by the network for the promotion of products,
for business turnover thanks to e-commerce and interaction with customers with social
media
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">(Cagnina et al., 2018)</xref>
        .
      </p>
      <p>
        The data for the last few years shows a slow improvement for Italy, but the distance
from the European average is still evident, an alarming situation especially if we
consider the growing importance of the digital economy, especially in the near future
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">(OECD, 2019)</xref>
        .
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>2 Digital transformation in the Italian agrifood system</title>
      <p>
        Digital transformation in the agrifood sector plays a crucial role in our society and
to counteract the critical factors of globalization and the growing environmental impact
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">(Weis, 2005; Ge et al, 2016)</xref>
        . In Italy, the market growth potential of "Agricoltura 4.0"
and "Farming 4.0" solutions is very high, but the adoption of technologies such as
robots and precision farming sensors is still reduced.
      </p>
      <p>
        In this context, "Agricultura 4.0" solutions are integrated with "Farming 4.0"
solutions, according to an approach based on the integration of various ICT/geo-space
technologies
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">(Lee et al., 2017)</xref>
        . That is, reliable remote monitoring is possible through
space-time and spectral measurements, able to monitor the phenomena at the level of
individual sites from various altimetric positions.
      </p>
      <p>
        Similarly, the Blockchain technology applied to the agrifood supply chain makes it
possible to guarantee a transparent, safe and shared environment for the traceability of
the components and processing processes of agrifood products offered to the consumer
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10 ref17 ref21 ref23 ref9">(Kempe et al., 2017; Krishnan et al., 2012; Scuderi et al., 2018; Tapscott, 2016)</xref>
        . For
example, the Italian Food chain makes it possible to securely (and decentrally) collect,
record, analyze, validate and certify data, information and documentation at every
stage of the supply chain, through the open functionalities of blockchain, through the
use of the "smart contract" concept
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16 ref19 ref24">(Scuderi et al., 2019; Timpanaro et al., 2018)</xref>
        .
      </p>
      <p>
        In summary, systems and technologies such as GIS / geo-spatial infrastructures,
fixed and mobile ultra-broadband networks, Internet of Things, Artificial Intelligence,
Blockchain, Augmented and Virtual Reality, etc. are available. These make possible
the provision of digital services through intelligent platforms for "green &amp; sustainable
development" applications (Precision Farming / Farming 4.0, food chain tracking,
ehealth, etc.)
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">(Abeyratne et al., 2016)</xref>
        , using case by case the most appropriate
combinations of these technologies. With the availability of advanced skills and
technologies available "as a service" in the Cloud, and the support of researchers and
experts in the various "verticals", it is possible to implement initiatives (market-driven)
for the provision of "digitized" value-added services in the field of "green"
development
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">(Chen et al., 2016)</xref>
        . It will be necessary to guarantee users the
transparency of the process, i.e. the mix of advanced technologies used to generate the
value of the chain (fig. 2).
      </p>
      <p>
        There is enormous potential for growth and market development in the agrifood
sector. In fact, only 2% of the Italian agricultural area uses robots and precision
farming sensors, which are not uniformly distributed in the various regions of the
country
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4 ref5">(De Molli et al., 2017; De Paulis, 2015)</xref>
        . Digital" agriculture (ICT-assisted)
varies between minus 1 and 4-5%, compared to 40-70% in China, Israel and the USA.
The most frequent solutions are systems that can be used transversally in several
agricultural sectors, followed by those aimed at the cereal, fruit and vegetable and wine
sectors. The focus on the Internet of farming is growing, albeit very slowly
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">(Osservatori.net, 2019)</xref>
        .
      </p>
      <p>The research aims to provide a first contribution to the perception that Italian
agricultural operators have about the opportunities and limits of the adoption of smart
agrifood. The first results, obtained from a multicriteria analysis approach, will be
presented to define possible future scenarios deriving from the implementation of
Digital transformation.
3</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Methodology</title>
      <p>The present study analyzes the digital transformation to identify new approaches
and opportunities in the agrifood sector that can be used to develop guidelines, to
enhance production, consumer protection, and to analyze the value chain.</p>
      <p>
        The proposed approach is based on integrating participatory planning and the novel
approach to imprecise assessment and decision environments as a possible
methodological structure to acquire and evaluate the “complex” information collected
on possible alternative scenarios in relation to digital transformation
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12 ref18 ref20">(Munaretto et al.,
2014; Scuderi et al,.2016)</xref>
        .
      </p>
      <p>The aim is to develop a methodological structure using suitable tools to acquire first,
and process second, qualitative and quantitative information concerning the possible
alternative scenarios of the problem under study. The opinions were collected through
specific focus groups with local stakeholders, operators, consumers, and producers
interested in the issue in question.</p>
      <p>The proposed model is based on:
- the individualization of stakeholders involved (30 questionnaires);
- the definition of the alternative scenarios (definition of the three hypotheses
of scenario: Farm, Chain and Consumers.</p>
      <p>
        The model used focus groups as a social research methodology, aiming to acquire
information on the opinions of stakeholders regarding a variety of scenarios for future
development
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18 ref20">(Scuderi et al.,2016)</xref>
        . The matrices of impact and equity constitute the
basis for the use of the discrete multicriteria evaluation NAIADE model
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">(Munda,
2006)</xref>
        , which is able to manage qualitative and quantitative data in order to evaluate
the measures of intervention. This instrument supports the classification of the
alternative scenarios proposed on the basis of determined decisional criteria and
considerations of possible “alliances” and “conflicts” between the groups of
stakeholders for the proposed scenarios, thus measuring their acceptability
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17 ref21">(Sturiale et
al., 2018)</xref>
        .
      </p>
      <p>The objective of this study is to analyze the principal priorities, using as its
methodology the model of digital transformation in the agrifood sector. The evaluation
through the focus groups was divided into three phases, referring in this specific case
to the potential repercussions.</p>
      <p>The questionnaire used for the interviews was designed to explore the perception of
traceability issues in the citrus-supply-chain context and to evaluate the real needs of
actors in the supply chain. It comprised 10 questions aiming to collect information and
opinions useful for the research related to three hypotheses proposed (Farm, Chain and
Consumers):</p>
      <p>Scenario Farm: application of digital transformation for the valorization of the
agricultural productions on the basis of the quality of the product.</p>
      <p>Scenario Chain: application of digital transformation in order to gain control
information and prices along the chain.</p>
      <p>Scenario Consumer: application of the digital transformation is aimed at protecting
the health of the consumer.</p>
      <p>The input of the NAIADE method is constituted by the impact matrix
(criteria/alternative matrix), including scores that can take the following forms: crisp
numbers; stochastic elements; fuzzy elements; and linguistic elements (such as “very
poor”, “poor”, “good”, “very good”, and ”excellent”). To compare alternative
scenarios, the concept of distance is introduced. In the presence of crisp numbers, the
distance between two alternative scenarios with respect to a given evaluation criterion
is calculated by subtracting the respective crisp numbers.</p>
      <p>The classification of alternative scenarios is based on data from the impact matrix,
used for:</p>
      <p>- comparison of each single pair of alternatives for all the evaluation criteria
considered;</p>
      <p>- calculation of a credibility index for each of the aforementioned comparisons that
measures the credibility of one preference relation, e.g. alternative scenario (a) is better
/ worse, etc. than alternative scenario (b) (preference relationships were used);
- aggregation of the credibility indices produced during the previous stage leading
to a preference intensity index [μ * (a, b)] of an alternative (a) with respect to another
(b) for all the evaluation criteria, associated the concept of entropy [H * (a, b)] as an
indication of the variation in the credibility indices; and classification of alternative
scenarios on the basis of previous information.</p>
      <p>The final classification of the alternatives is the result (intersection) of two different
classifications: the classification Φ + (a) (based on the “best” and “decidedly better”
preference relationships); and the classification Φ – (b) (based on the “worst” and
“decidedly worse” preference relationships).</p>
      <p>In relation to the objective of the present study, the analysis will be applied to the
main priorities, for the assessment of the scenario that benefits most from digital
transformation implementation in the agrifood sector.
4</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Results and discussion</title>
      <p>The results of the present study provide a further multidisciplinary contribution to
research on the management of digital transformation. Specifically, the analysis was
conducted to address the research question:</p>
      <p>What are the opportunities that Digital transformation for the agrifood sector?
The evaluation criteria were used is technology, communication, data, Internet of
things, automation and networking. These criteria were defined on the basis of the
purpose and objectives of the evaluation of the analyzed case, which can be considered
representative of agri-food sector.</p>
      <p>The scenario Chain was revealed to be the best option for sharing, closely followed
by scenario Farm and scenario Consumer, but all three hypotheses had positive
evaluations (tab. 1).</p>
      <p>This provided the views of interested parties on the three suggested hypotheses. The
selection of interested parties was based on their potential to assess the major
advantages for agrifood sector. A total of eight six groups of stakeholders were
involved: producers; trade associations; dealers; consumer associations; institutions
and scientific associations. It is important to underline that the opinions of the
interested parties in the NAIADE model can only be of a qualitative type, i.e. linguistic
expressions: bad; poor; medium; good; very good; and excellent. The results show that
a large number of stakeholders and groups of selected operators agreed with the
assessment of the three hypotheses. The results of the multi-criteria analysis revealed
that the scenario Chain was the predominant hypothesis, closely followed by scenario
Chain, while scenario Consumer acquired only a lower rating (Tab. 2).</p>
      <p>The results obtained through the analysis of the single answers were used to
examine possible alliances or conflicts between the opinions of the interested parties
regarding the decision on which hypothesis to adopt. The results in Tab. 3 show that a
large number of interested parties, in addition to agreeing on the classification of the
different hypotheses to be applied, agreed with scenario Chain, while noting that there
were also significant consequences for the Farm and Consumer scenarios.</p>
      <p>The results include different perspectives of digital transformation, the different
groups involved the perception and acceptability of the proposed alternatives, which
can lead to improving strategic decisions and creating innovative ideas and new
solutions to enhance and protect, based on the possibilities offered by these
participatory processes (Fig. 3).</p>
      <p>The results obtained from this model, developed through the integration of a
participatory tool and a multicriteria analysis, become strategic for investment choices
in the agrifood system, particularly in relation to the current situation in which the
supply chain, the farm and the consumer try to define their role through digital
transformation.</p>
      <p>
        The Italian agrifood sector has begun to understand that digital innovation is a
strategic lever, able to guarantee greater competitiveness to the entire supply chain,
from production in the field to food distribution, passing through processing
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18 ref20">(Sturiale
et al., 2016)</xref>
        .
      </p>
      <p>
        Digital transformation is fundamental to improve the competitiveness of the
agrifood sector not only for economic needs but also for social and environmental ones
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16 ref19">(Scuderi et al., 2019)</xref>
        . The remuneration of all phases of the agro-food chain includes
correct economic and contractual relations between all actors: agricultural producers,
processing and distribution industry; greater cooperation and transparency, adoption
of product and process innovations. This condition is essential to allow the
improvement of quality, social and environmental standards, also in the logic of
improving the efficiency of production, innovation and marketing processes. The
success of agricultural enterprises increasingly depends on the ability to collect and
enhance the large amount of data that will be generated, especially to achieve cost
control and increase the quality of production. It should be noted, however, that there
is still little clarity among those involved in the sector on how to exploit these
opportunities. It is necessary to invest in the creation of skills, in a sector characterized
by a level of 'corporate' culture and operational processes based more on the transfer
of generational skills and knowledge than on innovation and optimization of
production processes.
      </p>
      <p>The food economy should therefore constitute a resource capable of responding to
the most urgent and immediate needs of the planet, regulating the production of this
primary resource, encouraging innovative and environmentally friendly production
techniques, but above all ensuring a fair distribution of the resources produced through
the aid of digital transformation.</p>
      <p>Acknowledgment. This work has been financed by the University of Catania within
the project “Piano della Ricerca Dipartimentale 2016-18 of the Department of Civil
Engineering and Architecture”.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Abeyratne</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Monfared</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2016</year>
          )
          <article-title>Blockchain ready manufacturing supply chain using distributed ledger</article-title>
          .
          <source>International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology</source>
          ,
          <volume>5</volume>
          (
          <issue>9</issue>
          ), p.
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>10</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Cagnina</surname>
            <given-names>M.R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Cosmina</surname>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gallenti</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Marangon</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nassivera</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Troiano</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2018</year>
          )
          <article-title>The role of information in consumers' behavior: A survey on the counterfeit food products</article-title>
          .
          <source>Economia Agro-Alimentare</source>
          ,
          <volume>20</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ), p.
          <fpage>221</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>231</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Chen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lee</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2016</year>
          )
          <article-title>Sourcing under supplier responsibility risk: The effects of certification, audit, and contingency payment</article-title>
          .
          <source>Management Science</source>
          ,
          <volume>63</volume>
          , p.
          <fpage>2795</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>2812</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <surname>De Molli</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>De Biasio</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lovati</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Andrisani</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Barchiesi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Brioschi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Brugora</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2017</year>
          )
          <article-title>Sfide e priorità per il settore alimentare oggi. Strumenti e approcci per la competitività</article-title>
          ,
          <source>The European House - Ambosetti</source>
          , Retrieved from https://www.ambrosetti.eu/ricerche-e
          <article-title>-presentazioni/settore-alimentare-oggi/</article-title>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5. De Paulis,
          <string-name>
            <surname>G.</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          )
          <article-title>Food marketing: web e social. Strategie di business online per avere successo nell'agroalimentare</article-title>
          . FrancoAngeli, Milano,
          <year>2015</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6. FAO,
          <year>2019</year>
          .
          <article-title>Digital Technologies in agriculture and rural areas</article-title>
          .
          <source>Briefing paper</source>
          . By
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nikola M. Trendov</surname>
            , Samuel Varas and
            <given-names>Meng</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zeng</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Food and agriculture Organization of the United Nations</article-title>
          . Rome
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ge</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Brewster</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2016</year>
          )
          <article-title>Informational institutions in the agrifood sector: Meta-information and meta-governance of environmental sustainability</article-title>
          .
          <source>Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability</source>
          ,
          <volume>18</volume>
          , p.
          <fpage>73</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>81</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Janvier-James</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2012</year>
          )
          <article-title>A new introduction to supply chains and supply chain management: Definitions and theories perspective</article-title>
          .
          <source>International Business Research</source>
          ,
          <volume>5</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kempe</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sachs</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Skoog</surname>
          </string-name>
          . H. (
          <year>2017</year>
          )
          <article-title>Blockchain use cases for food traceability and control: A study to identify the potential benefits from using blockchain technology for food traceability and control</article-title>
          . Axfoundation, SKL Kommentus,
          <source>Swedish Country Councils and Regions</source>
          , Martin &amp;Servera, and Kairos Future.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Krishnan</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>and</article-title>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Winter</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2012</year>
          )
          <article-title>The economic foundations of supply chain contracting</article-title>
          .
          <source>Foundations and Trends in Technology, Information and Operations Management</source>
          ,
          <volume>5</volume>
          , p.
          <fpage>147</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>309</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          11.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lee</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mendelson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rammohan</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Srivastava</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2017</year>
          )
          <article-title>Technology in agribusiness: Opportunities to drive value</article-title>
          .
          <source>White paper</source>
          , Stanford Graduate School of Business.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          12.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Munaretto</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Siciliano</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Turvani</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2014</year>
          )
          <article-title>Integrating adaptive governance and participatory multicriteria methods: A framework for climate adaptation governance</article-title>
          .
          <source>Ecology and Society</source>
          ,
          <volume>19</volume>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          13.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Munda</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2006</year>
          ).
          <article-title>A NAIADE based approach for sustainability benchmarking</article-title>
          .
          <source>International Journal of Environmental Technology and Management</source>
          ,
          <volume>6</volume>
          , p.
          <fpage>65</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>78</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          14.
          <string-name>
            <surname>OECD</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2019</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Measuring the digital transformation. A road map for the future</article-title>
          .
          <source>OECD.</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          15.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Osservatori</surname>
          </string-name>
          .net (
          <year>2019</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Smart Agrifood: boom dell'agricoltura 4.0. (available on www</article-title>
          .
          <source>osservatori.net on 15 March</source>
          <year>2020</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          16.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Scuderi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Foti</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Timpanaro</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <year>2019</year>
          .
          <article-title>The supply chain value of pod and pgi food products through the application of blockchain</article-title>
          . Quality - Access to Success,
          <volume>20</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>580</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>587</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          17.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Scuderi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sturiale</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Timpanaro</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2018</year>
          )
          <article-title>Economic evaluation of innovative investments in agri-food chain</article-title>
          .
          <source>Quality-Access to Success</source>
          ,
          <volume>19</volume>
          (
          <issue>51</issue>
          ), p.
          <fpage>482</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>488</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation>
          18.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Scuderi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sturiale</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2016</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Multicriteria evaluation model to face phytosanitary emergencies: The case of citrus fruits farming in Italy</article-title>
          .
          <source>Agricultural Economics</source>
          ,
          <volume>62</volume>
          , p.
          <fpage>205</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>214</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref19">
        <mixed-citation>
          19.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Scuderi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sturiale</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2019</year>
          )
          <article-title>Evaluation of social media strategy for green urban planning in metropolitan cities</article-title>
          .
          <source>Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies</source>
          ,
          <volume>100</volume>
          , p.
          <fpage>76</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>84</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref20">
        <mixed-citation>
          20.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sturiale</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Scuderi</surname>
          </string-name>
          , a. (
          <year>2016</year>
          )
          <article-title>The digital economy: new e-business strategies for food Italian system</article-title>
          .
          <source>International Journal of Electronic marketing and Retailing</source>
          ,
          <volume>7</volume>
          (
          <issue>4</issue>
          ), p.
          <fpage>287</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>310</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref21">
        <mixed-citation>
          21.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sturiale</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Scuderi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2018</year>
          )
          <article-title>The evaluation of green investments in urban areas: a proposal of an eco-social-green model of the city</article-title>
          .
          <source>Sustainability</source>
          ,
          <volume>10</volume>
          (
          <issue>12</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>4541</fpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref22">
        <mixed-citation>
          22.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Spielman</surname>
            <given-names>D. J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2006</year>
          )
          <article-title>A critique of innovation systems perspectives on agricultural research in developing countries</article-title>
          .
          <source>Innovation Strategy Today</source>
          ,
          <volume>2</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ), p.
          <fpage>41</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>54</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref23">
        <mixed-citation>
          23.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Tapscott</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2016</year>
          )
          <article-title>Blockchain Revolution</article-title>
          , Random House, New York, NY.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref24">
        <mixed-citation>
          24.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Timpanaro</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Foti</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Scuderi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Schippa</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Branca</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2018</year>
          )
          <article-title>New food supply chain systems based on a proximity model: The case of an alternative food network in the Catania urban area</article-title>
          .
          <source>ActaHorticulturae</source>
          ,
          <volume>1215</volume>
          , p.
          <fpage>213</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>217</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref25">
        <mixed-citation>
          25.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Weis</surname>
            .,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2007</year>
          )
          <article-title>The Global Food Economy: The Battle for the Future of Farming</article-title>
          . Ed. Zed Books.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref26">
        <mixed-citation>
          26.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Weiss C.R</surname>
          </string-name>
          . and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Wittkopp</surname>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2005</year>
          )
          <article-title>Retailer concentration and product innovation in food manufacturing</article-title>
          ,
          <source>European Review of Agricultural Economics</source>
          ,
          <volume>32</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ), p.
          <fpage>219</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>244</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref27">
        <mixed-citation>
          27.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zheng</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Z.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Xie</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Dai</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Chen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>X.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Wang</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2016</year>
          )
          <article-title>Blockchain challenges and opportunities: A survey</article-title>
          .
          <source>International Journal of Web and Grid Services</source>
          ,
          <volume>14</volume>
          (
          <issue>4</issue>
          ), p.
          <fpage>352</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>375</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>