Operations Management Research

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12063-023-00390-z

Enabling artificial intelligence for sustainable food grain supply

chains: an agri 5.0 and circular economy perspective
Sumanta Das1 · Akhilesh Barve2 · Naresh Chandra Sahu3 · Kamalakanta Muduli4

Received: 8 November 2022 / Revised: 2 May 2023 / Accepted: 2 June 2023

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2023

Abstract
The majority of the food grain supply chain (FGSC) is run in a linear fashion, requiring substantial inputs that produce
mostly inedible by-products, environmental damage and wastage. Moreover, population increase, declining food resources,
shifting weather patterns, and dwindling supplies pose serious problems to the FGSC. Effective usage and consumption
of resources to harmonize ecological, economic, and social elements is the need of the hour from the Agri 5.0 and circular
economy (CE) perspective. Fortunately, modern technological developments like artificial intelligence (AI) might represent a
paradigm change in this context. However, enablers for AI adoption haven't been studied sufficiently despite AI's popularity.
Hence, the fundamental objective of this research is to identify and examine key enablers that facilitate rapid AI adoption in
FGSC, empowering Agri 5.0 and CE in India. The primary facilitators for AI adoption have been explored via a literature
review and expert interviews followed by a questionnaire survey. The fuzzy decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory
(F-DEMATEL) approach was then used to create a causal model of the identified enablers. The F-DEMATEL method helps
resolve the uncertainty of researching enabler interactions. Research findings suggest that “Legal and regulatory interven-
tions from the government (E7)” and “Green IoT-driven total automation (E5)” have a significant influence in integrating
AI in FGSC. The results have major ramifications for policymakers. The results may be used to justify future investments
and will also aid decision-makers in India in advancing AI initiatives.

Keywords AI-adoption · Agri 5.0 · Circular Economy (CE) · Food Grain Supply Chain (FGSC) · Fuzzy-DEMATEL

1 Introduction

The management, protection, and availability of agri-

food supplies are key concerns for countries all over the
* Kamalakanta Muduli globe (Das et al. 2021; Mangla et al. 2018). The advent
kamalakanta.muduli@pnguot.ac.pg of globalization and the resulting increase in competi-
Sumanta Das tiveness has pushed businesses toward the digital world,
sd38@iitbbs.ac.in where technologies enabled by Industry 5.0 are playing an
Akhilesh Barve increasingly important role (Akundi et al. 2022; Garske
akhileshbarve@yahoo.com et al. 2021; Liu et al. 2021). AI is one such technology; it
Naresh Chandra Sahu includes all programming codes, systems, computational
naresh@iitbbs.ac.in methods, and automated systems that exhibit intelligent
behavior (Barros et al. 2020; Vincent et al. 2019). In a
1
School of Mechanical Sciences, IIT Bhubaneswar, nutshell, AI is the study and development of computer sys-
Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
tems that mimic human intellect to generate new forms of
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, MANIT Bhopal, information and resolve issues (Fraga-Lamas et al. 2021;
Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India
Naz et al. 2021). By 2030, AI may add up to $15.7 trillion
3
School of Humanities, Social Sciences & Management, IIT to the world's economy, making it essential for the devel-
Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
opment of any given country’s economic growth (PWC
4
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Papua New Guinea 2018). AI-driven technologies have found widespread use
University of Technology, Lea, Papua New Guinea

13
Vol.:(0123456789)

in a variety of fields, including medicine (Haleem et al.
2019a, b), engineering (Pan and Zhang 2021), business
(Rana et al. 2022), etc. According to Belhadi et al., (2021),
supply chain management can be one of the potential areas
which may benefit most from AI integration. Despite a
recent flurry of studies, the full capabilities of AI in SCs
have yet to be investigated (Garske et al. 2021).
Given the complicated and ambiguous interactions of
SC, AI can help develop a synchronized SC that shares
information and resources cooperatively (Belhadi et al.
2021). According to Taylor and Fearne (2006), using big
data is necessary to provide a unified method for forecast-
ing demand activity in FSC. Utilizing and capitalizing on
such massive datasets to make informed decisions is one
area where AI is expected to be very useful. Better data
management with the use of AI might also be beneficial
for SC members (Bhat and Huang 2021; Talari et al. 2022).
Also, AI may be used to save expenses, give businesses
an edge, and boost SC efficiency (Haleem et al. 2019a,
b; Holmes et al. 2022; PWC 2018). While the preceding
studies have highlighted the relevance of AI in SCs, they
lack domain-specific insights that management may utilize
when considering AI deployment in particular organiza-
tions. This is because organizational variables affect AI
integration in SCs.
There are four phases of FGSCs: inputs, harvesting,
processing, and distribution. An AI-integrated FGSC
would allow real-time surveillance of material flows,
would boost responsiveness and efficiency, make it easier
to spot dangers, and help in strategy development. For
instance, the FGSC uses both digital and physical con-
nectivity, dealing with large concentrations, low profit-
ability, limited asset allocation, and tight schedules; this is
where AI technologies can assist in optimizing the systems
and enable coordination among stakeholders to meet the
requirement of the stocks (Vincent et al. 2019). FGSC is
crucial for the Indian economy because of the many issues
triggered by climate change and biodiversity loss, such
as pollution, broken nutrient cycles, lack of groundwa-
ter, starvation, economic hardship, and resource warfare
(Alberti et al. 2021; Bhat and Huang 2021; Khandelwal
and Chavhan 2019). FGSC entails constant quality modi-
fications until customers receive the food grains. Hence,
large post-harvest losses (PHL) have a detrimental effect
on food security (Das et al. 2023a, b; Chandrasekaran and
Ranganathan 2017; Gunasekera et al. 2017). Ensuring the
safety and quality of food grains along the SC becomes
a problem (Ling and Wahab 2020; Rathore et al. 2020).
Cutting-edge technology like AI may increase SC visibility
and traceability, while addressing food quality and safety
(Das et al. 2021; Faisal and Talib 2016; Haleem et al. 2019a,
b). Figure 1 shows the current problems in FGSC and how
AI can eliminate these problems to improve SC efficiency.
13
S. Das et al.
As a natural component, agriculture is integral to the
circular economy's emphasis on reusing and recycling
resources; its proximity to human consumption patterns
makes it ideally suited to facilitate the coordinated human-
natural relationships and ensuing sustainable human devel-
opment (Fraga-Lamas et al. 2021). Agri 5.0 deals with the
smooth collaboration between humans and robots whereas
CE deals with the recycling and optimization of resources.
The adoption of AI with CE and Agri 5.0 ideas and method-
ologies is necessary to address environmental degradation,
ecological harm, and resource depletion in today's traditional
farming practices (Liu et al. 2021).
Although modern farming has greatly increased yield, it
has also come at a high cost in the form of excessive use of
energy and other resources; destruction of the natural agri-
cultural ecosystem has been witnessed (Cadden et al. 2021;
Dora et al. 2021; Vincent et al. 2019). In this context, envi-
ronmentalism and sustainable development are two exam-
ples of social concerns that AI is expected to address. This
could be done, for example, by increasing the efficiency with
which resources and energy are used, streamlining logistics
throughout the entire SC, or by better integrating activities
and ecological use from the Agri 5.0 and CE perspective
(Akundi et al. 2022; Belhadi et al. 2021; Liu et al. 2021).
AI has enormous potential in the food industry. Previous
work has mostly concentrated on the use and advantages of
AI in FSC and has not sufficiently investigated the crucial
feature of AI-based data exchange for boosting SC efficiency
(Manning et al. 2022; Monteiro and Barata 2021; Vincent
et al. 2019). There are limited articles on AI uptake and
utilization in developing areas like India. According to exist-
ing research on AI in FGSC, key success criteria that might
influence and promote AI adoption from the much-needed
Agri 5.0 and CE perspectives have not been explored. Many
organizations still don't know how to account for the impact
of AI adoption on their overall company strategy (Dora et al.
2021). A comprehensive evaluation of such variables for AI
deployment in FGSC may be crucial in using this technology
to enhance an organization's reputation, profitability, and
competitive edge. Therefore, this article is primarily moti-
vated by the very low rate at which businesses embrace AI.
In this context, we intend to propose a meaningful theo-
retical and empirical framework employing many funda-
mental variables from existing literature and a dedicated
questionnaire survey for AI adoption in FGSC in a growing
market like India from the Agri 5.0 and CE perspective; this
can improve economic growth by using the natural ecosys-
tem's material recycling process. Hence the research aims to
provide answers to the following research questions:
RQ 1: What are the enablers that can help facilitate
the adoption of AI in the context of Agri 5.0 and the
CE in FGSC?
Enabling artificial intelligence for sustainable food grain supply chains: an agri 5.0 and…

Fig. 1  Benefits of AI integrated FGSC

RQ 2: How are these enablers interdependent or con-
nected to each other?
RQ 3: How can understanding the relationships between
these enablers be useful for decision-makers seeking to
integrate AI from an Agri 5.0 and CE perspective?
This paper contributes to the following areas of knowledge:
Firstly, it expands the AI adoption literature by reviewing AI ena-
blers. Secondly, the study adopted an F-DEMATEL approach
to interpret the interrelationships among the enablers. F-DEM-
ATEL has the advantage of classifying identified variables into
cause and effect groups; this provides insights into prioritizing
the enablers when decisions are being made. This methodology
has been extensively used in different fields such as food supply
chain management (Das et al. 2021), the manufacturing industry
(Parmar and Desai 2020) etc. Finally, the findings of the research
will be helpful to policymakers, solution providers, and supply
chain experts in assisting them to concentrate on the most crucial
elements that impact AI adoption in the FGSC.
The remainder of the paper is as follows. Section 2
shows the literature review. Section 3 depicts the research
gaps, followed by data collection in Section 4. The
research methodology is highlighted in Section 5. Results
and discussion are highlighted in Section 6. Section 7
shows the sensitivity analysis for validation of the data
analysis. Finally, Section 8 discusses the research implica-
tions and directions for further research.

13

2 Literature review
2.1 Role of AI in FSC
In recent years, technological advancements have enabled
a massive rise in the production of food grains. Still, con-
cerns over food production and supply are rising dramati-
cally across the globe (FAO 2021; Mithun Ali et al. 2019).
Problems include a shortage of storage space and poor com-
munication among members of the supply chain; these are
at the heart of inefficient FGSCs and are responsible for the
majority of losses (Chandrasekaran and Ranganathan 2017;
Gunasekera et al. 2017). An estimated 8–10% of worldwide
greenhouse gas emissions are related to wasted food (UNEP
2021). In emerging markets like India, post-harvest losses
account for 40% of food loss due to inadequate storage facili-
ties; this has serious ecological, social, and economic con-
sequences (Chauhan et al. 2020; Mangla et al. 2018; Sharon
et al. 2014). At the same time, traceability issues have also
been reported by many researchers, causing diversion of
food grains and circumventing the planned beneficiaries.
An estimation of 42% of food grains was diverted during
2011–12 (Drèze and Khera 2015). It is very important to
have a proper tracking and traceability system. It is vital
to check whether the entitled quantity of grains is reaching
the beneficiaries; if not. the efficiency of the SC must be
improved (Das et al. 2021). Due to demand fluctuations, per-
ishability, periodicity, and temperature sensitivities, FGSC
provides a particularly attractive environment for study (Das
et al. 2023a, b; Kamble et al. 2020).
AI has the capacity and is more effective in taking into
account the specific difficulties encountered by FGSC. AI
gives superior technological methods for increasing agricul-
tural output of produce, distribution, reducing food waste,
and maintaining a safe food supply (Dora et al. 2021; Jain
et al. 2021). For example, traditional approaches to crop
health monitoring are time-consuming and arduous. AI is
a useful tool for checking soil for nutrients and detecting
any problems with the crop. Deep learning is used to assess
agricultural crop health characteristics. AI-enabled apps help
analyze soil quality, pest problems, and diseases (Bhat and
Huang 2021; Syeda et al. 2021). To aid farmers and land
owners, researchers have highlighted the need for an AI-
driven system that helps in decision-making in terms of site
selection with the use of big data science (Vincent et al.
2019). These resources help farmers anticipate pest and dis-
ease outbreaks and facilitate more informed decisions about
how to best manage their crops. Every day, farms generate a
mountain of data at ground level. AI has made it possible for
farmers to examine data in real time, allowing them to make
more informed choices based on factors like weather, tem-
perature, water consumption, and soil properties. Utilizing
13
S. Das et al.
the readily available data, farmers can now cultivate crops
that are both healthy and resource-efficient due to advances
in AI technology (Belhadi et al. 2021; Bhat and Huang
2021). Hence, technological advancements play a pivotal
role in sharing data, especially in creating data-sharing and
computational infrastructures. AI may boost the productivity
of FSCs by facilitating improved integration among channel
partners (Bhat and Huang 2021; Maddikunta et al. 2022). It
may aid in accelerating the intricate procedures of an FGSC,
making it more trustworthy as a result. Table 1 gives a short
description of previous literature on AI in the field of SCs.
The identified enablers are shown in Table 2.
3 Research gaps and highlights
By completing an analysis of previously published research,
we were able to identify a great number of topics that need
more investigation. Several studies have looked into the
adoption of the latest technological models in multiple areas
(Bestelmeyer et al. 2020; Cadden et al. 2021; Dora et al.
2021; Durrant et al. 2021). Although there has been a growth
in research into cutting-edge technologies such as the Inter-
net of Things (IoT), big data analytics (BDA), drones etc.,
the role of key enablers in the adoption of AI in FSC has
received little attention (Barros et al. 2020; Dora et al. 2021).
According to the available research, AI has a great deal of
untapped potential for driving transformation inside FSCs.
In contrast, an adequate integration system is needed since
Indian FGSC is complex, unorganized, quasi, and includes a
wide range of intermediaries (Nyamah et al. 2017; Rathore
et al. 2020). Technologies like AI might play a significant
role in this context.
However, the adoption of AI in FGSC is crucial as an
advanced technological transformation has significant eco-
logical footprints. Therefore, AI adoption needs to be energy
efficient and reduce the greenhouse gas effect (Fraga-Lamas
et al. 2021). However, there has been no study on the impact
of key enablers for AI adoption in FGSC from the Agri 5.0
and CE perspective. There has only been investigation into
AI integration in Indian FSC from the CE perspective. This
study has not considered some of the significant factors like
‘Customer satisfaction in demand volatility’, ‘Economic
incentives from the government and private parties’, and
‘Green IoT-driven total automation’; these are all signifi-
cant aspects of Agri 5.0 and CE (Fraga-Lamas et al. 2021;
Garske et al. 2021; Vincent et al. 2019). This study has only
prioritized the AI adoption enablers; it has not explored
any interrelationships between the enablers. Therefore, an
industry-specific study is needed to understand the case bet-
ter and to provide more logical insights (Barros et al. 2020;
Cadden et al. 2021).
Enabling artificial intelligence for sustainable food grain supply chains: an agri 5.0 and…

Table 1  Previous literature on AI in SC

Authors Field of the study Research type Methodology Work done

(Manning et al. 2022) Generic FSC Qualitative Discussion The study highlighted the importance of
creating a common language for the
deployment of technology throughout
the SC while considering the ethical
implications of AI in the food industry
(Kollia et al. 2021) Belgium Quantitative Deep learning The study adopted a deep learning
algorithm that can recognize and
validate expiration dates on food
package photographs collected during
manufacture
(Durrant et al. 2021) Agri food sector Qualitative Discussion Highlighted that using semantic web,
distributed ledger, machine learning,
and information security will allow
future transformational agri-food
data-sharing infrastructures
(Jain et al. 2021) Indian food processing sector Quantitative Statistical analysis The study highlighted that operational
efficiency can be increased through
the adoption of AI in the SC for SMEs
(Liu et al. 2021) Agriculture sector Qualitative Discussion The study highlighted different chal-
lenges and enabling factors that are
needed for Industry 4.0 transformation
in agriculture
(Garske et al. 2021) Europe Qualitative Discussion The study highlighted that a trustwor-
thy legal framework for safety, data
privacy, access, and security is vital
for the adoption of AI
(Cadden et al. 2021) UK Quantitative Statistical analysis The study highlighted the cultural ena-
blers in the integration of AI into SC
of the manufacturing sector
(Dora et al. 2021) Indian FSC Quantitative Fuzzy SWARA​ The study analyzed the critical success
factors for AI adoption in Indian FSC
(Bhat and Huang 2021) Agriculture Qualitative Discussion The study focused on different chal-
lenges in big data and AI adoption
in agriculture, and also highlighted
the importance of this cutting-edge
technology in farming
(Barros et al. 2020) Agriculture and CE Literature review Discussion The study highlighted different trends
and practices in agriculture from the
CE perspective and concluded that
agricultural waste must be minimized
or recycled
(Bestelmeyer et al. 2020) Agri food sector Qualitative Discussion Highlighted that integrating AI into
agricultural research on a larger scale
can improve the efficiency of the SC;
AI will need long-term, wide-ranging
agricultural observational data
(Vincent et al. 2019) Agriculture sector Quantitative Neural network and This study integrates smart sensors with
Multi-Layer Perception AI systems like neural networks and
(MLP) MLP to evaluate agricultural land
compatibility for farming

Hence, identifying and analyzing the key enablers for
AI adoption from both the Agri 5.0 and CE perspective is
what makes this study unique, adding to the growing body
of empirical literature on this topic. This study not only pri-
oritizes the enablers for AI adoption but can classify these
enablers into cause and effect groups. Hence, the study pro-
vides the causal relationships among identified factors; this
can create a vision and provide insights for industry man-
agers and government to draft more informed policy and
improve decision making.

13

Table 2  Identified AI enablers for sustainable FGSC
Enablers
Development of computing infrastructure
Coordination and trust among organiza-
tions
Economic incentives from the government
and private parties
Customer satisfaction in demand volatility
Green IoT-driven total automation
Promoting private partnerships and bilat-
eral collaboration
Legal and regulatory interventions from
the government
Information sharing and communication
among SC stakeholders
Build a data integration team
13
S. Das et al.
How it influences the adoption of AI References of the evidence in prior studies
• Transfer of data across borders and legal (Kollia et al. 2021; Manning et al. 2022;
authority Monteiro and Barata 2021)
• Reduced cost
• Increased data storage capacity
• IT connectivity
• Smooth flow of information
• Stability of internet and low latency
• Ability to reach consensus (Bestelmeyer et al. 2020; Durrant et al. 2021)
• Better accountability and trust
• Efficient networking
• Smooth flow of information
• Strategic collaboration and inter-firm
networks
• More people-centric approach (UNEP 2021; Wong et al. 2020)
• Develop building trust and reliability
• Providing resources
• Helps formulate the policy India needs right
now
• Easily accessibility of Agri 5.0 products
• More people-centric approach to solving Expert Review
problems
• Develop building trust and reliability
• Understanding the sustainability initiative's
importance and benefits
• More popularity of the AI product
• Efficient networking Expert Review
• Real-time accurate data
• Better resource optimization
• Efficient transition from a linear economy to
a circular economy
• Create an opportunity for the pilot project (Dora et al. 2021; Fraga-Lamas et al. 2021)
• Triggers sustainability
• Create opportunities for bilateral collabora-
tion
• Better policy formulation
• Financial support
• Data privacy and comprehensive security (Akundi et al. 2022; Jain et al. 2021)
system
• Setting standards for technology and infra-
structures
• Mitigating bias and building trust
• Transparency
• Reliability and accountability
• Protection and reinforcement of positive
human values
• Right to equality
• Grievance redressal
• Formulate enforcement mechanisms to
adopt AI
• Accurate data sharing (Alberti et al. 2021; Devi et al. 2021; Hari et al.
• Better trust and transparency 2018)
• Better accountability
• Effective analysis of the data
• Well established eco-system (Bestelmeyer et al. 2020; Liu et al. 2021;
• Smart resource management Manning et al. 2022)
• Cleaning the dataset for further analysis
• Data standardization
Enabling artificial intelligence for sustainable food grain supply chains: an agri 5.0 and…

Table 2  (continued)
Enablers How it influences the adoption of AI References of the evidence in prior studies

Job security post AI adoption
Collaborative research for responsible AI
Top management’s involvement, support,
and commitment
Data-driven organizational culture
Rescaling internal talent; workforce hiring • Improve knowledge and skills of the
Implementing prototype projects for check- • High reliability
ing viability
Digital literacy and awareness building
• Increased interest to learn ML and deep (Cadden et al. 2021; Garske et al. 2021; Liu
learning algorithms et al. 2021)
• Enhanced popularity of AI
• Faster diffusion of AI in SC
• Looks for the potential areas of AI imple- (Dora et al. 2021; Fraga-Lamas et al. 2021)
mentation
• Better sustainability initiatives
• Better human-centric solutions
• Smart resource management
• Knowledge transfer and organizational
maturity
• Better accountability and trust (Belhadi et al. 2021; Pan and Zhang 2021;
• Provide resources Taylor and Fearne 2006)
• Smooth flow of information
• Transparency
• Data security
• Improve diffusion of AI (PWC 2018; Rana et al. 2022)
• Smooth flow of information
• Looks for potential areas of AI implementa-
tion
• Better accountability and trust
• More reliable outcome
(Bhat and Huang 2021; Dora et al. 2021;
employees Khanzode et al. 2021)
• Capability of integrating functionality, data,
and processes
• Improve diffusion of AI
• Better popularity of AI products
Expert Review
• Better responsibility
• Provide a better solution
• Smart resource optimization
• The popularity of AI products (Bhat and Huang 2021; Mangla et al. 2018)
• Better applicability of AI in sustainability
initiatives
• Enhanced accountability
• More human-centric solutions
• New educational and talent initiatives

4 Case analysis and data collection 4.1 Demographic profile and data collection

The case study technique was employed in this research to
gain a thorough understanding of enablers for the adoption
of AI in the Indian FGSC from the CE and Agri 5.0 perspec-
tive. AI-enhanced farming solutions might represent a water-
shed moment in the history of the FSC. Hence, this study
attempts to collect the advice of industry professionals and
conduct a comprehensive literature evaluation to identify the
most important factors facilitating the widespread applica-
tion of AI in the field of FGSC. The most important enablers
and the strength of their causal effects have been uncovered
via quantitative analysis of identified enablers.
After reviewing the available research, 18 AI enablers in
Indian FGSC were found. Through the use of the Delphi
method, a standardized questionnaire was developed for
all 18 enablers and distributed to panel experts to receive
their feedback. A 5-point Likert scale was used in the sur-
vey to assess their input. 77 professionals from the food SC
industry and academic institutions were interviewed using
a questionnaire. 72 of the 77 experts responded with 67 of
them completing the task. The demographic statistics of the
analysts are shown in Table 3.

13
 S. Das et al.

Table 3  Demographic statistics of the respondents for F-DEMATEL. Finally, only 5 experts were chosen ran-
Characteristics Profile No of Percentage domly from the final 15 experts for the sensitivity analysis.
respondents
4.2 Delphi study
Sector/profile Executive Director 09 11.68
General Manager 07 9.09
Table 4 displays the results of a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet
Supply Chain Man- 11 14.28
analysis of the replies. The characteristics of central ten-
ager
dency (mean, standard deviation, and median) were used to
Assistant General 12 15.58
Manager finalize the enablers. According to Kumar et al. 2022, to be
Divisional Manager 14 18.18 included in the Delphi research, the mean and median scores
General Manager 14 18.18 must be greater than or equal to 4. As a result, the same cut-
Academician 10 12.98 off point is used for inclusion of enablers in this research.
Experience in Less than 5 years 17 22.07
years Between 5 and 37 48.05
10 years 5 Research methodology
More than 10 years 23 29.87
Qualifications Graduates 30 38.96 5.1 Fuzzy DEMATEL
Postgraduates 32 41.55
PhD 15 19.48 The study adopted the fuzzy DEMATEL technique. This is an
Gender Male 51 66.23 efficient method to deal with a complicated and fuzzy environ-
Female 26 33.76 ment where subjective and imprecise assumptions can influ-
ence any decisions made (Das et al. 2021; Yadav et al. 2020).
The experts communicate their opinions on linguistic expres-
sion in matters linked to complex structures. The guideline
15 experts were selected from a pool of 67 experts to linguistic communication is a typical way for experts to
through stratified sampling (Taherdoost 2016). In this stimulate their judgments; fuzzy figures may convey linguistic
case, the population of experts was first divided into three principles in actuality. Fuzzy set theory has long been used by
groups based on their levels of experience (see Table 3); five scholars to express and handle uncertainty in decision-making
experts were then selected from each group to collect data (Jeng 2015; Yadav and Barve 2018; Zhou et al. 2011). Experts’

Table 4  Selection of enablers for the adoption of AI in Indian FGSC

SN No Enablers Mean Median Standard Accept/ Reject
deviation

1 Development of computing infrastructure 4.494 5 0.641 Accept

2 Coordination and trust among organizations 4.390 5 0.764 Accept
3 Economic incentives from the government and private parties 4.519 5 0.661 Accept
4 Customer satisfaction in demand volatility 4.429 5 0.696 Accept
5 Green IoT-driven total automation 4.481 4 0.503 Accept
6 Promoting private partnerships and bilateral collaboration 4.338 4 0.837 Accept
7 Legal and regulatory interventions from the government 4.455 5 0.680 Accept
8 Information sharing and communication among SC stakeholders 4.260 4 0.657 Accept
9 Build a data integration team 4.468 5 0.640 Accept
10 Job security post AI adoption 4.351 4 0.556 Accept
11 Collaborative research for responsible AI 4.377 4 0.708 Accept
12 Top management’s involvement, support, and commitment 4.455 5 0.597 Accept
13 Data-driven organizational culture 4.312 4 0.799 Accept
14 Rescaling internal talent; workforce hiring 4.416 4 0.593 Accept
15 Implementing prototype projects for checking viability 4.403 4 0.654 Accept
16 Digital literacy and awareness building 4.312 4 0.799 Accept
17 Open communication 3.182 3 1.060 Reject
18 Democratic methods of governance 3.299 3 1.136 Reject

13
Enabling artificial intelligence for sustainable food grain supply chains: an agri 5.0 and…

Find out the enablers for AI adoption in FGSC

Standardization of fuzzy numbers

Develop an initial direct relation matrix using

Calculate low (ls) and high (hs) normalized values
expert’s assessment

Calculate the total normalized crisp values

Design the fuzzy linguistic variables

Develop fuzzy initial direct relation matrix Find the crisp score of the kth expert’s assessment

Calculate integrated score by averaging the crisp scores of

Find the normalized fuzzy initial direct relation
all experts
matrix

Develop total relation matrix

Calculate the prominence and net effect of every

criterion

Set a threshold value to obtain the diagraph

Develop the causal diagram

Fig. 2  Flow chart of the research

uncertain decisions may be expressed by triangular fuzzy The step-wise F-DEMATEL method is as follows (Das
numbers (TFN); these are widely used for such situations et al. 2021).
(Das et al. 2021). Figure 2 shows the flow chart of the
research methodology. μà (x)
Let  be the TFN, denoted as (e, f, g), where e ≤ f ≤ g and
e, f, and g are real numbers (see Fig. 3, and Eq. (1)). The
membership functions of  in-universe X can be defined as
1.0
follows:

⎧0, x<e
⎪
⎪x − e∕f − e, e ≤ x ≤ f
𝜇Â (x) = ⎨ (1) x
0
⎪g − x∕g − f f ≤ x ≤ g
⎪0, x>g
⎩
Fig. 3  The membership function for the TFN

13
 S. Das et al.

( )
5.1.1 Step 1: set up the initial direct relation matrix (IDRM) TRM = tij = D(I − D)−1 (4)

The expert linguistic judgment via paired comparison of[the]

variables is derived as an initial direct relation matrix X = xij 5.1.6 Step 7: evaluate the direct and indirect effects
using Table 5 based on the influence score. A [ non-negative
]
matrix for each expert can be defined as X = xijk , where k is
k The TRM results may be explored in Ri and Cj in Table 6 by
the number of experts with 1 ≤ k ≤ K, and n is the number of using Eqs. (5–6).
performance variables. ( )� ( ) [∑n ]
Ri = R1 , ..., Ri , ..., Rn = Ri n×1 tij
j=1
(5)
n×1
5.1.2 Step 3: formation of fuzzy initial direct relation
matrix (F‑IDRM) ( )� ( ) ( )� [∑n ]
Cj = C1 , ..., Ci , ..., Cn = Cj n×1 = Cj n = tij
i=1 1×n
The IDRM is converted to the F-IDRM matrix using the lin- (6)
guistic scale described in Table 5 based on the corresponding where Ri indicates the direct and indirect effect of the ena-
fuzzy scores. Let ̃ xijk = (ekij , fijk , gkij ) represent the fuzzy judg- bler i on other factors. Likewise, Cj represents the direct and
ments of expert k (k = 1, 2, 3,…, K) on the degree to which indirect effects of enabler j by other factors. A positive value
criterion i influences the criterion j. of Ri demonstrates the net influence of the parameters on
the system, while a negative value reveals the system's net
5.1.3 Step 4: compute the overall direct matrix (ODM) impact on the parameters.

The ODM is calculated by combining all the experts chosen 5.1.7 Step 8: setting up a threshold value for the diagraph
for the study using Eq. (2).
∑k Usually, it is up to the pool of decision-makers whether they
Xk =
i=0
(xk )∕k (2) want to set a threshold value of the TRM or not. However,
a threshold value must be established to sort out the most
influential variables among the large number of variables
5.1.4 Step 5: compute the normalized direct matrix (NDM) chosen for the analysis (Das et al. 2021). The threshold value
must be obtained by adding one standard deviation (SD) to
NDM can be derived by Eq. (3), i.e., NDM = [dij ] for all the mean of the TRM. Here, the SD and mean are 0.072 and
0 ≤ dij ≤ 1. 0.176. Thus, the threshold value is 0.249. Table 7 highlights
1 all the values equal to or greater than the threshold value of
NDM = ∑n A (3) the TRM.
max j=1
aij
l≤i≤n
5.1.8 Step 9: develop the cause‑effect relationship digraph
5.1.5 Step 6: compute the total relation matrix (TRM)
Scatter plotting the data set ( Ri+Cj , Ri-Cj ) produces a causal
digraph. Figure 4 shows 16 key enablers for AI adoption in
TRM depicts the comprehensive connection between each
FGSC. Cause group variables are above the X-axis, while
pair of variables, with the component tij designating the indi-
effect group variables are below.
rect influence that factor i has on factor j. I is the identity
matrix of n × n (see Eq. (4)).
6 Results and discussion
Table 5  Linguistic assessment scale and corresponding TFNs
A causal diagram (Fig. 4) was developed after confirma-
Linguistic Variable Influence Corresponding
Score Triangular Fuzzy tion from the assessment group and the determination of
Numbers (TFNs) the TRM. The causal diagram simplifies the case's com-
plexity, allowing for more in-depth analysis and better
No Influence (NO) 0 (0,0,0.25)
judgments. The present study's findings are broken down
Very Low Influence (VL) 1 (0,0.25,0.5)
into three categories: an overall ranking of enablers,
Low Influence (L) 2 (0.25,0.5,0.75)
categorization of enablers into cause and effect groups,
High Influence (H) 3 (0.5,0.75,1)
and explanations of the major enablers for managerial
Very High Influence (VH) 4 (0.75,1,1)
decision-making.

13
Enabling artificial intelligence for sustainable food grain supply chains: an agri 5.0 and…

Table 6  Cause and Effect group enablers for AI adoption in FGSC

Enablers Ri Cj Ri + Cj Rank Ri—Cj Cause/Effect

EN1 Development of computing infrastructure 3.0677 2.0843 5.152 14 0.984 Cause

EN2 Coordination and trust among organizations 3.467 3.0283 6.495 3 0.439 Cause
EN3 Economic incentives from the government and private parties 3.2668 2.155 5.422 8 1.112 Cause
EN4 Customer satisfaction in demand volatility 2.1409 3.175 5.316 10 -1.034 Effect
EN5 Green IoT-driven total automation 3.4069 3.1338 6.541 2 0.273 Cause
EN6 Promoting private partnerships and bilateral collaboration 3.7404 2.1949 5.935 5 1.546 Cause
EN7 Legal and regulatory interventions from the government 4.1294 2.9863 7.116 1 1.143 Cause
EN8 Information sharing and communication among SC stakeholders 3.4088 2.8227 6.232 4 0.586 Cause
EN9 Build a data integration team 1.7997 3.5851 5.385 9 -1.785 Effect
EN10 Job security post AI adoption 1.0334 3.4763 4.510 16 -2.443 Effect
EN11 Collaborative research for responsible AI 2.6939 3.1937 5.888 6 -0.500 Effect
EN12 Top management’s involvement, support, and commitment 4.1154 1.078 5.194 12 3.038 Cause
EN13 Data-driven organizational culture 2.7621 2.3996 5.162 13 0.362 Cause
EN14 Rescaling internal talent; workforce hiring 1.9559 3.7783 5.734 7 -1.823 Effect
EN15 Implementing prototype projects for checking the viability 1.8958 3.0072 4.903 15 -1.112 Effect
EN16 Digital literacy and awareness building 2.2476 3.0032 5.281 11 -0.786 Effect

6.1 Ranking of the enablers based on (Ri+Cj ) score
The identified enablers for AI adoption from the CE and
Industry 5.0 perspective in FGSC are ranked based on the
( Ri+Cj ) scores (see Table 6). For the current research, ‘Legal
and regulatory interventions from the government (EN7)’
is the most significant enabler with the highest ( Ri+Cj )
score of 7.116, while the least important is ‘Job certainty
after AI adoption’ (EN10), with ( Ri+Cj ) score of 4.510. AI
generates hazards that existing laws and regulations cannot
address, hence new legislation is required. If AI technology
manufacturers explain how AI judgments are made, the
existing method can operate well in most circumstances.
Many researchers have highlighted the need for proper reg-
ulatory interventions from the government (Manning et al.
2022; Monteiro and Barata 2021). Next, ‘Green IoT-driven
total automation (EN5)’ has the second highest ( Ri+Cj ) score
of 6.541. IoT-driven agriculture can drastically boost the SC
industry by using the resources optimally. This can help to
access real-time data and better forecasting. Similar reports
have been noted (Devi et al. 2021; Hari et al. 2018). Next,
‘Coordination and trust among the organizations (EN2)’

Table 7  Total relation matrix (TRM)

EN1 EN2 EN3 EN4 EN5 EN6 EN7 EN8 EN9 EN10 EN11 EN12 EN13 EN14 EN15 EN16

EN1 0.104 0.208 0.146 0.199 0.228 0.163 0.190 0.213 0.253 0.246 0.233 0.058 0.190 0.243 0.202 0.191
EN2 0.122 0.176 0.128 0.221 0.250 0.193 0.244 0.232 0.279 0.269 0.254 0.119 0.203 0.289 0.244 0.244
EN3 0.182 0.214 0.116 0.242 0.239 0.185 0.199 0.206 0.247 0.261 0.209 0.060 0.200 0.259 0.215 0.233
EN4 0.108 0.112 0.126 0.113 0.115 0.112 0.158 0.105 0.130 0.197 0.163 0.038 0.151 0.203 0.135 0.175
EN5 0.183 0.240 0.188 0.247 0.176 0.126 0.205 0.229 0.272 0.267 0.233 0.080 0.203 0.283 0.238 0.239
EN6 0.199 0.258 0.202 0.265 0.250 0.134 0.255 0.212 0.292 0.288 0.268 0.086 0.217 0.305 0.255 0.257
EN7 0.205 0.278 0.219 0.288 0.285 0.221 0.205 0.264 0.316 0.309 0.289 0.145 0.220 0.331 0.277 0.279
EN8 0.124 0.246 0.176 0.202 0.251 0.195 0.224 0.162 0.278 0.218 0.239 0.134 0.188 0.285 0.244 0.244
EN9 0.135 0.092 0.118 0.165 0.096 0.089 0.141 0.087 0.105 0.126 0.150 0.032 0.076 0.167 0.109 0.113
EN10 0.038 0.054 0.074 0.106 0.056 0.041 0.103 0.051 0.062 0.063 0.059 0.021 0.043 0.137 0.072 0.054
EN11 0.130 0.191 0.101 0.212 0.192 0.168 0.188 0.179 0.232 0.176 0.143 0.053 0.127 0.225 0.171 0.207
EN12 0.214 0.262 0.218 0.288 0.285 0.221 0.274 0.264 0.316 0.292 0.289 0.073 0.235 0.329 0.276 0.278
EN13 0.131 0.206 0.119 0.217 0.210 0.104 0.192 0.199 0.232 0.227 0.215 0.055 0.109 0.195 0.156 0.194
EN14 0.066 0.151 0.070 0.104 0.154 0.089 0.102 0.157 0.187 0.179 0.172 0.039 0.074 0.125 0.168 0.118
EN15 0.068 0.162 0.070 0.119 0.164 0.070 0.145 0.091 0.182 0.178 0.155 0.038 0.074 0.190 0.095 0.096
EN16 0.077 0.180 0.085 0.185 0.183 0.083 0.162 0.173 0.202 0.183 0.123 0.048 0.090 0.214 0.150 0.111

The bold values represent values equal to or greater than the threshold value of the TRM

13
 S. Das et al.

Fig. 4  Causal diagram of the

enablers

has the third highest ( Ri+Cj ) score of 6.495. Management
often has too little understanding of what AI needs. Modern
skills and technology are unquestionably required but it's
also critical to match an industry's culture, organizational
structure, and working practices to promote widespread AI
adoption. However, old attitudes and methods of working
are incompatible with those required for AI at the major-
ity of firms that weren't born digital. Hence, coordination
and trust must be instilled to ensure better transparency and
decision-making; this will facilitate widespread AI adop-
tion in FGSC. Similar insights have been explored by other
researchers (Akundi et al. 2022; Dora et al. 2021; Rajput and
Singh 2019). Figure 5 highlights the rank of all enablers.
6.2 Discussion on cause group enablers
Based on their ( Ri - Cj ) scores, the enablers have been cat-
egorized into two groups—the cause group and the effect
group (Table 6). Out of 16 enablers, nine enablers with
positive ( Ri - Cj ) scores are found to be in the cause group
(see Fig. 6), while the other seven enablers with negative
( Ri - Cj ) scores are found to be in the effect group. To what
extent the AI adoption in Indian FGSC is successful depends
on the performance of the enablers specified in the cause
group. Therefore, this is a more important area than the vari-
ables influencing the impact group (Das et al. 2021; Kumar
et al. 2022).
The enabler “Top management involvement, support, and
commitment (EN12)” has the highest impact power among
all the enablers in the cause group with (­ Ri—Cj) score of
3.038. This means that the support of upper management is
crucial for securing the resources (facility, capital, IT, and
human resource) needed to put various strategies into action
and generate greater rewards. Support from top management
is frequently cited as a critical enabler and a necessity for
technology adoption. The enabler “Promoting private part-
nerships and bilateral collaboration (EN6)” has the second
highest impact power among the other enablers in the cause

Fig. 5  Prioritized enablers Prioritized enablers based on (Ri + Cj) value

based on ­(Ri + ­Cj) value
8.000
7.000
6.000
5.000
Ri + Cj

4.000
3.000
2.000
1.000
0.000
EN7 EN5 EN2 EN8 EN6 EN11 EN14 EN3 EN9 EN4 EN16 EN12 EN13 EN1 EN15 EN10
Ri + Cj 7.116 6.541 6.495 6.232 5.935 5.888 5.734 5.422 5.385 5.316 5.281 5.194 5.162 5.152 4.903 4.510

13
Enabling artificial intelligence for sustainable food grain supply chains: an agri 5.0 and…
Fig. 6  Prioritized cause group
enablers
3.500 3.038
3.000
2.500
Ri - Cj
2.000
1.500
1.000
0.500
0.000
EN12
group with ­(Ri—Cj) score of 1.546. This enabler dispatches
direct impact to other enablers such as EN2, EN4, EN5,
EN7, EN9, EN10, EN11, EN14, EN15, and EN16. Hence,
to maximize the value of present and prospects, it will be
necessary to work together to maximize the effect of invest-
ments and activities now underway at all levels. India has a
solid research foundation across all of its priority sectors, but
the country has to defragment its research infrastructure to
establish AI policies that favour the development of useful,
trustworthy, and resilient AI.
“Legal and regulatory intervention from the government
(EN7)” has the third highest impact power among the other
enablers in the cause group with ­(Ri—Cj) score of 1.143.
However, the highest Ri score (4.129) indicates that it is
one of the most important cause enablers with a significant
impact on others. It is evident from the literature that data
governance, data protection, connectivity, and data privacy
are all crucial to the future of agriculture's AI adoption. As
the use of AI and other data-centric processes continues
to grow, so are the number of laws governing them. These
regulations are obligatory for businesses, particularly those
in a heavily regulated sector like agriculture. Similar insights
have been highlighted by other researchers that legal safe-
guards may need to be updated to account for the unique
challenges posed by algorithmic decision-making (Hangl
et al. 2022; Manning et al. 2022). Developing a set of guid-
ing principles and norms is essential to ensure that all parties
involved in the SC have a shared view of what constitutes
appropriate behavior.
The enabler “Long-term investment and economic incen-
tives from the government and private parties (EN3)” has
the fourth highest ­(Ri—Cj) score of 1.112. The use of robots
has benefited the agriculture sector in various ways, includ-
ing increased production yield, but implementing AI from
the Agri 5.0 and CE perspective comes with a huge cost
involved. Hence, a long-term strategic investment plan
is necessary to facilitate the adoption process in FGSC.
This study’s results can help to highlight the importance
of long-term commercial investment and incentives while
Cause group enablers
1.546
1.143 1.112 0.984
0.586 0.439 0.362 0.273
EN6 EN7 EN3 EN1 EN8 EN2 EN13 EN5
Enablers
encouraging initial investment for AI adoption at the farm
level (Cadden et al. 2021; Garske et al. 2021).
“Development of computing infrastructure (EN1)” has
the fifth highest (­ Ri—Cj) score of 0.984 among the cause
group enablers. It is evident from previous research that
currently, India lacks the computational infrastructure
which can eliminate many critical challenges of data stor-
age, data accessibility, data privacy, cloud computing, and
data analysis, etc. Development of computing infrastructure
can be beneficial in collecting information in many forms
(audio, video, picture, text, and digital maps); data may then
be gathered and stored centrally on the cloud for further
analysis and to improve the decision-making process (Fraga-
Lamas et al. 2021; Maddikunta et al. 2022).
The other significant cause group enablers are “Informa-
tion sharing between the stakeholders (EN8)”, “Coordina-
tion and trust among organizations (EN2)”, “Data-driven
organizational culture (EN13)”, and “IoT-driven total auto-
mation (EN5)”. The ­(Ri—Cj) scores of EN8, EN2, EN13,
and EN5 are 0.586, 0.439, 0.362, and 0.273 respectively.
These enablers are less impacted by other enablers as seen
by the lower value of ­(Ri—Cj); on the other hand, a com-
paratively high ­(Ri + ­Cj) score indicates the significant
capability of these enablers to facilitate the process of AI
adoption in FGSC (Manning et al. 2021; Ritchie & Brindley
2007). For example, the success of AI implementation is
highly dependent on information sharing between members
involved in the SC. Hence, coordination and trust among
stakeholders are vital to ensure credible and quality data.
Similarly, a data-driven culture guarantees that everyone has
a data-first approach and uses data in every decision. By
introducing enhanced systems and new technology, more
teams may access previously segregated or hidden informa-
tion, investigate patterns, and execute changes in response
to emerging opportunities. Other researchers (Cadden et al.
2021; Dora et al. 2021) have also found that data-driven
organizational culture plays an important role in the process
of AI adoption in FSC.
13

6.3 Discussion on effect group enablers
The SC for food grains operates in very turbulent and unpre-
dictable conditions; this does not imply that the factors in
the effect group are not important to the cause group. Each
factor is necessary, but since all key enablers cannot be con-
centrated at once, it is often important to separate them into
cause and effect group factors. These effect group enablers
are categorized based on the negative (­ Ri—Cj) scores. The
ranking of the effect group enablers is shown in Fig. 7.
The factor “Collaborative research for responsible AI
(EN11)” has a ­(Ri—Cj) score of -0.5 but the fifth highest
­(Ri + ­Cj) score of 5.888. These values suggest that while this
enabler is greatly impacted by other enablers, it also has a
significant impact on others. Although EN11 is assigned in
the effect group, collaborative research work will help find
solutions to real-world complex problems in FGSC and can
provide a roadmap for successful implementation. Several
researchers have highlighted the importance of research
for exploring the scope, developing policies, creating data
repositories etc.for the adoption of AI in SC (Hangl et al.
2022; Manning et al. 2022).
The factor “Digital literacy and awareness building
(EN16)” has a strong interconnection ­(Ri + ­Cj = 5.281) and
significant impact on other enablers ­(Ri—Cj = -0.786) and
thus plays an important role for AI adoption in FGSC. This
result is in line with both Hangl et al. 2022 and Junaid et al.
2021. These studies emphasized that digital literacy and
awareness building among farmers will create an opportu-
nity and demand for AI and Agri 5.0-based products in SC.
The enabler “Customer satisfaction in demand volatility
(EN4)” has a (Ri + Cj) score of 5.316 and (­ Ri—Cj) score
of -1.034, indicating that EN4 has a significant impact on
other enablers but is also significantly impacted by other
enablers. Thus, to cope with the market's ambiguity and
volatility and to meet the demands of the food supply,
businesses must embrace creative technologies that show
a high degree of agility as a consequence of the market's
wild fluctuations. The enabler “Implementing prototype
Fig. 7  Prioritized effect group
enablers
3.000
2.443
2.500
2.000 1.823
Ri - Cj
1.500
1.000
0.500
0.000
EN10 EN14
13
S. Das et al.
projects for checking viability (EN15)” has the third low-
est relation value ­(Ri—Cj = -1.112) and does not signifi-
cantly interconnect to other enablers ­( R i + ­C j = 4.903).
Several respondents highlighted the importance of a pilot
project to explore the scope, develop policies, create data
repositories etc.for the adoption of AI in SC.
Next, “Build a data integration team (EN9)” has been
identified as one of the key enablers for AI adoption with
a ­( Ri—C j) score of -1.785 and ­( R i + ­C j) score of 5.385.
Thus, this enabler is not strongly interconnected to others
but is strongly influenced by other enablers. The result is
in line with other research (Cadden et al. 2021; Dora et al.
2021; PWC 2018) that has highlighted how data integra-
tion will continue to be crucial in ensuring that AI can
meet these obstacles and provide useful results. Not only
is the dimensionality important, but also the amount of
data. For machine learning algorithms to have a greater
probability of arriving at the correct results, they need a
thorough comprehension of all data properties.
The enabler “Rescaling internal talent (EN14)” signifi-
cantly contributes to the adoption of AI ­(Ri + ­Cj = 5.734)
and has the second lowest relational value ­(R i —
Cj = -1.823). This research outcome is in line with previ-
ous studies (Barros et al. 2020; Dora et al. 2021).
“Job security post-AI adoption (EN10)” is impacted by
other enablers ­(Ri—Cj = -2.443) with the lowest (­ Ri + ­Cj)
score of 4.510. This indicates that EN10 doesn’t have
much influence on the adoption of AI in FGSC but it can
be achievable by approaching other enablers (Cadden et al.
2021; Garske et al. 2021). Indicator checks for both the
enablers in the cause group and the effect group are shown
in Tables 8 and 9, respectively.
6.4 Correlation between the enablers
The TRM may be used to examine the interplay between
enablers. A threshold value of 0.249 is applied to each mem-
ber of the TRM to exclude any associations with insignifi-
cant effects. We further categorize the important impacts
Effect group enablers
1.785
1.112 1.034
0.786
0.500
EN9 EN15 EN4 EN16 EN11
Enablers
Enabling artificial intelligence for sustainable food grain supply chains: an agri 5.0 and…

Table 8  Indicator check for cause group enablers

Cause group enablers – Causal enablers
SN no Indicator check Description

1 The highest degree of influence power R
2 Highest ­(Ri—Cj) score in the group
3 Lowest ­(Ri—Cj) score
4 Highest ­(Ri + ­Cj) score
EN7 – Legal and regulatory intervention from the government has the highest impact power
R score of 4.129; this indicates that it is one of the most important cause enablers with a
significant impact on others
EN12 – Top management involvement, support, and commitment have the highest (­ Ri—Cj)
value of 3.038; this indicates that EN12 is the least impacted enabler by other enablers
EN5 – Data-driven organizational culture has the lowest (­ Ri—Cj) value of 0.273; this indi-
cates that although EN5 is a causal factor, it is highly impacted by other enablers
EN7 – Legal and regulatory intervention from the government has the highest ­(Ri + ­Cj) value
of 7.116; this indicates that management should pay attention to this enabler because of its
potential capacity of enabling AI implementation in FGSC

between the various enablers into three equal-sized value
categories. The minimum–maximum difference is divided
by 3 to compute the following interaction. Table 10 shows
that there are modest (green; values from 0.249 to 0.276),
moderate (yellow; values from 0.277 to 0.304), and substan-
tial (red; values from 0.305 to 0.331) impacts between the
enablers. It can be seen from the heatmap that “Legal and
regulatory interventions from the government (EN7)” has
a substantial effect on the following factors, EN9, EN10,
and EN14, and has a moderate effect on EN2, EN4, EN5,
EN11, EN15, and EN16. Similarly, EN12 has a significant
effect on EN9 and EN14 and a moderate effect on EN4,
EN5, EN10, EN11, and EN16. It is also evident that EN9
is mostly impacted by EN7 and EN12, and moderately
impacted by EN2, EN6, and EN8. Consequently, EN14 is
mostly impacted by EN6, EN7, and EN12 in addition to
the moderate effect from EN2, EN5, and EN8. Similarly,
insights can be drawn from the other enablers.
6.5 Sensitivity analysis
The link between cause and effect group variables or bias in
the expert data was examined using a sensitivity analysis (SA).
For the experts listed in Table 3, a mix of different weights
was allocated (see Table 11). We assigned the weights to the
experts based on their credibility with weights varied between
0 and 1. Three experts had more than 10 years of experience in
the relevant area among the randomly chosen five experts. So,
we assigned a comparatively higher weighting to those experts
(SCE1, SCE2, SCE3) than the others. The ranking order has
also been contrasted with the average matrix of the experts
(Scenario 4). Figure 8 replicates the same ranking for the
cause and effect group components as presented in Table 12's
sensitivity analysis result, suggesting a negligibly small order
difference. As a consequence, the findings are reliable and not
susceptible to weight changes.
7 Research implications
The current research makes original contributions in the
form of theoretical and practical suggestions; both are dis-
cussed in the following sub-sections.
7.1 Theoretical implications
While some researchers have studied the factors that encour-
age the use of new technologies like AI in the SC (Queiroz

Table 9  Indicator check for effect group enablers

Effect group enablers – Impacted enablers
SN no Indicator check Description

1 The highest degree of influence power R EN11 – Collaborative research for responsible AI has the highest impact power R score of
2.694 indicating that EN11 is the most effective enabler to the administration in terms of
turning AI adoption into practice
2 Highest ­(Ri—Cj) score in the group EN11 – Digital literacy and awareness building has the highest ­(Ri—Cj) value of 0.5; this
indicates that EN11 is most impacted by the rest of the enablers
3 Lowest ­(Ri—Cj) score EN10 – Employment stability post-AI adoption has the lowest (­ Ri—Cj) value of -2.443; this
indicates that EN11 is least impacted by the rest of the enablers
4 Highest ­(Ri + ­Cj) score EN11 – Digital literacy and awareness building has the highest ­(Ri + ­Cj) value of 5.888,
indicating that EN11 is highly significant compared to other enablers

13
 S. Das et al.

Table 10  Correlation heatmap of the enablers

Table 11  Weights assigned for Supply chain Supply chain Supply chain Supply chain Supply
experts for SA expert 1 expert 2 expert 3 expert 4 chain
(SCE1) (SCE2) (SCE3) (SCE4) expert 5
(SCE5)

Scenario 1 Considering the average matrix only

Scenario 2 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.2 0.20
Scenario 3 0.35 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.05
Scenario 4 0.15 0.15 0.35 0.25 0.10
Scenario 5 0.20 0.40 0.30 0.05 0.05
Scenario 6 0.25 0.35 0.30 0.05 0.05

Fig. 8  Sensitivity analysis

13
 Table 12  SA results
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Scenario 6
Ri + Cj Ri-Cj Rank Ri + Cj Ri-Cj Rank Ri + Cj Ri-Cj Rank Ri + Cj Ri-Cj Rank Ri + Cj Ri-Cj Rank Ri + Cj Ri-Cj Rank

5.158 0.984 14 5.087 0.960 14 5.091 0.973 14 5.191 0.994 14 5.090 0.957 14 5.092 0.964 14
6.492 0.491 3 6.401 0.475 3 6.410 0.471 3 6.543 0.504 3 6.403 0.478 3 6.411 0.475 3
5.397 1.057 9 5.328 1.054 9 5.337 1.060 9 5.435 1.054 9 5.328 1.051 9 5.336 1.056 9
5.310 -1.028 11 5.227 -1.008 10 5.244 -1.009 10 5.348 -1.037 11 5.226 -1.009 10 5.236 -1.010 10
6.611 0.242 2 6.490 0.261 2 6.499 0.259 2 6.680 0.231 2 6.495 0.260 2 6.500 0.260 2
5.966 1.554 5 5.867 1.519 5 5.875 1.524 5 6.025 1.576 5 5.869 1.519 5 5.877 1.523 5
7.116 1.159 1 7.002 1.164 1 7.014 1.148 1 7.167 1.166 1 7.005 1.169 1 7.011 1.163 1
6.281 0.597 4 6.172 0.576 4 6.180 0.580 4 6.340 0.605 4 6.176 0.576 4 6.181 0.577 4
5.421 -1.793 8 5.329 -1.776 8 5.337 -1.774 8 5.470 -1.807 8 5.333 -1.777 8 5.337 -1.778 8
Enabling artificial intelligence for sustainable food grain supply chains: an agri 5.0 and…

4.510 -2.489 16 4.450 -2.445 16 4.456 -2.446 16 4.539 -2.520 16 4.451 -2.448 16 4.455 -2.450 16
5.937 -0.507 6 5.835 -0.491 6 5.844 -0.494 6 5.991 -0.511 6 5.839 -0.491 6 5.844 -0.491 6
5.223 3.058 12 5.144 3.012 12 5.149 3.014 12 5.269 3.085 12 5.147 3.014 12 5.151 3.016 12
5.188 0.371 13 5.112 0.365 13 5.115 0.366 13 5.233 0.374 13 5.115 0.365 13 5.119 0.366 13
5.777 -1.807 7 5.673 -1.814 7 5.688 -1.811 7 5.825 -1.811 7 5.676 -1.814 7 5.680 -1.816 7
4.875 -1.082 15 4.801 -1.072 15 4.828 -1.081 15 4.890 -1.088 15 4.798 -1.068 15 4.807 -1.076 15
5.3301 -0.8081 10 5.2032 -0.7797 11 5.2238 -0.7814 11 5.39 -0.8148 10 5.2054 -0.7825 11 5.2137 -0.7787 11

13

and Wamba 2019; Pillai and Sivathanu 2020), only a very
few have examined these factors with regard to the FSC. We
believe that it is better to analyze the adoption process of AI
keeping the area-specific constraints and potential into con-
sideration. Hence, identifying and analyzing the enablers for
AI adoption in FGSC from the Agri 5.0 and CE perspective
is novel. The study has listed 16 significant enablers, with
those factors further divided into cause and effect groups.
Thus, this research provides a solid foundation for advancing
the overall understanding of the key enablers of AI adoption
in FGSC in India. Insights from this study may speed up the
process of AI adoption in FGSC.
Secondly, this research makes a significant contribution
to current academic literature by elucidating the interplay
and interdependence of several factors that facilitate the
adoption of AI. Using the fuzzy DEMATEL method, we
have found several relationships between previously unrec-
ognized enablers for AI adoption in FGSC.
7.2 Managerial implications
The research identifies a range of ramifications for both the
government and business organizations. Thus, it provides
an operational and flexible decision-making model for the
management of AI adoption in FGSC.
• Based on the findings of this research, a prioritized list of
enabling factors is provided. Policymakers can use this
list to develop strategies for the successful implementa-
tion of AI in FGSC.
• The classification of cause and effect group enablers
helps managers and policymakers in determining the
key elements on which to focus to advance AI adoption.
Managers may now readily determine the aspects that
need more focus than others. The cause group variables
should thus be their main concern since they have a sig-
nificant influence on the effect group elements.
• According to the results of the study, “Legal and regula-
tory interventions from the government (EN7)” is the
most important key enabler among all. It is difficult to
regulate AI, as different people have different opinions
on how much and what kinds of regulation will work
best for any particular applications it will be used for.
Hence, it is essential to pinpoint the precise function that
legislation may have while framing regulatory and legal
techniques. Furthermore, given the speed at which this
nascent technology is developing, a continuing assess-
ment of AI ethical concepts and norms will be required.
• According to the study, “Green IoT-driven full automation
(EN5)” is the second most significant enabler for responsible
AI adoption. Management must focus on the quality of the
equipment used in India. It must be sturdy enough to survive
13
S. Das et al.
field conditions and be self-sustainable to perform consist-
ently without human interference. This requires a system that
can handle a lot of data and work across devices. Agricul-
ture AI devices must be networked and compatible across
platforms for hassle-free data collection; this will encourage
further distribution of AI technology in SC.
• “Top management’s involvement and support (EN12)”,
“Development of computing infrastructure (EN1)”, “Coor-
dination and trust among stakeholders (EN2)”, and “Long
term investment and economic incentives from the gov-
ernment and private parties (EN3)” have been identified
as some of the significant enablers. Management must
work with openness and provide support to promote bilat-
eral collaboration and coordination among SC members.
The government must focus on creating demand through
an awareness program and provide the necessary financial
investment for AI implementation in FGSC.
• Expertise in AI and the accompanying field is scarce.
AI demands highly knowledgeable and experienced
personnel. Although companies are recruiting data sci-
entists and analysts to use AI-based solutions, demand
for trained specialists exceeds supply. Therefore, man-
agement must provide training and resources to rescale
the workforce for adoption of AI. Further, the sensitivity
analysis helps detect experts' consistency.
8 Conclusion
Even though India's agricultural industry is in a transi-
tional phase and is more reliant on technological integra-
tion for improved operations, it nevertheless confronts
several difficulties throughout the value chain. Technology
offers remedies to these problems by introducing disrup-
tive interferences. Integrating indigenous and traditional
farming knowledge with game-changing smart farming
methods, such as the use of AI, is necessary for the success
of the overall system. Adopting AI technology will allow
for greater output with more efficient use of resources via
improvements in areas such as predictive analysis, crop
health management, quality, traceability etc.
In this context, this study aimed to identify the key ena-
blers for the adoption of AI in Indian FGSC through an
extensive literature review and consultation with industry
experts from Agri 5.0 and CE viewpoints. The study has
drawn up sixteen key enablers for AI adoption and prior-
itized them based on ­(Ri + ­Cj) scores. Among all the enablers
“Legal and regulatory interventions from the government
(EN7)”, and “Green IoT driven total automation (EN5)” are
the top two significant enablers for successful implementa-
tion of AI in FGSC. Hence, decision-makers must concen-
trate on these enablers while drafting policies or strategic
plans for AI implementation.
Enabling artificial intelligence for sustainable food grain supply chains: an agri 5.0 and…
However, the (R + C) value cannot be used to determine
which enablers should be the focus since certain enablers
may not have an impact on other enablers and hence may
not be an overall success in terms of the outcome. There-
fore, using the ­( R i—C j) value, it is essential to catego-
rize the enablers into cause and effect categories. Hence,
F-DEMATEL is used to address the question "What is
the relevance of various components in a comprehensive
decision framework?", as mentioned in the Solution Meth-
odology section.
Currently, agriculture is going through a catalytic shift.
The industry is absorbing and using cutting-edge technology
to improve operational efficiency and consequently increase
production. Technological tools work to bring data science
and analytics to each element of the agricultural value chain,
ultimately optimizing the effectiveness of its distribution.
This article also recognizes some limitations that have
emerged. The research relies on subjective expert views. The
study was also limited to Indian industrial organizations.
Expert views were used to analyze one case organization's
enablers. We appreciate that results may vary according to
country, industry size, domain etc. Future studies may use
ISM, AHP, fuzzy MICMAC etc.
All the data has been provided in manuscript.
Authors' contributions Sumanta Das, Ideas, Writing– Original draft
preparation, Conceptualization, Formal analysis Dr. Akhilesh Barve,
Formal Analysis, Visualization Supervision, Project Administration
Dr. Naresh Chandra Sahu, Review editing, Formal Analysis Dr
Kamalakanta Muduli, Critical review, Data Curation, Validation,
Commentary and Revision.
Data availability All the data has been provided in manuscript.
Declarations
Ethics approval All authors follow the ethics in the research and pro-
vide consent to participate in the research.
Consent to participate All authors provide consent for publication.
Conflicts of interest/Competing interests The authors declare that they
have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships
that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
Akundi A, Euresti D, Luna S, Ankobiah W, Lopes A, Edinbarough I
(2022) State of Industry 5.0—Analysis and identification of cur-
rent research trends. Appl Syst Innov 5(1):27. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
3390/​asi50​10027
Alberti L, Bhat SA, Huang N-F, Sofi IB, Sultan M (2021) Agriculture-
Food Supply Chain Management Based on Blockchain and IoT:
a narrative on enterprise blockchain interoperability. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​3390/​agric​ulture
Barros MV, Salvador R, de Francisco AC, Piekarski CM (2020) Map-
ping of research lines on circular economy practices in agricul-
ture: From waste to energy. In Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews (Vol. 131). Elsevier Ltd. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​rser.​
2020.​109958
Belhadi A, Mani V, Kamble SS, Khan SAR, Verma S (2021) Artificial
intelligence-driven innovation for enhancing supply chain resil-
ience and performance under the effect of supply chain dynamism:
an empirical investigation. Ann Oper Res. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 007/​
s10479-​021-​03956-x
Bestelmeyer BT, Marcillo G, McCord SE, Mirsky S, Moglen G,
Neven LG, Peters D, Sohoulande C, Wakie T (2020) Scaling up
agricultural research with artificial intelligence. IT Professional
22(3):33–38. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1109/​MITP.​2020.​29860​62
Bhat SA, Huang NF (2021) Big data and AI revolution in precision
agriculture: survey and challenges. IEEE Access 9:110209–
110222. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1109/​ACCESS.​2021.​31022​27
Cadden T, Dennehy D, Mantymaki M, Treacy R (2021) Understanding
the influential and mediating role of cultural enablers of AI inte-
gration to supply chain. Int J Prod Res. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​
00207​543.​2021.​19466​14
Chandrasekaran M, Ranganathan R (2017) Modelling and optimisa-
tion of Indian traditional agriculture supply chain to reduce post-
harvest loss and CO2 emission. Ind Manag Data Syst 117(9):1817–
1841. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​IMDS-​09-​2016-​0383
Chauhan A, Kaur H, Yadav S, Jakhar SK (2020) A hybrid model for
investigating and selecting a sustainable supply chain for agri-
produce in India. Ann Oper Res 290(1–2):621–642. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1007/​s10479-​019-​03190-6
Das S, Barve A, Sahu NC, Muduli K,Kumar A, Luthra S (2023a) Ana-
lysing the challenges to sustainable foodgrain storage manage-
ment: a path to food security in emerging nations. Int J Food Sci
Technol. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​ijfs.​16437
Das S, Barve A, Sahu NC, Yadav DK (2021) Selecting enablers for
sustainable PDS supply chain in the Indian context using fuzzy-
DEMATEL approach. J Agribusiness Dev Emerg Econ. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1108/​JADEE-​01-​2021-​0025
Das S, Myla AY, Barve A, Kumar A, Sahu NC, Muduli K. Luthra S
(2023b) A systematic assessment ofmulti‐dimensional risk factors
for sustainable development in food grain supplychains: A busi-
ness strategic prospective analysis. Bus Strategy Environ. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1002/​bse.​3435
Devi A, Julie Therese M, Dharanyadevi P, Pravinkumar K (2021) IoT
Based Food Grain Wastage Monitoring and Controlling System
for Warehouse. 2021 International Conference on System, Com-
putation, Automation and Networking (ICSCAN), 1–5. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1109/​ICSCA​N53069.​2021.​95264​00
Dora M, Kumar A, Mangla SK, Pant A, Kamal MM (2021) Critical suc-
cess factors influencing artificial intelligence adoption in food supply
chains. Int J Prod Res. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​00207​543.​2021.​19596​65
Drèze J, Khera R (2015) Understanding leakages in the public dis-
tribution system. Econ Pol Wkly 50(7):39–42
Durrant A, Markovic M, Matthews D, May D, Leontidis G, Enright J
(2021) How might technology rise to the challenge of data shar-
ing in agri-food? Glob Food Sec 28:100493. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1016/j.​gfs.​2021.​100493
Faisal MN, Talib F (2016) Implementing traceability in Indian food-
supply chains: An interpretive structural modeling approach.
J Foodserv Bus Res 19(2):171–196. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/
​15378​020.​2016.​11598​94
FAO (2021) State of food security and nutrition in the world. https://​
www.​world​bank.​org/​en/​topic/​agric​ulture/​overv​iew
Fraga-Lamas P, Lopes SI, Fernández-Caramés TM (2021) Green
iot and edge AI as key technological enablers for a sustainable
digital transition towards a smart circular economy: an industry
5.0 use case. Sensors 21(17). https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​s2117​5745
13

Garske B, Bau A, Ekardt F (2021) Digitalization and ai in european
agriculture: a strategy for achieving climate and biodiversity
targets? Sustain (Switzerland) 13(9). https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​
su130​94652
Gunasekera D, Parsons H, Smith M (2017) Post-harvest loss
reduction in Asia-Pacific developing economies. J Agribusi-
ness Dev Emerg Econ 7(3):303–317. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​
JADEE-​12-​2015-​0058
Haleem A, Javaid M, Khan IH (2019a) Current status and applications of
Artificial Intelligence (AI) in medical field: An overview. Curr Med
Res Pract 9(6):231–237. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​cmrp.​2019.​11.​005
Haleem A, Khan S, Khan MI (2019b) Traceability implementation in
food supply chain: A grey-DEMATEL approach. Inform Process
Agric 6(3):335–348. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​inpa.​2019.​01.​003
Hangl J, Behrens VJ, Krause S (2022) Barriers, drivers, and social con-
siderations for AI adoption in supply chain management: a tertiary
study. Logistics 6(3):63. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.3​ 390/l​ ogist​ ics60​ 30063
Hari S, Prasadh HR, Jadisha S, Parthiban P, Narainan SN (2018)
Enhancement of IoT based smart salvation and monitoring devices
for agriculture. Int J Recent Trends Eng Res 204–209. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​23883/​ijrter.​conf.​02180​328.​034.​6fsd3
Holmes W, Porayska-Pomsta K, Holstein K, Sutherland E, Baker T,
Shum SB, Santos OC, Rodrigo MT, Cukurova M, Bittencourt II,
Koedinger KR (2022) Ethics of AI in education: towards a com-
munity-wide framework. Int J Artif Intell Educ 32(3):504–526.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s40593-​021-​00239-1
Jain V, Tewary T, Gopalakrishnan BN (2021) Unlocking technology adop-
tion for a robust food supply chain: evidence from indian food pro-
cessing sector. HSE Econ J 25(1):147–164. https://​doi.​org/​10.​17323/​
1813-​8691-​2021-​25-1-​147-​164
Jeng DJF (2015) Generating a causal model of supply chain collabo-
ration using the fuzzy DEMATEL technique. Comput Ind Eng
87:283–295. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​cie.​2015.​05.​007
Junaid M, Shaikh A, Hassan MU, Alghamdi A, Rajab K, al Reshan MS,
Alkinani M (2021) Smart Agriculture Cloud Using AI Based Tech-
niques. Energies 14(16):5129. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​en141​65129
Kamble SS, Gunasekaran A, Gawankar SA (2020) Achieving sustain-
able performance in a data-driven agriculture supply chain: A
review for research and applications. Int J Prod Econ 219:179–
194. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ijpe.​2019.​05.​022
Khandelwal PM, Chavhan H (2019) Artificial intelligence in agricul-
ture: an emerging era of research article. https://w ​ ww.r​ esear​ chgat​ e.​
net/​publi​cation/​33558​2861
Khanzode AG, Sarma PRS, Goswami M (2021) Modelling interactions
of select enablers of Lean Six-Sigma considering sustainability
implications: an integrated circular economy and Industry 40 per-
spective. Prod Plann Control. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​09537​287.​
2021.​19809​08
Kollia I, Stevenson J, Kollias S (2021) AI-enabled efficient and safe
food supply chain. Electronics 10(11):1223. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
3390/​elect​ronic​s1011​1223
Kumar M, Raut RD, Sharma M, Choubey VK, Paul SK (2022) Enablers
for resilience and pandemic preparedness in food supply chain.
Oper Manag Res. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s12063-​022-​00272-w
Ling EK, Wahab SN (2020) Integrity of food supply chain: Going
beyond food safety and food quality. Int J Prod Qual Manag
29(2):216–232. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1504/​IJPQM.​2020.​105963
Liu Y, Ma X, Shu L, Hancke GP, Abu-Mahfouz AM (2021) From
industry 4.0 to agriculture 4.0: current status, enabling technolo-
gies, and research challenges. IEEE Trans Industr Inf 17(6):4322–
4334. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1109/​TII.​2020.​30039​10
Maddikunta PKR, Pham QV, Deepa BP, Dev N, Gadekallu K, Ruby
TR, Liyanage MR (2022) Industry 5.0: a survey on enabling tech-
nologies and potential applications. J Industrial Inform Integr 26.
Elsevier B.V. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jii.​2021.​100257
13
S. Das et al.
Mangla SK, Luthra S, Rich N, Kumar D, Rana NP, Dwivedi YK (2018)
Enablers to implement sustainable initiatives in agri-food supply
chains. Int J Prod Econ 203:379–393. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​
ijpe.​2018.​07.​012
Manning L, Brewer S, Craigon PJ, Frey J, Gutierrez A, Jacobs N,
Kanza S, Munday S, Sacks J, Pearson S (2022) Artificial intel-
ligence and ethics within the food sector: Developing a common
language for technology adoption across the supply chain. Trends
Food Sci Technol 125:33–42. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​tifs.​2022.​
04.​025
Manning L, Morris W, Birchmore I (2021) Organisational forgetting:
The food safety risk associated with unintentional knowledge loss.
Trends Food Sci Technol 118:242–251. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​
tifs.​2021.​08.​028
Mithun Ali S, Moktadir MA, Kabir G, Chakma J, Rumi MJU, Islam
MT (2019) Framework for evaluating risks in food supply chain:
Implications in food wastage reduction. J Clean Prod 228:786–
800. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2019.​04.​322
Monteiro J, Barata J (2021) Artificial intelligence in extended agri-
food supply chain: a short review based on bibliometric analysis.
Procedia Comput Sci 192:3020–3029. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​
procs.​2021.​09.​074
Naz F, Kumar A, Majumdar A, Agrawal R (2021) Is artificial intelligence
an enabler of supply chain resiliency post COVID-19? An exploratory
state-of-the-art review for future research. Oper Manag Res. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s12063-​021-​00208-w
Nyamah EY, Jiang Y, Feng Y, Enchill E (2017) Agri-food supply
chain performance: an empirical impact of risk. Manag Decis
55(5):872–891. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​MD-​01-​2016-​0049
Pan Y, Zhang L (2021) Roles of artificial intelligence in construction
engineering and management: A critical review and future trends.
Autom Constr 122:103517. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/j.a​ utcon.2​ 020.​
103517
Parmar PS, Desai TN (2020) Evaluating sustainable lean six Sigma
enablers using fuzzy DEMATEL: a case of an indian manufac-
turing organization. J Clean Prod 265. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​
jclep​ro.​2020.​121802
Pillai R, Sivathanu B (2020) Adoption of AI-based chatbots for hospi-
tality and tourism. Int J Contemp Hosp Manag 32(10):3199–3226.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​IJCHM-​04-​2020-​0259
PWC (2018) Sizing the Prize. What’s the Real Value of AI for Your
Business and How Can You Capitalise?
Queiroz MM, Fosso Wamba S (2019) Blockchain adoption challenges
in supply chain: An empirical investigation of the main drivers in
India and the USA. Int J Info Manage 46:70–82. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1016/j.​ijinf​omgt.​2018.​11.​021
Rajput S, Singh SP (2019) Connecting circular economy and indus-
try 4.0. Int J Inf Manag 49:98–113. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.
​ijinf​omgt.​2019.​03.​002
Rana NP, Chatterjee S, Dwivedi YK, Akter S (2022) Understanding
dark side of artificial intelligence (AI) integrated business analyt-
ics: assessing firm’s operational inefficiency and competitiveness.
Eur J Inf Syst 31(3):364–387. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​09600​85X.​
2021.​19556​28
Rathore R, Thakkar JJ, Jha JK (2020) Evaluation of risks in foodgrains
supply chain using failure mode effect analysis and fuzzy VIKOR.
Int J Qual Reliab Manag 38(2):551–580. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​
IJQRM-​02-​2019-​0070
Ritchie B, Brindley C (2007) An emergent framework for supply
chain risk management and performance measurement. J Oper
Res Soc 58(11):1398–1411. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1057/​palgr​ave.​
jors.​26024​12
Sharon M, Abirami CVK, Alagusundaram K (2014) Grain storage
management in India. J Postharvest Technol 02(01):012–014.
www.​jpht.​info
Enabling artificial intelligence for sustainable food grain supply chains: an agri 5.0 and…
Syeda IH, Alam MM, Illahi U, Su’ud MM (2021) Advance control
strategies using image processing, UAV and AI in agriculture: a
review. World J Eng (Vol 18(4):579–589. Emerald Group Hold-
ings Ltd. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​WJE-​09-​2020-​0459
Taherdoost H (2016) Sampling methods in research methodology; How
to choose a sampling technique for research. SSRN Electronic
Journal. https://​doi.​org/​10.​2139/​ssrn.​32050​35
Talari G, Cummins E, McNamara C, O’Brien J (2022) State of the
art review of Big Data and web-based Decision Support Systems
(DSS) for food safety risk assessment with respect to climate
change. Trends Food Sci Technol 126:192–204. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1016/j.​tifs.​2021.​08.​032
Taylor DH, Fearne A (2006) Towards a framework for improvement
in the management of demand in agri-food supply chains. Sup-
ply Chain Manag Int J 11(5):379–384. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​
13598​54061​06823​81
UNEP (2021) Food waste index report 2021. https://​www.​unep.​org/​
resou​rces/​report/​unep-​food-​waste-​index-​report-​2021
Vincent DR, Deepa N, Elavarasan D, Srinivasan K, Chauhdary SH,
Iwendi C (2019) Sensors driven ai-based agriculture recommen-
dation model for assessing land suitability. Sens (Switzerland)
19(17). https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​s1917​3667
Wong L-W, Leong L-Y, Hew J-J, Tan GW-H, Ooi K-B (2020) Time to
seize the digital evolution: Adoption of blockchain in operations
and supply chain management among Malaysian SMEs. Int J
Inf Manag 52:101997. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ijinf​omgt.​2019.
​08.​005
Yadav DK, Barve A (2018) Segmenting critical success factors of
humanitarian supply chains using fuzzy DEMATEL. Benchmark-
ing 25(2):400–425. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​BIJ-​10-​2016-​0154
Yadav S, Luthra S, Garg D (2020) Internet of things (IoT) based coor-
dination system in Agri-food supply chain: development of an
efficient framework using DEMATEL-ISM. Oper Manag Res.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s12063-​020-​00164-x
Zhou Q, Huang W, Zhang Y (2011) Identifying critical success factors
in emergency management using a fuzzy DEMATEL method.
Saf Sci 49(2):243–252. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/j.s​ sci.2​ 010.0​ 8.0​ 05
Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds
exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the
author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted
manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of
such publishing agreement and applicable law.
13