64

Society and Security Insights № 4 2025

Research Article / Научная статья

УДК 316.334.56:172.15(571.13)

DOI: 10.14258/SSI(2025)4–04

e Contribution of Technology and Innovation

to Achieving Food Security in Algeria

Amel Mechta¹

Rabeh Belkacemi²

¹Yahia Fares University of Medea, Algeria, mechta.amel@univ-medea.dz,

https://orcid.org/0009–0002–3801–0100

²Yahia Fares University of Medea, Algeria, mechta.amel@univ-medea.dz,

https://orcid.org/0009–0009–4191–8831

Abstract. Food security is a critical issue for most governments, yet it remains diﬃcult to

achieve in many countries due to challenges such as resource scarcity, ineﬃcient distribution sys-

tems, and climate-related risks. However, the eﬀective integration of digital technology into agri-

culture may help mitigate these issues. erefore, this study aimed to examine the contribution of

technology and innovation to achieving food security in Algeria. A purposive sampling technique

was used to collect data from 125 respondents, including farmers, agricultural extension workers,

cooperatives, and policymakers. Using multiple regression analysis, the results indicated that sup-

ply chain and food distribution optimization, precision agriculture, reducing food waste, sustain-

able farming practices, and biotechnology signiﬁcantly inﬂuence food security, with supply chain

optimization and precision agriculture emerging as the strongest predictors. Ultimately, this study

provides important insights for stakeholders, highlighting the need to align technological adoption

with supportive policies and capacity-building initiatives to strengthen national food security.

Keywords: food security, digital technology, precision agriculture, supply chain optimization,

sustainable farming, Algeria

For citation: Mechta, A., Belkacem, i R. (2025). The Contribution of Technology and Innovation to

Achieving Food Security in Algeria. Society and Security Insights, 8(4), 64–82. (In Russ.). doi: 10.14258/

ssi(2025)4–04

Вклад технологий и инноваций в обеспечение

продовольственной безопасности в Алжире

Амель Мехта¹

Рабех Белкасеми²

¹ Университет Яхья Фарес, Медиа, Алжир, mechta.amel@univ-medea.dz,

https://orcid.org/0009–0002–3801–0100

² Университет Яхья Фарес, Медиа, Алжир, mechta.amel@univ-medea.dz,

https://orcid.org/0009–0009–4191–8831

Интеграция и безопасность в странах Азиатского региона

65

Аннотация. Продовольственная безопасность является одной из ключевых задач для

большинства правительств, однако во многих странах ее достижение остается затрудни-

тельным из-за таких проблем, как ограниченность ресурсов, неэффективность систем

распределения и климатические риски. Эффективная интеграция цифровых технологий

в сельское хозяйство может способствовать смягчению этих проблем. Настоящее иссле-

дование направлено на анализ вклада технологий и инноваций в обеспечение продоволь-

ственной безопасности в Алжире. Для сбора данных использовалась целевая выборка,

включающая 125 респондентов — фермеров, работников сельскохозяйственных служб,

представителей кооперативов и органов власти.

На основе множественного регрессионного анализа было установлено, что такие

факторы, как оптимизация цепочек поставок и распределения продовольствия, точное

земледелие, сокращение продовольственных потерь, устойчивые фермерские практики

и биотехнологии, оказывают значительное влияние на продовольственную безопасность.

Наибольший вклад вносят оптимизация цепочек поставок и точное земледелие, высту-

пая наиболее сильными предикторами модели. В конечном итоге исследование предлагает

важные выводы для заинтересованных сторон, подчеркивая необходимость согласования

внедрения технологий с поддерживающей политикой и инициативами по развитию по-

тенциала для укрепления национальной продовольственной безопасности.

Ключевые слова: продовольственная безопасность, цифровые технологии, точное

земледелие, оптимизация цепочек поставок, устойчивое сельское хозяйство, Алжир

Для цитирования: Мехта А., Белкасеми Р. Вклад технологий и инноваций в обеспечение

продовольственной безопасности в Алжире // Society and Security Insights. 2025. Т. 8, № 4.

С. 64–82. doi: 10.14258/ssi(2025)4–04

1. Introduction

Many developing countries continue to struggle with food insecurity, driven

by factors such as population growth, climate change, low income levels, the spread

of diseases and epidemics, and recurring droughts in certain regions (Galanakis

et al., 2021; Hassoun et al., 2023; Oh & Lu, 2023). Addressing these challenges requires

integrated agricultural policies and a strategic vision that considers economic, political,

and social dimensions (Erokhin et al., 2021). e global population is projected to reach

9 billion by 2050, with food demand expected to increase by 70% (Yu et al., 2022).

Food contamination and waste have signiﬁcantly contributed to the rising incidence

of foodborne diseases and the persistence of food insecurity in many countries worldwide

(Meliana et al., 2024). According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United

Nations, the four key principles of food security are «food availability, access, utilization,

and stability» (Erickson et al., 2021). Food security challenges moved to the forefront

of political and economic discussions during the COVID-19 pandemic, as many

countries around the world faced severe food crises (e.g., supply chain disruptions)

(Erokhin et al., 2021). Consequently, achieving food security is both an urgent necessity

and a crucial step toward reducing poverty, eradicating hunger, and fostering sustainable

development (Malec et al., 2024; Mihrete & Mihretu, 2025).

66

Society and Security Insights № 4 2025

In this digital age, the successful adoption and implementation of technological

solutions can play a vital role in enhancing the performance of the agricultural sector

and mitigating the severity of food insecurity (Mouloudj et al., 2025; Smidt & Jokonya,

2022; Were et al., 2016). e adoption of digital technologies by farmers has improved

eﬃciency, reduced negative environmental impacts, and enhanced the sustainability

of production, supply, and marketing systems (Dibbern et al., 2024; Gupta et al., 2025;

Wang et al., 2022). Pandey and Mishra (2024) argue that AI has the potential to address

«food security challenges». e beneﬁts of applying technology in agriculture extend to

improved food security, nutrition, and public health (Richter et al., 2023; Zhao et al.,

2025). Several recent studies have conﬁrmed that the adoption of digital technologies —

such as “artiﬁcial intelligence (AI), big data analytics, machine learning, cloud computing,

the Internet of ings (IoT), and blockchain”— contributes positively to achieving food

security in the agricultural sector (Galanakis et al., 2021; Gouvea et al., 2022; Hassoun et

al., 2023; Malec et al., 2024). However, in many developing countries, including Algeria,

agricultural practices remain largely traditional, and the integration of technology

into farming activities is slow, requiring signiﬁcant eﬀorts from multiple stakeholders

(Adegbaju et al., 2024; Erokhin et al., 2024). Indeed, numerous barriers hinder the

adoption of agricultural technologies in these countries, including limited resources,

inadequate infrastructure, low levels of awareness, lack of technological knowledge, and

insuﬃcient government support (Dibbern et al., 2024; Ma & Rahut, 2024).

Although numerous studies have examined the antecedents of digital technology

adoption in the agricultural sector (e.g., Dibbern et al., 2024, 2025; Erokhin et al., 2024)

and the barriers to implementing digital solutions on farms (e.g., Richter et al., 2023),

relatively few have investigated the link between the adoption of modern technological

tools and the achievement of food security, particularly in developing countries (e.g.,

Hasan et al., 2018; Oh & Lu, 2023), such as Algeria. Furthermore, Saha et al. (2025)

recommended that geographical diﬀerences be carefully considered, since agricultural

practices, climate conditions, and crop varieties vary signiﬁcantly across countries. is

implies that research ﬁndings from one context cannot be readily generalized to others.

erefore, further investigation is required to better understand the role of technology

and innovation in supporting food security across diverse settings. So, this study seeks

to address this gap by examining the impact of ﬁve dimensions of technology and

innovation — namely precision agriculture, genetic engineering and biotechnology,

sustainable farming practices, supply chain and food distribution optimization, and

food waste reduction — on food security in Algeria. e analysis is conducted from the

perspective of various stakeholders, including farmers, agricultural extension agents,

agricultural experts, cooperatives, and policymakers.

2. Literature Review and Research Hypotheses

2.1. Using digital technology to achieve food security

Pandey and Mishra (2024) report that the causes of food insecurity are multifaceted

and include insuﬃcient agricultural investment and infrastructure, climate change,

poverty and low income, market volatility, food waste, resource and technology scarcity,

Интеграция и безопасность в странах Азиатского региона

67

population growth, and conﬂicts. In this context, digital solutions can play an important

role in reducing food insecurity, as smart and digital agriculture have emerged as

contemporary models that complement or even challenge traditional agricultural

practices (Gupta et al., 2025). Digital agriculture — also referred to as «digital farming»,

«Agriculture 4.0», «smart farming», or «smart agriculture» — encompasses a wide

range of technology-driven approaches to modern farming (Dibbern et al., 2024). In

recent years, technology has accelerated the digital transformation of many sectors, and

agriculture is no exception (Richter et al., 2023). e sector has witnessed the emergence

of numerous innovative technologies — such as AI, drones, IoT, sensors, and blockchain

— that help farmers enhance the eﬃciency and eﬀectiveness of their operations, thereby

signiﬁcantly improving overall performance (Erokhin et al., 2024). Digital agriculture

is deﬁned as “the use of information and communication technologies in collecting,

generating, transmitting, storing, and analyzing data to enhance decision-making at all

stages of the agricultural value chain” (Dibbern et al., 2024, p. 1).

In the same context, Smidt and Jokonya (2022) stated that digital technologies (e.g.,

mobile platforms) enable smallholder farmers to overcome key constraints that hinder

their participation in agricultural value chains. Contemporary technologies (e.g., smart

irrigation) have the potential to reduce energy consumption in agriculture. Pandey and

Mishra(2024)emphasizethattheuseofAIenhances«predictivemodeling»andprecision

agriculture, while also facilitating the detection of crop diseases, thereby contributing

to food security. In addition to contributing to food suﬃciency, Zhao et al. (2025) argue

that agricultural technological innovation is an essential tool for promoting sustainable

development and improving population health by reducing pollution. In addition,

Wang et al. (2022) found that the implementation of blockchain technology increased

the qualiﬁcation rate of agricultural products by approximately 30% and signiﬁcantly

improved the eﬃciency of the agricultural product trading system, thereby enhancing

«economic beneﬁts».

In contrast, Dibbern et al. (2025) emphasized that the adoption of digital

agriculture in Latin American countries is hindered by several barriers, including

limited technological knowledge and digital awareness among producers, unfavorable

economic and ﬁnancial conditions, a shortage of qualiﬁed labor, the limited availability

of companies providing agricultural technology services, and inadequate infrastructure.

In Iran, Taheri et al. (2022) found that farmers’ reluctance to adopt «wireless sensor

networks» (WSNs) stemmed from concerns related to high costs, limited accessibility,

complexity of use, and doubts about data reliability. Bačiulienė et al. (2023) note that the

application of AI in the agricultural sector faces numerous social, technological, and

economic barriers, particularly within the supply chain.

2.2. Hypotheses Development

2.2.1. Precision Agriculture

Precision agriculture is «a data-driven, technology-enabled farming management

strategy that monitors, quantiﬁes, and examines the requirements of speciﬁc crops

and ﬁelds» (Saha et al., 2025, p.1). It use the advanced technologies — such as “global

68

Society and Security Insights № 4 2025

positioning systems” (GPS), “geographic information systems” (GIS), sensors, drones,

and data analytics — to monitor, analyze, and manage variability in crops and soils,

thereby optimizing resource use and improving productivity. Technologies such as AI,

drones, and IoT sensors help farmers optimize the use of resources, including water,

fertilizers, and pesticides (Meliana et al., 2024; Xu et al., 2024). Precision agriculture

aims to increase food production and improve yields, eﬃciency, and environmental

sustainability, thereby contributing to enhanced food security (Saha et al., 2025; Sanyaolu

& Sadowski, 2024). In this context, Erokhin et al. (2024) emphasized that the adoption

of digital technologies by farmers contributes to reducing water waste. Moreover,

innovations in ICT, data analytics, and machine learning can predict weather patterns

and improve yield forecasts (Gouvea et al., 2022) and improve food security (Hasan et

al., 2018; Were et al., 2016). Malec et al. (2024) found that «investments in agricultural

innovation» signiﬁcantly enhance food security by improving food productivity. Richter

et al. (2023) highlighted that achieving food security is one of the key drivers behind

the adoption of modern agricultural technologies. Several studies have indicated that

precision agriculture, which relies on information technology and innovation, has the

potential to contribute to food security (e.g., Erickson et al., 2021; Kabato et al., 2025;

Ncube et al., 2018; Raimi et al., 2021; Xu et al., 2024). Accordingly, we propose the

following hypothesis:

H1: Precision agriculture has a positive inﬂuence on achieving food security.

2.2.2. Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology

Genetic engineering and biotechnology refer to the scientiﬁc techniques that

manipulate an organism’s DNA to modify, improve, or introduce traits for speciﬁc

purposes. Biotechnology can contribute to food security by promoting sustainable

agriculture in developing countries (Serageldin, 1999). In their review, Areche et al.

(2023) emphasize that biotechnology and genetic engineering techniques can increase

crop yields and improve food quality, thereby contributing to greater food abundance.

Demirel et al. (2024) argue that sustainable biotechnology plays an important role in

promoting both food safety and food security. Meliana et al. (2024) emphasized the

urgent need for «smarter food tracking systems» and highlighted that agricultural

biosensors can support early detection and routine monitoring of plant diseases and

stress. Many studies have conﬁrmed that the implementation of genetic engineering and

biotechnology solutions plays an important role in improving crops and increasing food

productivity, which contributes to food security (Adegbaju et al., 2024; Areche et al.,

2023; De Souza & Bonciu, 2022; Kaya, 2025; Ouyang et al., 2017; Serageldin, 1999). Based

on the above discussion, we propose the following hypothesis:

H2: Genetic engineering and biotechnology have a positive inﬂuence on achieving

food security.

2.2.3. Sustainable Farming Practices

Sustainable farming practices refer to agricultural methods that aim to meet

current food needs while preserving the environment, maintaining soil fertility,

Интеграция и безопасность в странах Азиатского региона

69

conserving water, and protecting biodiversity for future generations (Demirel et al.,

2024). ese practices oﬅen include crop rotation, organic farming, vertical farming,

conservation tillage, integrated pest management, agroforestry, and the use of renewable

resources (Erokhin et al., 2021). WSNs represent environmentally friendly technologies

that support timely, eﬃcient, and cost-eﬀective farm production and management

(Taheri et al., 2022). In their review, Capato et al. (2025) argue that climate-smart

agricultural practices — such as «precision agriculture», «regenerative agriculture», and

«agroforestry» — constitute sustainable approaches that enhance food security while

mitigating pollution. Ecological agriculture plays a vital role in sustaining ecosystems

and ensuring food security (Madsen et al., 2021; Mazumder et al., 2023). In addition,

Oh and Lu (2023) highlighted that vertical farming, as «a sustainable farming practice»,

can play a signiﬁcant role in addressing global food security challenges, particularly in

African and Asian countries. Petrovics and Giezen (2022) argued that vertical farming

holds great potential for ensuring long-term food security. Accordingly, the following

hypothesis is proposed:

H3: Sustainable farming practices have a positive inﬂuence on achieving food

security.

2.2.4. Supply Chain & Food Distribution Optimization

e loss of nearly one-third of food at various stages of the supply chain represents

one of the most serious challenges facing the global food system (Areche et al., 2023).

Food safety is a critical dimension of food security, as smart tracking across the supply

chain is essential to ensuring it (Yu et al., 2022). Moreover, food safety is closely linked

to consumer health and, by extension, to the overall well-being of society. Furthermore,

emerging technological innovations, such as «Food Traceability 4.0», are enhancing

digital food traceability, helping to prevent food fraud, minimize food waste, and provide

reliable information to consumers (Hassoun et al., 2024). However, many existing food

traceability systems face challenges, as food safety incidents and recalls have undermined

consumer trust, caused economic losses, and increased pressure on food safety authorities

(Bidyalakshmi et al., 2025; Dhal & Kar, 2025; Yu et al., 2022). In addition, agri-food delivery

applications can help small farmers and producers reach customers more eﬀectively, lower

costs, and promote their agricultural products (Galanakis et al., 2021; Mouloudj et al.,

2025). Galanakis et al. (2021) argued that digital technologies, particularly Industry 4.0,

have the potential to transform food supply chains and signiﬁcantly enhance agri-food

productivity. Dhal and Kar (2024) emphasize that AI technologies improve supply chain

performance, enhance food preservation, and reduce spoilage, thereby supporting food

security. Hence, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H4: Supply chain and food distribution optimization have a positive inﬂuence on

achieving food security.

2.2.5. Reducing Food Waste

Food waste refers to the disposal of excess food resulting from overpurchasing,

uneaten meals, spoilage, or expiration due to prolonged storage. Consequently, food

70

Society and Security Insights № 4 2025

waste and loss are closely associated with food insecurity and heightened environmental

pollution (Meliana et al., 2024; Pandey & Mishra, 2024). Innovations such as smart

packaging and advanced traceability systems are expected to enhance food safety and

availability, strengthen food supply chains, and reduce food waste (Galanakis et al., 2021;

Hassoun et al., 2024; Pandey & Mishra, 2024). Lai et al. (2022) argued that wasted food

could be redirected to signiﬁcantly reduce food insecurity and address food sustainability

challenges. Manzoor et al. (2024) pointed out that reducing food waste improves the

eﬃciency of the food supply system and enhances food security. In the some context,

several studies have linked food waste to food security, highlighting that reducing waste

signiﬁcantly enhances food security (Lai et al., 2022; Manzoor et al., 2024; Sarangi et al.,

2024; Wani et al., 2024). Accordingly, we propose the following hypothesis:

H5: Reducing food waste has a positive inﬂuence on achieving food security.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Measurement Tool Development

A structured questionnaire was employed to collect the primary data for this study.

e instrument consisted of two main sections. e ﬁrst section gathered demographic

information, including gender, age, educational level, and occupation. e second section

comprised items designed to measure the study’s constructs, which were adapted from

established scales in the literature. Speciﬁcally, the measurement scales were developed

as follows: Precision agriculture items were drawn from Erickson and Fausti (2021) and

Ncube et al. (2018). Genetic engineering and biotechnology items were adapted from

De Souza and Bonciu (2022) and Areche et al. (2023). Sustainable farming practices items

were drawn from Erokhin et al. (2024). Supply chain and food distribution optimization

items were drawn from Hassoun et al. (2024) and Smidt and Jokonya (2022). Reducing food

waste was measured using items adapted from Lai et al. (2022). Achieving food security

items were developed based on Demirel et al. (2024) and Erokhin et al. (2021).

To ensure content validity, two academic experts in agricultural technology

reviewed the questionnaire, and their feedback was incorporated to reﬁne some items.

e instrument was initially prepared in English and subsequently translated into Arabic

to enhance respondents’ understanding. A pilot test with 15 respondents was conducted

to verify clarity and reliability, leading to minor modiﬁcations. Table 1 presents the ﬁnal

measurement items used in the study.

Table 1

Measurement items

Таблица 1

Измеряемые параметры

Constructs

Statements

PA1: e use of precision agriculture technologies can optimize

resources such as water, fertilizers, and pesticides.

PA2: Precision agriculture can improve crop yields and farm

productivity.

Precision Agriculture

(PA)

Интеграция и безопасность в странах Азиатского региона

71

End of Table 1

Constructs

Statements

Precision Agriculture

(PA)

PA3: Precision agriculture can help farmers adapt to changing climate

conditions

GEB1: e use of improved crop varieties through biotechnology can

increase agricultural productivity.

Genetic Engineering & GEB2: Genetic engineering can enhance the nutritional value of food

Biotechnology (GEB) products.

GEB3: Biotechnology can help crops resist pests, diseases, and harsh

climate conditions

SFP1: Sustainable farming practices can improve soil fertility and

protect natural resources.

Sustainable Farming

Practices (SFP)

SFP2: Sustainable farming methods can reduce environmental

damage.

SFP3: Sustainable farming can contribute to long-term food

production

SCFDO1: Improved supply chain systems can reduce post-harvest

Supply Chain &

Food Distribution

Optimization

(SCFDO)

food losses.

SCFDO2: e use of digital platforms can make food distribution

more eﬃcient and transparent.

SCFDO3: Optimizing food distribution can increase the availability

of food in local markets

RFW1: Better storage and packaging technologies can reduce food

waste.

Reducing Food Waste

(RFW)

RFW2: Food waste reduction initiatives can improve food availability

for communities.

RFW3: Reducing food waste can make food more aﬀordable for

households

FS1: e use of agricultural technologies and innovations can increase

the availability of food.

Achieving Food

Security (FS)

FS2: e use of agricultural technologies can improve access to

aﬀordable food.

FS3: e use of agricultural innovations can make food systems more

resilient and stable

3.2. Participants and Procedure

e study population consisted of various stakeholders in northern Algeria,

including farmers, agricultural extension agents, agricultural experts, cooperatives,

and policymakers. Given the absence of a comprehensive sampling frame, a purposive

sampling method was adopted. A total of 180 questionnaires were distributed in person

at workplaces, including farms, between May and July 2025. Prior to participation,

respondents were informed about the objectives of the study and were assured

of conﬁdentiality and voluntary participation. Out of the distributed questionnaires,

133 responses were received. Aﬅer screening for completeness, 12 responses were

excluded due to missing data, leaving 125 valid responses for analysis.

72

Society and Security Insights № 4 2025

4. Results

4.1. Sample Characteristics

Table 2 presents the demographic characteristics of the respondents (N = 125).

e sample is predominantly male (89.6%), with only a small proportion of female

participants (10.4%), reﬂecting the male-dominated nature of agricultural activities in

the study context. In terms of age, the majority of respondents fall within the 41–50

age group (36%), followed by those aged 31–40 (25.6%). Educational background shows

a fairly balanced distribution, with 39.2% having a high school education or less, while

34.4% hold a bachelor’s degree and 26.4% possess a master’s degree or higher. Regarding

occupation, farmers constitute the largest share (52%), followed by agricultural extension

agents (16.8%) and other stakeholders such as cooperatives, agricultural engineers,

policymakers, and experts. is distribution highlights that the sample captures

a diverse range of perspectives from key actors directly and indirectly involved in food

security.

Table 2

Demographic proﬁle (N = 125)

Таблица 2

Демографический профиль (N = 125)

Demographic proﬁle

Gender

Categories

n

112

13

21

32

45

27

49

43

33

65

21

13

14

05

07

%

Male

Female

89.60

10.40

16.80

25.60

36.00

21.60

39.20

34.40

26.40

52.00

16.80

10.40

11.20

04.00

05.60

18–30 years

31–40 years

41–50 years

> 50 years

High school or less

Bachelor’s degree

Master’s degree or above

Farmers

Agricultural extension agents

Cooperatives

Agricultural Engineer/Guide

Policymakers

Agricultural experts

Age

Educational level

Occupation

4.2. Descriptive Statistics

Table 3 reports the descriptive statistics, reliability coeﬃcients, and normality

measures for the study constructs. e mean values range from 3.37 (supply chain & food

distribution optimization) to 3.99 (food security), suggesting that respondents generally

hold moderately positive perceptions toward the role of technology and innovation in

advancing food security. Standard deviations remain below 1 for all constructs, indicating

relatively consistent responses among participants. e Cronbach’s alpha values range

Интеграция и безопасность в странах Азиатского региона

73

between 0.776 for reducing food waste and 0.945 for genetic engineering & biotechnology,

all exceeding the recommended threshold of 0.70, which conﬁrms strong internal

consistency and reliability of the measurement scales (Henseler et al., 2015). Skewness

and kurtosis values fall within acceptable ranges ( 2 and 7 respectively), supporting the

assumption of normality in the data distribution (Erokhin et al., 2024).

Table 3

Descriptive statistics and Cronbach’s alphas

Таблица 3

Описательная статистика и коэффициенты альфа Кронбаха

Constructs

Precision Agriculture

GEB

Mean

3.842

3.576

Std. Dev.

0.753

0.751

CA

0.867

0.945

Skewness

–1.126

–1.391

Kurtosis

1.471

2.212

Sustainable Farming Practices

(SFP)

3.704

0.784

0.920

–1.480

2.391

SCFDO

Reducing Food Waste (RFW)

Achieving Food Security (FS)

3.373

3.829

3.989

0.671

0.623

0.603

0.941

0.776

0.780

–0.534

–0.881

–0.898

–0.281

0.950

0.858

Note: Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology (GEB); Supply Chain & Food Distribution Optimization (SCFDO);

Cronbach’s Alphas (CA)

Table 4 presents the correlation matrix among the study constructs. All predictors

demonstrate strong and statistically signiﬁcant positive correlations with food security,

indicating that advancements in these technological and innovative practices are closely

associated with improved food security outcomes. Precision agriculture (r = 0.762)

shows the strongest correlation, underscoring its central role in enhancing eﬃciency and

productivity. Sustainable farming practices (r = 0.723) and Reducing Food Waste (r = 0.718)

also exhibit strong associations, highlighting their importance in building sustainable and

resilient food systems. Supply chain and food distribution optimization (r = 0.707) and

genetic engineering & biotechnology (r = 0.636) are likewise positively related, suggesting

their contributions to strengthening availability and accessibility within the food system.

Overall, the correlation results conﬁrm that all ﬁve predictors are relevant drivers of food

security, supporting their inclusion in the analytical model.

Table 4

Correlation matrix

Таблица 4

Корреляционная матрица

Constructs

1. Precision Agriculture (PA)

2. GEB

3. Sustainable Farming Practices

(SFP)

PA

1

GEB

SFP

1

SCFDO

RFW

0.573^**

1

0.806^**

0.633^**

74

Society and Security Insights № 4 2025

End of Table 4

Constructs

PA

GEB

SFP

SCFDO

1

RFW

4. SCFDO

0.650^**

0.723^**

0.762^**

0.517^**

0.594^**

0.636^**

0.555^**

0.649^**

0.723^**

5. Reducing Food Waste (RFW)

6. Achieving Food Security (FS)

0.648^**

1

0.707^**

0.718^**

Note: Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology (GEB); Supply Chain & Food Distribution Optimization (SCFDO)

4.3. Testing Hypotheses

Table 5 presents the multiple regression analysis results, examining the inﬂuence

of the ﬁve predictors on achieving food security. e model is statistically signiﬁcant

(F = 59.524, p < 0.001) and explains 70.2% of the variance in achieving food security,

indicating strong explanatory power. Among the predictors, supply chain and food

distribution optimization (β = 0.241, p < 0.001) emerges as the most inﬂuential factor,

followed by precision agriculture (β = 0.187, p = 0.016), reducing food waste (β = 0.163,

p = 0.033), sustainable farming practices (β = 0.140, p = 0.043), and genetic engineering &

biotechnology (β = 0.119, p = 0.029). All predictors are statistically signiﬁcant, conﬁrming

their meaningful contribution to food security. Furthermore, tolerance values and

«variance inﬂation factor» (VIF) scores indicate no multicollinearity concerns, ensuring

the robustness of the results (Erokhin et al., 2024).

Table 5

Multiple regression scores

Таблица 5

Результаты множественной регрессии

Constructs

(Constant)

Precision Agriculture

GEB

β

t-value

5.877

2.439

2.208

Sig.

Tolerance

VIF

1.130

0.187

0.119

0.000

0.016

0.029

0.261

0.530

3.831

1.886

Sustainable Farming Practices

(SFP)

0.140

2.048

0.043

0.305

3.282

SCFDO

0.241

0.163

3.867

2.153

0.000

0.033

0.500

0.392

1.999

2.553

Reducing Food Waste (RFW)

F = 59.524; Adjusted R²= 0.702

Note: Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology (GEB); Supply Chain & Food Distribution Optimization (SCFDO)

ese ﬁndings underscore the multidimensional role of technology and innovation

in driving food security, with supply chain optimization and precision agriculture

standing out as particularly critical drivers.

5. Discussions

Our results conﬁrm that precision agriculture is one of the most signiﬁcant

contributors to achieving food security. is ﬁnding is consistent with previous studies,

Интеграция и безопасность в странах Азиатского региона

75

which have highlighted the potential of precision agriculture to safeguard food security

(e.g., Erickson et al., 2021; Hasan et al., 2018; Ncube et al., 2018; Raimi et al., 2021;

Richter et al., 2023; Saha et al., 2025; Xu et al., 2024; Were et al., 2016). ese results

suggest that precision agriculture can improve productivity, reduce costs, and enhance

food availability through the use of digital technology and innovation (Sanyaolu &

Sadowski, 2024). Smidt and Jokonya (2022) highlighted that the adoption of agricultural

technologies not only supports food security but also enables farmers to increase

their income and contributes to poverty reduction. Precision agriculture can play an

important role in «increase productivity, improve resource allocation for inputs such

as pesticides, fertilizers, water, feed, and labor, provide for more stable production, and

reduce agricultural production’s environmental eﬀect» (Erickson et al., 2021, p. 4455).

Furthermore, Xu et al. (2024) argue that precision agriculture contributes to food safety

by “minimizing reliance on chemical fertilizers and pesticides, which are associated

with various health and environmental concerns.”

Moreover, our results demonstrate that genetic engineering and biotechnology

can play a signiﬁcant role in ensuring food security. Despite some criticism, genetic

engineering and biotechnology are capable of improving both the quantity and quality

of agricultural crops, thereby enhancing the performance of the agricultural sector and

strengthening food security. ese ﬁndings align with numerous previous studies that

have highlighted the potential of genetic engineering and biotechnology in addressing

food security (Areche et al., 2023; De Souza & Bonciu, 2022; Demirel et al., 2024; Kaya,

2025; Ouyang et al., 2017). In this context, Adegbaju et al. (2024) emphasize that «genome

editing technology», as a component of biotechnology, can improve crops because of its

cost-eﬀectiveness and ease of use. Kaya (2025) argues that innovations in agricultural

engineering are an important means of achieving food security and promoting health.

Moreover, our results conﬁrm that optimizing supply chains and food distribution

plays a critical role in achieving food security. is ﬁnding is consistent with prior

studies, which demonstrate that eﬃcient supply chain systems and improved distribution

mechanisms are essential for ensuring stable food access (Bidyalakshmi et al., 2025;

Dhal & Kar, 2024; Dhal & Kar, 2025; Pandey & Mishra, 2024). Pandey and Mishra (2024)

emphasizethatAItechnologiescanenhancesupplychaineﬃciency,storagemanagement,

transportation systems, and food quality assurance — factors that directly inﬂuence

the reliability of food availability. Likewise, Dhal and Kar (2024) indicate that AI-based

predictive models improve agricultural productivity, supply chain management, and

food storage, thereby strengthening resilience against disruptions and contributing to

long-term food security. In addition, Dhal and Kar (2025) note that the implementation

of AI technology contributes to food quality and safety by enabling contamination

detection, enhancing traceability, and supporting predictive maintenance.

In addition, the empirical results indicate that sustainable agricultural practices

make a signiﬁcant contribution to achieving food security. ese ﬁndings are consistent

with previous studies showing that sustainable agricultural practices have the potential to

mitigate food security challenges (e.g., Gupta et al., 2025; Madsen et al., 2021; Mazumder

et al., 2023; Mihrete & Mihretu, 2025; Oh & Lu, 2023; Pandey & Mishra, 2024; Petrovics

76

Society and Security Insights № 4 2025

& Giezen, 2022). Environmentally friendly farming behaviors — particularly those that

employ technology to reduce the waste of water, seeds, fertilizers, and other resources

— represent an important pathway toward this goal. For instance, hydroponics and

vertical farming enable food production in urban areas, reducing dependence on arable

land, while hydroponics and aeroponics provide resource-eﬃcient agricultural solutions

(Dibbern et al., 2024). Kabato et al. (2025) reveal that unsustainable agricultural practices

decrease yields and exacerbate food insecurity. Similarly, Ma and Rahut (2024) argue

that sustainable agriculture — particularly climate-smart agriculture — constitutes

a pivotal approach to achieving food security, reducing poverty, and addressing the

challenges of climate change, thereby contributing to the realization of the “United

Nations Sustainable Development Goals”. Moreover, education, awareness, and digital

literacy are expected to play a crucial role in encouraging farmers to adopt sustainable

practices and technologies (Bačiulienė et al., 2023).

Furthermore, our results conﬁrm that reducing food waste contributes directly to

achieving food security. In this regard, minimizing food waste is an eﬀective way to

address food security challenges and ensure greater food availability for others. Even

small reductions in waste can help meet a portion of food needs, thereby strengthening

food security. For this reason, initiatives to reduce food waste — no matter how minor —

should not be underestimated. In Algeria, for example, households waste large amounts

of bread, particularly during Ramadan. is ﬁnding aligns with numerous studies that

emphasizethecriticalroleoffoodwastereductioninovercomingfoodsecuritychallenges

(e.g., Lai et al., 2022; Manzoor et al., 2024; Sarangi et al., 2024; Wani et al., 2024). Pandey

and Mishra (2024) emphasize that AI technology helps reduce food loss and waste while

supporting smart inventory management. e responsibility for reducing food waste

rests with all stakeholders, including authorities, farmers, producers, retailers, and

consumers (Meliana et al., 2024). Governments should enact stronger legislation and

integrate technology to ensure food safety, while consumers must be made aware of the

risks and consequences of food waste. Farmers and food producers can also contribute

by designing packaging and containers that are more suitable for both quantity and

quality preservation (Erokhin et al., 2021).

6. Conclusions

All countries, without exception, strive to achieve food security. Governments are

under increasing pressure due to a number of factors, including water scarcity, economic

and social crises, the spread of epidemics and diseases, and the demand to implement

sustainable policies. Under these circumstances, technology and innovation in agriculture

can help address some of the challenges threatening food security (Zhao et al., 2025).

Accordingly, this study investigated the role of integrating digital technology into

various agricultural activities to achieve food security. e ﬁndings revealed that digital

technology tools and innovation play a pivotal role in enhancing food security through

diverse and complementary pathways. Speciﬁcally, improvements in the food supply chain

and distribution, precision agriculture, food waste reduction, sustainable agricultural

practices, genetic engineering, and biotechnology all contribute meaningfully to food

Интеграция и безопасность в странах Азиатского региона

77

security. Among these, supply chain optimization and precision agriculture emerged as

particularly inﬂuential, underscoring the importance of eﬃcient agricultural production

in the early stages and eﬀective distribution and management in later stages.

e study further highlights the need to integrate technological innovation with

supportive policies that promote food suﬃciency and strengthen agricultural capacity

among stakeholders. Farmers, agricultural extension workers, cooperatives, and

policymakers must collaborate to overcome barriers such as limited knowledge, resource

constraints, and infrastructure gaps. By fostering innovation systems and encouraging

sustainable practices, stakeholders can collectively move closer to the overarching

goal of food security. In conclusion, this research emphasizes that food security in the

modern era cannot be achieved through traditional approaches alone; rather, it requires

the strategic integration of agricultural technologies and innovation-driven solutions.

6.1. Managerial Implications

e results of this study provide several practical insights for managers,

policymakers, and stakeholders in the agricultural sector. First, the strong impact of

improving the food supply chain and distribution on food security highlights the need

to invest in digital platforms, logistics infrastructure, and tracking systems that reduce

bottlenecks and ineﬃciencies in food delivery. In this context, the smart management of

storage centers and the digitalization of distribution networks can minimize losses and

ensure that food reaches markets and consumers at the right time and place, thereby

reducing both scarcity and waste.

Second, the ﬁndings show that precision agriculture and reducing food waste are

also key factors in achieving food security. For farm and cooperative managers, this

underscores the importance of adopting data-driven technologies — such as artiﬁcial

intelligence, sensors, drones, and smart irrigation systems — to optimize resource

use and increase yields. At the same time, food industry managers should implement

strategies to minimize waste across production, storage, and retail stages. is dual

approach not only enhances sustainability but also creates opportunities for cost savings

and strengthens consumer conﬁdence in food systems.

Finally,thepositiveinﬂuenceofsustainableagriculturalpracticesandbiotechnology

underscorestheneedforknowledgesharingandagriculturalcapacitybuilding.Managers

of agricultural organizations, extension services, and cooperatives should therefore

prioritize training programs that improve farmers’ awareness, knowledge, and skills

in safely applying sustainable technologies and adopting biotechnology innovations

(De Souza & Bonciu, 2022; Erokhin et al., 2021). By aligning management practices

with technological advancements, organizations can play a proactive role in achieving

food security while simultaneously contributing to broader goals of environmental

sustainability and rural development.

6.2. Limitations and Future Research

While this study provides useful insights into how technology and innovation

contribute to food security, it is not without limitations. First, the sample size was

78

Society and Security Insights № 4 2025

limited to 125 respondents. Although the sample included a diverse group of farmers,

agricultural extension workers, cooperatives, and policymakers, it may not fully

represent the diversity of all stakeholders in the food system. Future research could

therefore broaden the scope to include more regions and a wider range of actors, such

as private sector food distributors, agri-tech startups, and consumer associations, to

develop a more comprehensive understanding of how technology and innovation can

advance food security through multi-stakeholder engagement.

Second, the reliance on a questionnaire presents another limitation, as responses

may have been inﬂuenced by participants’ perceptions, knowledge, or biases rather than

actual technology adoption practices. Future studies could complement survey data

with ﬁeld observations, case studies, or secondary data on agricultural production and

distribution outcomes in Algeria. Moreover, while the study identiﬁes the important role

of various technologies, it does not examine in depth the contextual barriers — such as

infrastructure challenges, ﬁnancial constraints, or digital illiteracy — that may hinder

technology adoption. Further research could investigate these structural and behavioral

obstacles to provide more targeted recommendations for strengthening technology-

based food security strategies.

Finally, the study was conducted within the Algerian context, which is

characterized by distinct socioeconomic and agricultural conditions. While this oﬀers

valuable localized insights, it may also limit the generalizability of the ﬁndings to other

countries in the region. Future research could therefore undertake comparative studies

across North African countries or the broader Middle East and North Africa region to

explore both the commonalities and diﬀerences in how innovation contributes to food

security, thereby providing regional perspectives and strategies to support integration

and collaboration in achieving food security.

REFERENCES

Adegbaju, M. S., Ajose, T., Adegbaju, I. E., Omosebi, T., Ajenifujah-Solebo, S. O.,

Falana, O. Y., … & Akinbo, O. (2024). Genetic engineering and genome editing tech-

nologies as catalyst for Africa’s food security: the case of plant biotechnology in Nige-

ria. Frontiers in Genome Editing, 6, 1398813. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgeed.2024.1398813

Areche, F., Gondal, A., Sumarriva-Bustinza, L., Zela-Payi, N., Sumarriva-Hustinza, I.,

Oscanoa-León, R., … & Gamarra, F. B. L. (2023). Role of biotechnology in food secu-

rity: A review. SABRAO Journal of Breeding and Genetics, 55(5), 1496–1509. http://doi.

org/10.54910/sabrao2023.55.5.5

Bačiulienė, V., Bilan, Y., Navickas, V., & Civín, L. (2023). e aspects of artiﬁcial intelli-

gence in diﬀerent phases of the food value and supply chain. Foods, 12(8), 1654. https://

doi.org/10.3390/foods12081654

Bidyalakshmi, T., Jyoti, B., Mansuri, S. M., Srivastava, A., Mohapatra, D., Kalnar, Y. B.,

… & Indore, N. (2025). Application of artiﬁcial intelligence in food processing: Current

status and future prospects. Food Engineering Reviews, 17, 27–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/

s12393–024–09386–2

Интеграция и безопасность в странах Азиатского региона

79

Dhal, S. B., & Kar, D. (2024). Transforming Agricultural Productivity with AI-Driven

Forecasting: Innovations in Food Security and Supply Chain Optimization. Forecasting,

6(4), 925–951. https://doi.org/10.3390/forecast6040046

Dhal, S. B., & Kar, D. (2025). Leveraging artiﬁcial intelligence and advanced food pro-

cessing techniques for enhanced food safety, quality, and security: a comprehensive re-

view. Discover Applied Sciences, 7(1), 75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452–025–06472-w

De Souza, C. P., & Bonciu, E. (2022). Progress in genomics and biotechnology, the key

to ensuring food security. Scientiﬁc Papers Series Management, Economic Engineering in

Agriculture and Rural Development, 22(1), 149–157.

Demirel, Ö., Güneş, H., & Can, C. (2024). Sustainable and modern bio-based technolo-

gies: new approachs to food safety and security. Environment, Development and Sustain-

ability, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668–024–04683–6

Dibbern, T., Romani, L., & Massruhá, S. M. F. S. (2024). Main drivers and barriers to the

adoption of digital agriculture technologies. Smart Agricultural Technology, 8, 100459.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atech.2024.100459

Dibbern, T., Romani, L., & Massruhá, S. (2025). Drivers and barriers to digital agri-

culture adoption: A mixed-methods analysis of challenges and opportunities in Latin

American. Sustainability, 17(8), 3676. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17083676

Erickson, B., & Fausti, S. W. (2021). e role of precision agriculture in food security.

Agronomy Journal, 113(6), 4455–4462. https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.20919

Erokhin, V., Mouloudj, K., Bouarar, A. C., Mouloudj, S., & Gao, T. (2024). Investigating

farmers’ intentions to reduce water waste through water-smart farming technologies.

Sustainability, 16(11), 4638. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16114638

Erokhin, V., Tianming, G., & Andrei, J. V. (2021). Shiﬅing Patterns of Agricultural Trade:

e Protectionism Outbreak and Food Security. Springer Singapore.

Galanakis, C. M., Rizou, M., Aldawoud, T. M., Ucak, I., & Rowan, N. J. (2021). Inno-

vations and technology disruptions in the food sector within the COVID-19 pandemic

and post-lockdown era. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 110, 193–200. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.tifs.2021.02.002

Gouvea, R., Kapelianis, D., Li, S., & Terra, B. (2022). Innovation, ICT & food security.

Global Food Security, 35, 100653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2022.100653

Gupta, D. K., Pagani, A., Zamboni, P., & Singh, A. K. (2024). AI-powered revolution

in plant sciences: advancements, applications, and challenges for sustainable agricul-

ture and food security. Exploration of Foods and Foodomics, 2(5), 443–459. https://doi.

org/10.37349/eﬀ.2024.00045

Hasan, M. K., Desiere, S., D’Haese, M., & Kumar, L. (2018). Impact of climate-smart ag-

riculture adoption on the food security of coastal farmers in Bangladesh. Food Security,

10(4), 1073–1088. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571–018–0824–1

Hassoun, A., Aït-Kaddour, A., Abu-Mahfouz, A. M., Rathod, N. B., Bader, F.,

Barba, F. J., … & Regenstein, J. (2023). e fourth industrial revolution in the food in-

dustry. Part I: Industry 4.0 technologies. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition,

63(23), 6547–6563. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2022.2034735

80

Society and Security Insights № 4 2025

Hassoun, A., Alhaj Abdullah, N., Aït-Kaddour, A., Ghellam, M., Beşir, A., Zannou, O.,

… Regenstein, J. M. (2024). Food traceability 4.0 as part of the fourth industrial revolu-

tion: Key enabling technologies. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 64(3),

873–889. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2022.2110033

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discrimi-

nant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of

Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747–014–0403–8

Kabato, W., Getnet, G. T., Sinore, T., Nemeth, A., & Molnár, Z. (2025). Towards climate-

smart agriculture: Strategies for sustainable agricultural production, food security,

and greenhouse gas reduction. Agronomy, 15(3), 565. https://doi.org/10.3390/agrono-

my15030565

Kaya, C. (2025). Plant metabolic engineering for enhanced nutrition and food secu-

rity during climate uncertainty. Food and Energy Security, 14(1), e70060. https://doi.

org/10.1002/fes3.70060

Lai, M., Rangan, A., & Grech, A. (2022). Enablers and barriers of harnessing food waste

to address food insecurity: A scoping review. Nutrition Reviews, 80(8), 1836–1855.

https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuac012

Ma, W., & Rahut, D. B. (2024). Climate-smart agriculture: adoption, impacts, and im-

plications for sustainable development. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global

Change, 29(5), 44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027–024–10139-z

Madsen, S., Bezner Kerr, R., LaDue, N., Luginaah, I., Dzanja, C., Dakishoni, L., … &

Hickey, C. (2021). Explaining the impact of agroecology on farm-level transitions to

food security in Malawi. Food Security, 13(4), 933–954. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571–

021–01165–9

Malec, K., Rojík, S., Maitah, M., Abdu, M., & Abdullahi, K. T. (2024). Impact of in-

vestments in agricultural innovation on food security in sub-Saharan Africa. Heliyon,

10(16), e35913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e35913

Manzoor, S., Fayaz, U., Dar, A. H., Dash, K. K., Shams, R., Bashir, I., … & Abdi, G. (2024).

Sustainable development goals through reducing food loss and food waste: A compre-

hensive review. Future Foods, 9, 100362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fufo.2024.100362

Mazumder, M. S. U., Ali, M. S., Moonmoon, M., & Toshi, F. Z. (2023). Eﬀects of con-

servation farming practices on agro-ecosystem services for sustainable food security in

Bangladesh. Food Security, 15(3), 673–692. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571–023–01359–3

Meliana, C., Liu, J., Show, P. L., & Low, S. S. (2024). Biosensor in smart food traceabili-

ty system for food safety and security. Bioengineered, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2165

5979.2024.2310908

Mihrete, T. B., & Mihretu, F. B. (2025). Crop diversiﬁcation for ensuring sustainable ag-

riculture, risk management and food security. Global Challenges, 9(2), 2400267. https://

doi.org/10.1002/gch2.202400267

Mouloudj, K., Aprile, M. C., Bouarar, A. C., Njoku, A., Evans, M. A., Oanh, L. V. L.,

Asanza, D. M., & Mouloudj, S. (2025). Investigating antecedents of intention to use green

agri-food delivery apps: Merging TPB with trust and electronic word of mouth. Sustain-

ability, 17(8), 3717. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17083717

Интеграция и безопасность в странах Азиатского региона

81

Ncube, B., Mupangwa, W., & French, A. (2018). Precision Agriculture and Food Securi-

ty in Africa. In: Mensah, P., Katerere, D., Hachigonta, S., Roodt, A. (eds.) Systems Anal-

ysis Approach for Complex Global Challenges (pp. 159–178). Springer, Cham. https://doi.

org/10.1007/978–3–319–71486–8_9

Oh, S., & Lu, C. (2023). Vertical farming — smart urban agriculture for enhancing re-

silience and sustainability in food security. e Journal of Horticultural Science and Bio-

technology, 98(2), 133–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/14620316.2022.2141666

Ouyang, B., Gu, X., & Holford, P. (2017). Plant genetic engineering and biotechnology:

a sustainable solution for future food security and industry. Plant Growth Regulation,

83(2), 171–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10725–017–0300–5

Pandey, D. K., & Mishra, R. (2024). Towards sustainable agriculture: Harnessing AI

for global food security. Artiﬁcial Intelligence in Agriculture, 12, 72–84. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.aiia.2024.04.003

Petrovics, D., & Giezen, M. (2022). Planning for sustainable urban food systems: An

analysis of the up-scaling potential of vertical farming. Journal of Environmental Plan-

ning and Management, 65(5), 785–808. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2021.1903404

Raimi, L., Panait, M., Sule, R. (2021). Leveraging Precision Agriculture for Sustainable

Food Security in Sub-Saharan Africa: A eoretical Discourse. In: Erokhin, V., Tian-

ming, G., Andrei, J.V. (Eds.) Shiﬅing Patterns of Agricultural Trade (pp. 491–509). Spring-

er, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978–981–16–3260–0_21

Richter, I., Neef, N. E., Moghayedi, A., Owoade, F. M., Kapanji-Kakoma, K., Sheena, F.,

& Ewon, K. (2023). Willing to be the change: Perceived drivers and barriers to participa-

tion in urban smart farming projects. Journal of Urban Aﬀairs, 47(5), 1540–1558. https://

doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2023.2232060

Saha, S., Kucher, O.D., Utkina, A.O., & Rebouh, N.Y. (2025). Precision agriculture for

improving crop yield predictions: a literature review. Frontiers in Agronomy, 7, 1566201.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fagro.2025.1566201

Sanyaolu, M., & Sadowski, A. (2024). e role of precision agriculture technologies in

enhancing sustainable agriculture. Sustainability, 16(15), 6668. https://doi.org/10.3390/

su16156668

Sarangi, P. K., Pal, P., Singh, A. K., Sahoo, U. K., & Prus, P. (2024). Food waste to food se-

curity: Transition from bioresources to sustainability. Resources, 13(12), 164. https://doi.

org/10.3390/resources13120164

Serageldin, I. (1999). Biotechnology and food security in the 21^stcentury. Science,

285(5426), 387–389. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.285.5426.387

Smidt, H. J., & Jokonya, O. (2022). Factors aﬀecting digital technology adoption by small-

scale farmers in agriculture value chains (AVCs) in South Africa. Information Technolo-

gy for Development, 28(3), 558–584. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2021.1975256

Taheri, F., D’Haese, M., Fiems, D., & Azadi, H. (2022). Facts and fears that limit dig-

ital transformation in farming: Exploring barriers to the outreach of wireless sensor

networks in Southwest Iran. Plos One, 17(12), e0279009. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.

pone.0279009

82

Society and Security Insights № 4 2025

Wang, L., Qi, C., Jiang, P., & Xiang, S. (2022). e Impact of Blockchain application on

the qualiﬁcation rate and circulation eﬃciency of agricultural products: A simulation

analysis with agent-based modelling. International Journal of Environmental Research

and Public Health, 19(13), 7686. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19137686

Wani, N. R., Rather, R. A., Farooq, A., Padder, S. A., Baba, T. R., Sharma, S., … & Ara,

S. (2024). New insights in food security and environmental sustainability through waste

food management. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 31(12), 17835–17857.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356–023–26462-y

Were, K., Gelaw, A.M., & Singh, B.R. (2016). Smart Strategies for Enhanced Agricultural

Resilience and Food Security Under a Changing Climate in Sub-Saharan Africa. In: Lal,

R., Kraybill, D., Hansen, D., Singh, B., Mosogoya, T., Eik, L. (eds.), Climate Change and

Multi-Dimensional Sustainability in African Agriculture (pp. 431–453). Springer, Cham.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978–3–319–41238–2_23

Xu, J., Cui, Y., Zhang, S., & Zhang, M. (2024). e evolution of precision agriculture

and food safety: A bibliometric study. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 8, 1475602.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1475602

Yu, Z., Jung, D., Park, S., Hu, Y., Huang, K., Rasco, B. A., … Chen, J. (2022). Smart trace-

ability for food safety. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 62(4), 905–916.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2020.1830262

Zhao, Y., Cui, S., & Xing, Y. (2025). e Impact of agricultural technological innovation

on residents’ health and its spatial eﬀects. Frontiers in Public Health, 13, 1633413. https://

doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1633413

INFORMATION ABOUT THE AUTHORS / СВЕДЕНИЯ ОБ АВТОРАХ

Amel Mechta — Doctoral Student, Assistant Professor, Department of Media and

Communication Sciences, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Political and

Social Communication Laboratory, Yahia Fares University, Medea, Algeria.

Амел Мехта — докторант, доцент кафедры медиа- и коммуникационных

наук, факультет гуманитарных и социальных наук, лаборатория политической

и социальной коммуникации, Университет Яхиа Фареса, Медиа, Алжир.

Rabeh Belkacemi — PhD, Professor, Department of Media and Communication

Sciences, Political and Social Communication Laboratory, Faculty of Humanities and

Social Sciences, Yahia Fares University, Medea, Algeria.

Рабех Белькасеми — доктор философии, профессор кафедры медиа- и ком-

муникационных наук, факультет гуманитарных и социальных наук, лаборато-

рия политической и социальной коммуникации, Университет Яхиа Фареса, Ме-

диа, Алжир.

The article was submitted 22.08.2025;

approved after reviewing 03.10.2025;

accepted for publication 25.11.2025.

Статья поступила в редакцию 22.08.2025;

одобрена после рецензирования 03.10.2025;

принята к публикации 25.11.2025.