Agricultural Socialized Services in China's Smallholder Farming Systems: A Systematic Review of Service Types, Benefits, and Measurement Challenges

Rong Zeng¹Meseret C. Abate^1*Cai Baozhong¹Amsalu K. Addis²Xiangyun Yi¹Shaoping Jiang¹Xu Yan¹Betelhem A. Geremew¹Amsalu N. Alamerew³

• ¹Hunan University of Science and Engineering, Yongzhou, China
• ²Hanjiang Normal University, Shiyan, China
• ³The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

This review examines the scope and focus of existing research on agricultural socialized services (ASS), evaluates how these services benefit smallholders, and the barriers they face in accessing them. ASS are at the core to modern farming systems, influencing both service providers and smallholder practices across diverse national contexts. While prior literature has explored trends and development levels of ASS, limited attention has been given to the types of services receiving adequate research and the barriers smallholders face in accessing them. This lack of information intensifies the vulnerability of smallholder farmers to persistent and unpredicted risks. Using a modified Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) approach, we conducted a comprehensive literature search and applied eligibility criteria to identify relevant studies. The identified literature was then categorized by service types and their reported benefits to smallholders without restrictions placed on the methodology of the study. Our findings reveal that 66% of studies focus on production-stage services, particularly machinery outsourcing, driven by rural labor migration and yield optimization. Only 16% of studies addressed multi-stage ASS integration (pre-production, production, post-production), and none of the studies addressed holistic service bundling. Mechanization services are dominant due to their measurable productivity gains, yet significant gaps remain in quantifying intangible benefits and systemic trade-offs. We identify challenges in measuring services, including measurement of subjective impacts/outcomes, gaps in validating data, and the need for better simulation models. The review concludes by recommending a shift in research focus toward diverse service types, cost-effective delivery mechanisms, and improved access strategies to enhance smallholder resilience and livelihoods.