Stephen C. Mukembo et al., Assessing small farmers’ adaptation and management strategies to navigate the risks and uncertainties: The case of Missouri (2023)

Summary

An article by Stephen C. Mukembo and Jasper Grashuis of the University of Missouri and Ye Su of Lincoln University of Missouri in Advancements in Agricultural Development, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2023, pages 60 to 73 (DOI 10.37433/aad.v4i2.323), published May 30, 2023. The descriptive study analyses 141 survey responses from small farmers in Missouri on how they managed the risks of the COVID-19 pandemic. Most used several strategies at once: drawing on savings, diversifying, cutting inputs, donating output, delaying investment, taking off-farm jobs and using government relief. Apart from the stimulus checks that reached eligible households automatically, few farmers knew of or took part in the federal relief programs for small businesses and producers. The authors recommend that Extension specialists work with the agencies running relief programs to raise awareness.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Cite this document

“Stephen C. Mukembo et al., Assessing small farmers’ adaptation and management strategies to navigate the risks and uncertainties: The case of Missouri (2023).” Original at agdevresearch.org. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/stephen-c-mukembo-et-al-assessing-small-farmers-adaptation-and-managem-6a2517a4db/, SHA-256 4b09a3d6c4c8a659d79d21abb53659b523d32d2c66ba5c00fffacf4ae9db1e33.

Full text

Advancements in Agricultural Development
Volume 4, Issue 2, 2023
agdevresearch.org

Assessing Small Farmers’ Adaptation and Management
Strategies to Navigate the Risks and Uncertainties: The Case of
Missouri

S. C. Mukembo1, J. Grashuis2, Y. Su3

Article History
Abstract Received: April 5, 2023
Accepted: May 8, 2023
Investing in the agricultural sector exposes producers to numerous risks
Published: May 30, 2023
and uncertainties. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated these
challenges, and their impacts are still being felt globally. Our study aims
to evaluate and describe the risk management strategies employed by
Keywords
small farmers in Missouri to mitigate and adapt to the impact of the
COVID-19 pandemic; mitigation
COVID-19 pandemic on their farm operations. We analyzed 141 survey strategies; relief programs; risks and
responses, and our findings indicate that most respondents employed uncertainties
multiple strategies, including using savings, diversification, reducing
inputs, donating output, delaying investment, gaining off-farm
employment, and utilizing government relief programs. However, apart
from the COVID-19 stimulus checks, which were automatically disbursed
to eligible households, few farmers were aware of or participated in other
federal relief programs aimed at supporting small businesses and
producers. We recommend that Extension specialists collaborate with
other stakeholders and agencies responsible for federal relief programs
to enhance small farmer awareness and participation in the future.
Additionally, further research is necessary to understand the coping
strategies employed by small farmers to remain resilient and maintain
personal and mental health during the pandemic.

1. Stephen C. Mukembo, Postdoctoral Fellow, Division of Applied Social Sciences, University of Missouri, 320 Mumford Hall
Columbia, MO 65211, mukembos@missouri.edu, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1909-9349
2. Jasper Grashuis, Assistant Research Professor, Division of Applied Social Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO
65211, grashuisj@missouri.edu, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5075-4439
3. Ye Su, Assistant Professor, Cooperative Research, College of Agriculture, Environment and Human Science, Lincoln
University of Missouri; 311 Foster Hall; Jefferson City, Missouri 65101, suy@lincolnu.edu,
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2071-6236 (corresponding author)
60
Mukembo et al. Advancements in Agricultural Development

Introduction and Problem Statement
Producers invest in the agricultural sector with the expectation of a profitable return. However,
these investments carry risks and uncertainties that are beyond their control. As a result,
farmers must continuously innovate and adapt to changes in the dynamic external
environment. These changes may include governmental policy, weather, climate, price
fluctuations, market uncertainty, and disease outbreaks such as the COVID-19 pandemic.
Among other developments, the pandemic increased the cost of production and contributed to
food wastage because of labor shortages and market shutdowns as the result of stay-at-home
measures to promote physical distancing (Lahath et al., 2021; Litkowski & Giri, 2023; McElrone
et al., 2021; Seidel et al., 2021), which impacted production and profitability. Further, although
consumer food prices soared during the pandemic, farm-gate prices declined, and regional food
shortages were reported (Mucioki et al., 2022).

Since the declaration of the COVID-19 outbreak as a pandemic by the World Health
Organization on March 11, 2020 (Cucinotta & Vanelli, 2020), numerous studies have
investigated its impact on the agricultural sector (Pu & Zhong, 2020). Additionally, several
investigations have explored the adaptations made by small farmers during the pandemic,
typically in a local or regional context, such as northwest Arkansas (Florick & Park, 2022) or
western Washington (Ladyka et al., 2022). This descriptive study extends previous research on
farmers’ adaptations by focusing on risk management strategies employed by small farmers in
the state of Missouri. The lessons learned from our research will inform policy and Extension
programming in Missouri and could potentially be transferable to other regions, depending on
the specific contextual factors.

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework
The production of goods and services in the agricultural sector involves the investment and
combination of various factors of production, such as land, labor, capital, and entrepreneurship,
to create value. Investing in these factors of production entails undertaking certain risks and
uncertainties that producers must manage or mitigate to achieve the desired outcome, such as
generating a return on investment for the farmer (see Figure 1).

Individuals employ different strategies to manage risks and uncertainties, including acceptance,
avoidance, transferring, and mitigation (Project Management Institute, 2013). Farmers, for
example, use various techniques to guard against risks and uncertainties (Komarek et al., 2020),
such as government programs, diversification of farm enterprises, input rationing, insurance,
financial leverage, futures contracts, liquidity marketing contracts, off-farm employment,
options contracts, and production contracts (Johansson, 2020; Kahan, 2008; Prager et al., 2020;
Tsiboe & Turner, 2023). Drawing on our literature review, we established relationships between
these factors to formulate a conceptual framework (Grant & Osanloo, 2014; Van der Waldt,
2020) that guided our understanding of the challenges farmers face when investing in the
agricultural sector and the management decisions they make. A conceptual framework such as

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.323 61
Mukembo et al. Advancements in Agricultural Development

the one presented in Figure 1 “lays out the key factors, constructs, or variables, and presumes
relationships among them” (Miles & Huberman, 1994, p. 440).

Figure 1

Study’s Conceptual Framework

Note. The conceptual relationship between investment in the agricultural sector, exposure to
risks and uncertainties leading to the deployment of risk management/adaptation strategies,
and outcomes/outputs and return on agricultural investment.

Purpose
Our study aimed to describe, assess, and understand the adaptive and management strategies
used by small farmers in Missouri to navigate the risk and uncertainty associated with the
COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, seven objectives undergirded this study:
1. Describe input cost changes for small farmers in Missouri during the pandemic.
2. Evaluate on-the-farm management strategies used by small farmers in Missouri to respond
to the COVID-19 pandemic.
3. Describe the awareness and participation of small farmers in Missouri in federal relief
programs.
4. Describe the sales channels used by small farmers in Missouri used to market products to
consumers before and during the pandemic.
5. Describe changes in farm revenue based on the sales channels used by small farmers in
Missouri before and during the pandemic.
6. Describe changes in total farm revenue following the COVID-19 pandemic.
7. Describe the future farm aspirations of small farmers in Missouri.

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.323 62
Mukembo et al. Advancements in Agricultural Development

Methods
To address the above objectives, the research team developed an online survey instrument to
describe and evaluate the changes in small farmer decisions and outcomes following the
outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. During the design stage, we received input from extension
specialists and local farmers to ensure the study’s practical relevance. A panel of experts from
the Division of Applied Social Sciences at the University of Missouri and a faculty member from
the College of Agricultural and Natural Sciences at Lincoln University of Missouri assessed the
survey instrument for content and face validity (Creswell, 2014). Upon receiving approval from
the University of Missouri’s Institutional Review Board, we distributed the online survey
invitation to small farmers in Missouri through two approaches. First, we emailed the invitation
directly to farmers who were registered with the Missouri Grown program and the Missouri
Farm Bureau’s Missouri Meat Producer Directory. Second, Extension specialists in the state of
Missouri disseminated the invitation link through program newsletters, email lists, and social
media. The programs include the Small Ruminant Program, Innovative Small Farmers’ Outreach
Program (ISFOP), Agricultural Economics and Marketing program, Missouri Farmers’ Market
Association, and Exceed-Regional Economic and Entrepreneurial Development. We collected
survey responses from April 2022 to July 2022. We used Microsoft Excel and Stata to organize,
analyze, report, and illustrate the data. For this study, only descriptive statistics such as
percentages are reported in the tables and the figures.

Findings
We received a total of 141 responses. Following the deletion of respondents who self-identified
as “medium” or “large” farmers, we analyzed 121 responses. Because of the descriptive nature
of the data analysis, we did not delete observations with partially missing data. Regarding the
demographic characteristics of our survey respondents, the majority (57%) identified as female,
and 43% identified as male. The average age of respondents was 51 years. The majority of our
survey participants (59%) were livestock producers, while 46% reported growing fruits and
vegetables, and 28% had crops. It is worth noting that the percentages for the type of farming
operation are higher than 100% due to respondents selecting multiple choices. Additionally,
most of the survey respondents (70%) reported owning the farm land, 21% reported owning
and renting, and 6% reported farming on rented land.

Table 1 displays the distribution of our respondents in terms of revenue categories. The largest
category comprised respondents (44%; n = 51) who earned up to $10,000 per year in farm
revenue. Eighty of the respondents (69%) make less than $30,000 per year.

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.323 63
Mukembo et al. Advancements in Agricultural Development

Table 1

Number of Respondents by Revenue Category
Category n %
Less Than $10,000 51 44
$10,000 - $20,000 15 13
$20,000 - $30,000 14 12
$30,000 - $40,000 7 6
$40,000 - $50,000 6 5
$50,000 - $100,000 15 13
$100,000 - $150,000 4 3
More Than $150,000 4 3

Objective 1: Changes in Farming Costs of Inputs used by Farmers During the Pandemic
A majority of respondents reported a significant increase of approximately 70% or more in the
costs of variable inputs such as feed, fertilizer, seed, energy, and equipment These findings
suggest that farmers faced significant cost pressures in multiple aspects of their operations,
which could have implications for their overall profitability and financial viability. It is important
for farmers to carefully monitor their input costs and explore strategies to manage and reduce
these expenses where possible. Regarding the classic factors of production (i.e., capital, labor,
land), almost 50% or more of farmers indicated that their costs did not change much during the
COVID-19 pandemic (see Table 2). However, relatively few respondents observed a cost
decrease in any expense category.

Table 2

Changes in Input Costs during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Decreased No Change Increased
Category
n % n % n %
Feed 1 1.19 11 13.10 72 85.71
Fertilizer 1 1.12 12 13.48 76 85.39
Seed 1 1.08 15 16.13 77 82.80
Energy 2 1.75 27 23.68 85 74.56
Equipment 2 1.90 30 28.57 73 69.52
Labor 5 5.56 53 58.89 32 35.56
Equity/Capital 22 22.92 47 48.96 27 28.13
Land 1 1.12 64 71.91 24 26.97

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.323 64
Mukembo et al. Advancements in Agricultural Development

Objective II: On-Farm and Household Management Strategies in Response to the COVID-19
Pandemic
Our survey asked respondents about 11 different farm and household management strategies
in response to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. The results showed that 66% of
respondents used their savings, indicating the significant financial impact of the pandemic on
small farmers. Furthermore, 46% of farmers indicated that they had diversified their farming
activities as a risk management strategy against the uncertainties and risks of the pandemic .
Other strategies employed by farmers included the reduction of input use (39%), donation of
output (38%), delayed or canceled investments (37%), off-farm employment (31%), and
decreased output (25%), among others (see Table 3). Further, more than one-fifth (21%) of the
respondents delayed harvesting or sold assets to mitigate losses. Some farmers stopped
production altogether (14%), while others destroyed their output/produce (11%).

Table 3

Farm and Household Management Strategies in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic
Decision n %
Used savings 79 66
Diversified output 55 46
Reduced input 47 39
Donated output 45 38
Delayed/canceled investment 44 37
Gained off-farm employment 37 31
Decreased output 30 25
Delayed/canceled harvest 25 21
Sold assets 25 21
Stop production 17 14
Destroyed output 13 11

Objective III: Small Farmer Awareness of and Participation in Federal Relief Programs
To inform farm-level and household-level federal assistance to small farmers in Missouri, we
first asked our survey participants to indicate their awareness of nine federal relief programs.
Secondly, we asked them if they had participated in any of the listed programs. Out of the nine
programs, the survey participants were most aware of the stimulus check (81%, as shown in
Table 4), which was sent by the U.S. government to households with an income of up to
$150,000. Seventy percent of the small farmers in our survey received the check. Only 21% of
the respondents indicated participating in the Paycheck Protection Program or the USDA Direct
Pandemic Assistance for Producers. Other farmers (17% -18%) participated in the two rounds of
the Coronavirus Food Assistance Program. Although the respondents seemed to be aware of
the other four federal relief programs, their participation remained low.

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.323 65
Mukembo et al. Advancements in Agricultural Development

Table 4

Small Farmer Awareness and Participation in Federal Relief Programs
Awareness Participation
Federal Program
n % n %
COVID-19 Stimulus Check 97 81 84 70
Paycheck Protection Program 60 50 25 21
USDA Direct Pandemic Assistance for Producers 37 31 25 21
Coronavirus Food Assistance Program 25 21 22 18
Coronavirus Food Assistance Program 2 20 17 20 17
Mortgage Relief 19 16 5 4
Unemployment Insurance 26 22 4 3
Food Stamp and Meal Programs 25 21 2 2
Rent Assistance and Eviction Moratorium 36 30 1 1

Objective IV: Sales Channel used by Farmers Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic
As we illustrate in Figure 2, social media platforms, such as Facebook Marketplace and Twitter,
were the most popular sales channels (55%) before and during the COVID-19 pandemic among
our respondents. The farmers’ market constituted the second most popular sales channel
(49%). Relatively few small farmers in our survey had access to sales channels at the
downstream segment of the food value chain (12% with wholesalers, 15% with institutions, and
22% with retailers). When comparing the two time periods, our respondents made almost no
changes in terms of the use of the channels. Auctions were the only sales channel to experience
a slight decrease in usage (from 13% to 11%), probably due to restrictions on public gatherings,
and may have been unable to switch from in-person to online platforms to facilitate
transactions.

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.323 66
Mukembo et al. Advancements in Agricultural Development

Figure 2

Sales Channel used by Farmers Before and During/After the COVID-19 Pandemic
60% 55%
49% 55%
49%
50%

40%

30% 23% 23% 22%
23% 23% 22% 18%
15% 19%
20% 13% 13% 12% 15%
13% 11% 12%
10%

Before Pandemic During Pandemic

Objective V: Changes in Farm Revenue by Sales Channel Before and During the COVID-19
Pandemic
While sales channel contribution remained more or less identical, the actual importance of
each sales channel to farm revenue changed (as shown in Figure 3). We asked respondents who
used a given sales channel to indicate what percentage of farm revenue it facilitated. It is
noticeable that sales channels with physical components (such as farmers' markets and
institutions/restaurants) decreased, while sales channels with online presence (such as farm
websites) and social media increased. Among the respondents who used the farmers’ market to
sell output, the average contribution to farm revenue decreased from 63.70% before the
COVID-19 pandemic to 47.58% during the COVID-19 pandemic. Institutions, including
restaurants and other food service establishments, which faced closures and restrictions during
the pandemic, contributed less to the farm revenue of small farmers. The online shop channel
experienced the largest increase from 17.73% before the COVID-19 pandemic to 31% during
the COVID-19 pandemic. Social media marketing increased from 28.36% before the pandemic
to 36.01% after the pandemic.

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.323 67
Mukembo et al. Advancements in Agricultural Development

Figure 3

Changes in Farm Revenue Based on Marketing Channels used by Farmers Before and During the
Pandemic

63.70% 57.59%
70%

56.44%
60% 62.22%
56.00%

47.58%
50%

28.36%
32.54%

32.29%
40%
28.68% 31.00% 35.50% 27.25%
28.15% 36.01%
30% 29.17% 22.42%
21.44% 22.33%
17.73%
20%

10%

Before pandemic During pandemic

Objective VI: Total Farmer Revenue Changes Following the COVID-19 Pandemic.
As shown in Table 5, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the revenue of our survey
respondents was mixed. Just over two-fifths of small farmers (41%) reported an increase in
their farm revenue. In contrast, 38% reported a decrease in their revenue, and 21% reported no
change in revenue.

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.323 68
Mukembo et al. Advancements in Agricultural Development

Table 5

Change in Farm Revenue Following the COVID-19 Pandemic
Change in Sales n %
More than 30% Decrease 23 20
0-30% Decrease 21 18
No Change 25 21
0-30% Increase 34 29
More than 30% Increase 14 12

Objective VII: Future Farm Aspirations
We also asked respondents to indicate their future intentions regarding farm size. The results
showed that a majority of respondents (56.30%) had no intention to expand their operations
(see Figure 4). Meanwhile, 28.15% and 11.85% of respondents reported intentions to increase
or decrease their farm size, respectively. Only a small proportion of respondents (3.7%)
indicated plans to exit farming in the near future.

Figure 4

Future Farm Size Intentions of Small Farmers in Missouri

Increase in Size 28.15%

No change in Size 56.30%

Decrease in Size 11.85%

Exit 3.70%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Conclusions, Discussion, and Implications for Extension Practice
The study found that most farmers experienced increased input costs, especially for variable
inputs such as feed and fertilizer, due to supply chain disruptions and increased demand during
the pandemic (Mucioki et al., 2022). To mitigate the impact of these challenges on their
production and profitability on farmers’ investments, they employed a range of management
strategies, including using savings, diversification of output, reduction of inputs, and delayed or

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.323 69
Mukembo et al. Advancements in Agricultural Development

canceled investments (see Figure 1 and Table 3). The need to mitigate risks also led some
farmers to gain off-farm employment and rely on federal relief programs (Prager et., 2020;
Tsiboe & Turner, 2023). However, despite the availability of federal relief programs, few
farmers were aware of or able to access them (McElrone et al., 2021), highlighting the
importance of Extension specialists partnering with government agencies and other
stakeholders to improve farmer awareness and participation in such programs. To address the
information gap, these specialists should consider leveraging traditional and social media
platforms to reach farmers and provide them with information on available programs. This
approach could decrease the dependence on savings and other informal means to respond to
risks and uncertainties.

The desire for farmers to expand or sustain the current farm size necessitates the involvement
of Extension specialists in devising educational programs that impart farmers with valuable
knowledge and competencies in the context of diverse management strategies, risk and
uncertainty management, and on-farm emergency planning. To this end, conducting a thorough
assessment of the farmers’ needs and identifying the gaps that require attention through a
comprehensive training program is crucial. Such an approach would significantly enhance the
farmers’ capacity to adapt to different situations, foster farm resilience, and ultimately improve
their livelihoods.

In this study, while the farmers reported consistency in their sales channels during the
pandemic, our analysis revealed a decline in revenue generated from most channels, except for
online sales via farm websites, social media, community-supported agriculture (CSA), and
wholesale. The pandemic may have presented an opportunity for farmers to expand their
market reach, particularly through online sales and social media platforms, given the stay-at-
home measures instituted to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. Consequently, promotion of
online and social media channels is necessary to enable farmers to capitalize on these
opportunities. To this end, Extension specialists in Missouri could design programs to equip
farmers with the requisite knowledge and skills to develop online marketing strategies and
branding. Such initiatives may include creating farm websites or social media accounts to
enhance the farm’s online presence and foster engagement with potential customers.

Recommendations for Future Extension Research

This study examined the management strategies adopted by small farmers in Missouri to
mitigate the risks and uncertainties associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on farm-
level perspectives. However, it is crucial to note that small farmers in Missouri may have also
encountered personal and mental health challenges amid the pandemic (American Farm
Bureau Federation, 2020; McElrone et al., 2021). Additional research is required to understand
the coping strategies employed by farmers to remain resilient in this regard. Furthermore,
future Extension research should consider the role of farm and operator characteristics in
promoting on-farm resilience during times of crisis. It is important to note that due to the
limited number of respondents in our study, generalizations beyond the sample are not
feasible. Thus, a large-scale study would be necessary to determine whether small farmers

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.323 70
Mukembo et al. Advancements in Agricultural Development

across the country have similar experiences and formulate a common, state or region-specific
response.

Acknowledgements
This research was supported by a NIFA/AFRI grant project 2022-67024-36111

Author contributions: S. C. Mukembo - writing and conceptualization of the original draft; J.
Grashuis - data analysis, designing the survey, data collection, and manuscript revisions; Y. Su -
designing the survey, data collection, and grant funding for this research.

References
American Farm Bureau Federation. (2020, December). Impacts of COVID-19 on rural mental
health. https://www.fb.org/files/Impacts_of_COVID-
19_on_Rural_Mental_Health_1.6.21.pdf

Creswell. J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Cucinotta, D., & Vanelli, M. (2020). WHO declares COVID-19 a pandemic. Acta bio-medica,
91(1), 157–160. https://doi.org/10.23750/abm.v91i1.9397

Grant, C., & Osanloo, A. (2014). Understanding, selecting, and integrating a theoretical
framework in dissertation research: Creating the blueprint for your “house.”
Administrative Issues Journal: Connecting Education, Practice, and Research, 4(2), 12–
26. https://doi.org/10.5929/2014.4.2.9

Florick, L., & Park, C. (2022). A pilot study exploring the impacts of COVID-19 on small-scale
direct marketing farmers in northwest Arkansas and their responses to the
pandemic. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 12(1),
47-61. https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2022.121.006

Johansson, R. (2020, September 24). America’s farmers: Resilient throughout the COVID
pandemic. United States Department of Agriculture.
https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2020/09/24/americas-farmers-resilient-throughout-
covid-pandemic

Kahan, D. (2008). Managing risk in farming. Food and Agriculture Organization.
https://www.fao.org/uploads/media/3-ManagingRiskInternLores.pdf

Komarek, A. M., De Pinto, A., & Smith, V. H. (2020). A review of types of risks in agriculture:
What we know and what we need to know. Agricultural Systems, 178, 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2019.102738

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.323 71
Mukembo et al. Advancements in Agricultural Development

Ladyka, D., Sipos, Y., Spiker, M. L., & Collier, S. M. (2022). A qualitative investigation of
resilience among small farms in western Washington State: Experiences during the first
growing season of COVID-19. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community
Development, 11(4), 35-59. https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2022.114.007

Lahath, A., Omar, N. A., Ali, M. H., Tseng, M., & Yazid, Z. (2021). Exploring food waste during the
COVID-19 pandemic among Malaysian consumers: The effect of social media,
neuroticism, and impulse buying on food waste. Sustainable Production and
Consumption, 28, 519–531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.06.008

Litkowski, C., & Giri, A. K. (2023). Farms and farm households during the COVID-19 pandemic.
United States Department of Agriculture. https://www.ers.usda.gov/COVID-19/farms-
and-farm-households/

McElrone, M., Russomanno, J., & Wroth, K. (2021). A pilot study assessing the impacts of
COVID-19 on Tennessee farmer social needs and pandemic-related anxiety. Journal of
Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 11(3), 75–85.
https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2022.113.009

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded source book
(2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Mucioki, M., Hoover, E., Sowerwine, J., Intertribal Agriculture Council., Johnson-Reyes, K.,
Redhouse, L., & Cornelius, D. (2022). Native American agriculture and food systems:
Challenges and opportunities presented by the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of
Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 11(3),121–137.
https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2022.113.013

Prager, D., Burns, C., Tulman, S., & MacDonald, J. (2020). Farm use of futures, options, and
marketing contracts. United States Department of Agriculture.
https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/99518/eib-219.pdf

Project Management Institute. (2013). A guide to the project management body of knowledge:
PMBOOK guide (5th ed). Project Management Institute.

Pu, M., & Zhong, Y. (2020). Rising concerns over agricultural production as COVID-19 spreads:
Lessons from China. Global Food Security, 26(100409), 1-7.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100409

Seidel, M., Murakami, C. D., Egan, J. F., Pope, J. D., & Tsai, C. L. (2021). Impact of COVID-19 on
Pennsylvania farm revenue: Looking back at the 2020 season. Journal of Agriculture,
Food Systems, and Community Development, 11(1), 21–26.
https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2021.111.015

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.323 72
Mukembo et al. Advancements in Agricultural Development

Tsiboe, F., & Turner, D. (2023). Risk management strategies. Economic Research Service. United
States Department of Agriculture. https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-practices-
management/risk-management/risk-management-strategies/

Van der Waldt, G. (2020). Constructing conceptual frameworks in social science research. The
Journal for Transdisciplinary Research in Southern Africa, 16(1), 1–9
https://doi.org/10.4102/td.v16i1.758

© 2023 by authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of
the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.323 73

File and source

File: mukembo-2023-assessing-small-farmers-adaptation-and-management-strategies-to-navigate-the.pdf
Size: 359,029 bytes
SHA-256: 4b09a3d6c4c8a659d79d21abb53659b523d32d2c66ba5c00fffacf4ae9db1e33
Our copy: mukembo-2023-assessing-small-farmers-adaptation-and-management-strategies-to-navigate-the.pdf
Original: agdevresearch.org