Digitalization and productivity in the Latin American livestock agro-industry: evidence from panel data
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70577/asce.v5i3.967Keywords:
Agro-industry, Latin America, Digitalization, Livestock, ProductivityAbstract
The livestock agro-industry is a strategic activity for food security, rural development, and value creation in Latin America; however, the sector faces challenges related to technological gaps and the need to increase production efficiency. The objective was to analyze the relationship between digitalization and productivity in the Latin American livestock agro-industry using a panel data approach. A quantitative, explanatory, and longitudinal study was conducted covering Argentina, Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, and Peru. Livestock productivity was estimated based on the production of beef, pork, poultry, and raw milk, while a digitalization index was constructed using principal component analysis based on indicators of internet and mobile phone access; control variables—livestock inventory, GDP per capita, and agricultural employment—were also included. The results revealed marked productive, economic, and technological heterogeneity among the countries analyzed. Argentina and Mexico recorded the highest levels of productivity, while Bolivia and Ecuador showed the lowest; digitalization trended upward across all countries and maintained a positive relationship with productivity. Likewise, GDP per capita showed a favorable association with productivity performance, whereas agricultural employment showed a negative relationship. Digitalization is a factor that fosters modernization and efficiency in the livestock agro-industry; although it does not explain productivity differences on its own, its positive association with productivity confirms its relevance to sectoral transformation processes. Furthermore, economic conditions and the level of technological adoption significantly influence the productivity outcomes achieved by each country.
Downloads
References
1. López-Delgado DS, Chapues-Andrade GL, Narváez CA, Zambrano Santacruz JC, Rosero-Galindo CY. Fisiología del envejecimiento: Actualización y perspectiva genética. Med Fam SEMERGEN. 2025;51(6):102452. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SEMERG.2025.102452 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semerg.2025.102452
2. World Health Organization. Ageing and health. Geneva: WHO; 2023. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ageing-and-health
3. Bueno Pacheco GA, García Ortega AC. Estimulación cognitiva en memoria para adultos mayores [Tesis de grado]. Universidad del Azuay; 2024. http://dspace.uazuay.edu.ec/handle/datos/15197
4. López NR, Arberas EJ. Aportaciones del método Montessori a la práctica clínica de terapia ocupacional en demencias. TOG (A Coruña). 2023;20(1):54–62. https://www.revistatog.es/ojs/index.php/tog/article/view/20
5. Segiet N, Początek G, Klimkowicz-Mrowiec A. Montessori as a tool to engage the elderly with dementia: literature review. Int Psychogeriatr. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610223002727 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610223002727
6. Mousavi SA, Aslani MA, Mohammadi RK, Bahramian E, Zehtab S, Bahramian F, Jalali A. The effect of Montessori program in the elderly with dementia: a literature review. J Public Health Dev. 2022;20(3):249–264. https://doi.org/10.55131/jphd/2022/200320 DOI: https://doi.org/10.55131/jphd/2022/200320
7. Woolford M, Bruce L, Rigoni D, et al. Intersection between person-centred practice and Montessori for dementia and ageing in residential aged care. Age Ageing. 2024;53(10):afae217. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afae217 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afae217
8. Yan Z, Traynor V, Alananzeh I, et al. The impact of Montessori-based programmes on individuals with dementia living in residential aged care: A systematic review. Dementia (London). 2023;22(5):1259–1291. https://doi.org/10.1177/14713012231165377 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/14713012231173817
9. Ljubič A, Hozjan D, Filej B, Štemberger Kolnik T. Montessori activities for older adults in community nursing: Comparative case study. Pielęgniarstwo XXI Wieku. 2023. https://doi.org/10.2478/pielxxiw-2023-0038
10. Donadey M, Broc G, Erkes J, Lembach M, Camp CJ, Capdevielle D. Application, understanding, and appropriation of the Montessori method for persons with dementia: A qualitative pilot study. Dementia (London). 2024. https://doi.org/10.1177/14713012241264910 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/14713012241264910
11. López NR, Arberas EJ. Aportaciones del método Montessori y calidad de vida en demencias. TOG (A Coruña). 2023;20(1):54–62. https://www.revistatog.es/ojs/index.php/tog/article/view/20
12. Valdevila Figueira JA, Yambay-Bautista XR, Carvajal Parra ID, Valdevila Santiesteban R, Altamirano Cárdenas LF, Pico Cucalón MJ, Rodas JA. Epidemiology of dementia in an Ecuadorian mental health institution. J Alzheimers Dis Rep. 2025. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12627374/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/25424823251396049
13. Suárez-Salazar JV, Baca-López EN, Quiñonez-Gómez JL, Patiño-Quiroz FW, Cadena-Fuertes DF, Herrera-Topa TL. Perfil sociodemográfico y clínico de adultos mayores con demencia en un hospital especializado en Quito-Ecuador. Rev MasVita. 2025. https://www.acvenisproh.com/revistas/index.php/masvita/article/view/926/2150 DOI: https://doi.org/10.47606/ACVEN/MV0278
14. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;12(3):189–198. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1202204/
15. Reyes S, Beaman P, García-Peña C, Villa MA, Heres J, Córdova A, et al. Validation of a modified version of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in Spanish. Aging Neuropsychol Cogn. 2004;11:1–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1076/anec.11.1.1.29366
16. Yesavage JA, Brink TL, Rose TL, Lum O, Huang V, Adey M, et al. Development and validation of a geriatric depression screening scale: A preliminary report. J Psychiatres. 1982–1983;17(1):37–49. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7183759/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3956(82)90033-4
17. Razali NM, Wah YB. Power comparisons of Shapiro-Wilk, Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Lilliefors and Anderson-Darling tests. J Stat Model Anal. 2011;2(1):21–33.
18. Chaudhry N, Tofique S, Husain N, Couture D, Glasgow P, Husain M, Kiran T, Memon R, Minhas S, Qureshi A, Shuber F, Leroi I. Montessori intervention for individuals with dementia: feasibility study of a culturally adapted psychosocial intervention in Pakistan (MIRACLE). BJPsych Open. 2020 Jul 2;6(4):e69. doi: 10.1192/bjo.2020.49. PMID: 32611476; PMCID: PMC7443909. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2020.49
19. Gambella E, Lombardi L, Cicconi D, Raccichini A, Paciaroni L, Giuli C, Bonfigli AR, Fabbietti P, Pelliccioni G, Gagliardi C. The Silver Agri Age project in Italy: a Montessori-inspired social intervention with older adults with mild cognitive impairment. Single-group pre-post pilot study protocol. Front Public Health. 2025 May 16;13:1561263. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1561263. PMID: 40453497; PMCID: PMC12122297. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1561263
20. Ljubič A, Hozjan D, Filej B, Štemberger Kolnik T. Montessori activities for older adults in community nursing: comparative case study. Nursing in the 21st Century. 2023;22(4):282–287. doi:10.2478/pielxxiw-2023-0038. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/pielxxiw-2023-0038
21. Arteaga FMA, et al. Estimulación cognitiva: clave para el bienestar y la mejora cognitiva en adultos mayores. Jóvenes en la Ciencia. 2024.
22. Kao CC, Lin LC, Wu SC, Lin KN, Liu CK. Effectiveness of different memory training programs on improving hyperphagic behaviors of residents with dementia: a longitudinal single-blind study. Clin Interv Aging. 2016 May 23;11:707-20. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S102027. PMID: 27307717; PMCID: PMC4887047. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S102027
23. Agaku IT. Methodological considerations for the design and implementation of reliable and valid surveys. Public Health Toxicol. 2021;1:8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18332/pht/141977
24. Bolarinwa OA. Sample size estimation for health and social science researchers: the principles and considerations for different study designs. Niger Postgrad Med J. 2020;27(2):67–75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/npmj.npmj_19_20
25. Marsden E, Torgerson CJ. Single group, pre- and post-test research designs: some methodological concerns. Oxf Rev Educ. 2012;38(5):583–616. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2012.731208
26. McCambridge J, Witton J, Elbourne DR. Systematic review of the Hawthorne effect: new concepts are needed to study research participation effects. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(3):267–77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.08.015
27. Lenth RV. Some practical guidelines for effective sample size determination. Am Stat. 2001;55(3):187–93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1198/000313001317098149
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Jorge Saúl Sopalo Iza , Guillermo Arturo Cárdenas Caycedo , Judith Elizabeth Castro Aguirre , Evelyn Janina Garcia Arellano , Esperanza Del Pilar Varela Bravo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Eres libre de:
- Compartir : copiar y redistribuir el material en cualquier medio o formato
- Adaptar : remezclar, transformar y desarrollar el material
- El licenciante no puede revocar estas libertades siempre y cuando usted cumpla con los términos de la licencia.
En los siguientes términos:
- Atribución : Debe otorgar el crédito correspondiente , proporcionar un enlace a la licencia e indicar si se realizaron cambios . Puede hacerlo de cualquier manera razonable, pero no de ninguna manera que sugiera que el licenciante lo respalda a usted o a su uso.
- No comercial : no puede utilizar el material con fines comerciales .
- CompartirIgual — Si remezcla, transforma o construye sobre el material, debe distribuir sus contribuciones bajo la misma licencia que el original.
- Sin restricciones adicionales : no puede aplicar términos legales ni medidas tecnológicas que restrinjan legalmente a otros hacer algo que la licencia permite.
