Abstract
Farmland fragmentation and farmland consolidation are two sides of the same coin paradoxically viewed as farmland management tools. While there is a vast body of literature addressing the connections between farmland fragmentation and farmland consolidation on the one hand and agriculture production and crops diversification on the other hand, their relationship with variations in food security is still under-explored. This challenges policy makers about whether and how to devise policies in favor of fragmentation conservation or defragmentation. Therefore, drawing on the multiple secondary data and the deductive logical reasoning through an integrative concept-centric qualitative approach following the rationalist theory, this study critically reviews and analyses the existing body of literature to identify how farmland fragmentation versus defragmentation approaches relate to food security. The goal is to develop and derive an explicit model indicating when, where, how and why farmland fragmentation can be conserved or prevented and controlled for food security motives as a novel alternative comprehensive scientific knowledge generation, which could guide and inform the design of future research and policies about farmland fragmentation management. The findings show that both fragmentation and consolidation variously (positively and negatively) impact on food security at different (macro, meso and micro) levels. While farmland fragmentation is highly linked with food diversification (food quality), acceptability, accessibility, and sovereignty at the local (household and individual) levels, farmland consolidation is often associated with the quantity and availability of food production at the community, regional and national levels. Theoretically, the best management of farmland fragmentation for food security purposes can be achieved by minimizing the problems associated with physical and tenure aspects of farmland fragmentation along with the optimization of its potential benefits. In this regard, farmland consolidation, voluntary parcel exchange and on-field harvest sales, farmland realignment, and farmland use (crop) consolidation can be suitable for the control of physical fragmentation problems under various local conditions. Similarly, farmland banking and off-farm employment, restrictions about the minimum parcel sizes subdivision and absentee owners, joint ownership, cooperative farming, farmland use (crop) consolidation, agricultural land protection policies, and family planning measures can be suitable to prevent and minimize farmland tenure fragmentation problems. On the other hand, various agriculture intensification programs, agroecogical approaches, and land saving technologies can be the most suitable strategies to maximize the income from agriculture on fragmented plots under the circumstances of beneficial fragmentation. Moreover, in areas where both rational and defective fragmentation scenarios coexist, different specific strategies like localized and multicropping based land consolidation approaches in combination with or without agriculture intensification programs, can provide better and more balanced optimal solutions. These could simultaneously minimize the defective effects of fragmentation thereby optimizing or without jeopardizing its potential benefits with regard to food security under specific local conditions.
Highlights
Farmland fragmentation has generally been considered as negative for agricultural production and food security and equivalent to the increase in production costs leading to farm inefficiency [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11]
In the context of contrasting advocacies for farmland fragmentation, farmland consolidation, farmland use consolidation and food security nexuses, this study extends the discourse by explicitly and comprehensively displaying different conditions under which and how one could choose between farmland fragmentation conservation and defragmentation policies or both, as responsible farmland management tools to achieve food security
In contrast to the dominant standpoint of the current literature, this study reveals that both farmland fragmentation and farmland consolidation impact on food security in different ways at different levels
Summary
Farmland fragmentation has generally been considered as negative for agricultural production and food security and equivalent to the increase in production costs leading to farm inefficiency [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11]. The success of each strategy depends on local conditions of a country and specific management and governance factors, since the strategy which works well in one country might not succeed in another [11] Such idiosyncrasies necessitate each time a careful and substantive assessment of how and where farmland fragmentation patterns (forms, causes and both problematic and beneficial impacts) are similar or different. This assessment applies to the success requirements and operational conditions of farmland fragmentation management strategies (as specific farmland management instruments) and their anticipated impacts prior to their transfer between countries [11,12,16,28]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
