Role of mechanization on the sustainability of sugar beet production using emergy approach

Fallahinejad, Samin; Armin, Mahammad

doi:10.22034/aes.2022.327793.1019

Document Type : Original research article

Authors

Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Sabzevar Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sabzevar, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22034/aes.2022.327793.1019

Abstract

Over 40% of agriculture on the planet is conducted on smallholder farms with low productivity but high production costs. As a result, governments have attempted to replace traditional farms with mechanized farms in recent years. The sustainability of three distinct production systems, namely traditional, semi-mechanized, and mechanized cultivation systems, were assessed using emergy approach in 2017-2018. These systems were practiced over areas of less than 2 ha, 2-10 ha, and more than 10 ha, respectively. The results indicated that the total emergy values for sugar beet production were 2.84E+16, 4.57E+16, and 6.21E+16 sej ha^-1 yr^-1, respectively, for traditional, semi-mechanized, and mechanized systems. Historically, the proportion of renewable natural inputs, non-renewable natural inputs, and purchased inputs in total input emergy was 8.88E+14, 8.88E+15, and 1.86E+16 sej ha^-1 yr^-1, respectively. However, the proportion of renewable natural inputs, non-renewable natural inputs, and purchased inputs was 9.06E+14, 2.56E+16, and 3.57E+16 sej ha^-1 yr^-1, respectively, in mechanized farms. As the rate of mechanization increased, the unit emergy value, renewable emergy ratio, emergy exchange ratio, emergy yield ratio, emergy input ratio, and environmental loading ratio increased by 11.5, 77, 13.7, 11.9, and 1.32 percent, respectively; while the renewable emergy ratio and environmental sustainability index decreased by 20.1 and 28.9 percent, respectively. In general, the results indicated that mechanization protected the environment more than traditional cultivation.

Highlights

Emergy approach was used to analyze the sustainability of three separate production systems: traditional, semi-mechanized, and mechanized.
The overall emergy values for traditional, semi-mechanized, and mechanized sugar beet were 2.84E+16, 4.57E+16, and 6.21E+16 sej ha-1 yr-1, respectively.
As the rate of mechanization increased, the UEV, R%, EER, EYR, EIR, and ELR increased; whereas the ESI index decreased.

Keywords

References

Agostinho, F., Diniz, G., Siche, R., Ortega, E., 2008. The use of emergy assessment and the Geographical Information System in the diagnosis of small family farms in Brazil. Ecological Modelling, 210(1), 37-57.

Amiri, Z., Asgharipour, M.R., Campbell, D.E., Armin, M., 2019. A sustainability analysis of two rapeseed farming ecosystems in Khorramabad, Iran, based on emergy and economic analyses. Journal of Cleaner Production, 226, 1051-1066.

Amiri, Z., Asgharipour, M.R., Campbell, D.E., Armin, M., 2020. Extended exergy analysis (EAA) of two canola farming systems in Khorramabad, Iran. Agricultural Systems, 180, 102789.

Araujo, A.V.d., Brandão Junior, D.d.S., Colen, F., 2013. Energetic analysis of landrace varieties and hybrids of corn produced in different technological levels of management. Engenharia Agrícola, 33(4), 625-635.

Asgharipour, M.R., Shahgholi, H., Campbell, D.E., Khamari, I., Ghadiri, A., 2019. Comparison of the sustainability of bean production systems based on emergy and economic analyses. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 191(1), 1-21.

Bagheri, N., Moazzen, S., 2009. Optimum strategy for agricultural mechanization development in Iran. Journal of Agricultural Technology, 5(2), 225-237.

Bazrgar, A.B., 2011. Environmental Assessment of Khorasan Sugarbeet Production Systems Using LCA, Faculty of Plant Production. Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, p. 205.

Bazrgar, A.B., Soltani, A., Koocheki, A., Zeinali, E., Ghaemi, A., 2011. Environmental emissions profile of different sugar beet cropping systems in East of Iran. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 6(29), 6246-6255.

Brown, M.T., Campbell, D.E., De Vilbiss, C., Ulgiati, S., 2016. The geobiosphere emergy baseline: a synthesis. Ecological Modelling, 339, 92-95.

Brown, M.T., Ulgiati, S., 2004. Energy quality, emergy, and transformity: HT Odum’s contributions to quantifying and understanding systems. Ecological Modelling, 178(1-2), 201-213.

Erdal, G., Esengün, K., Erdal, H., Gündüz, O., 2007. Energy use and economical analysis of sugar beet production in Tokat province of Turkey. Energy, 32(1), 35-41.

Hanif, I., Aziz, B., Chaudhry, I.S., 2019. Carbon emissions across the spectrum of renewable and nonrenewable energy use in developing economies of Asia. Renewable Energy, 143, 586-595.

Jelsøe, E., Kjærgård, B., 2016. Sustainability in agriculture and food production, in: A new agenda for sustainability. Routledge, pp. 147-170.

Jiang, M., Chen, B., Zhou, J., Tao, F., Li, Z., Yang, Z., Chen, G., 2007. Emergy account for biomass resource exploitation by agriculture in China. Energy policy, 35(9), 4704-4719.

Kohansal, M., Mansoori, H., 2013. Socio-economic factors affecting agricultural machines ownership by farmers in Khorasan-Razavi province in Iran. Journal of Agricultural Mechanization, 1(1), 53-59.

Lal, R., 2018. Saving global land resources by enhancing eco-efficiency of agroecosystems. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 73(4), 100A-106A.

Lu, H., Bai, Y., Ren, H., Campbell, D.E., 2010. Integrated emergy, energy and economic evaluation of rice and vegetable production systems in alluvial paddy fields: implications for agricultural policy in China. Journal of Environmental Management, 91(12), 2727-2735.

Martin, J.F., Diemont, S.A., Powell, E., Stanton, M., Levy-Tacher, S., 2006. Emergy evaluation of the performance and sustainability of three agricultural systems with different scales and management. Agriculture, ecosystems & environment, 115(1-4), 128-140.

Moazzen, S.A.A., 2010. Determination of the most important challenges for agricultural mechanization development in Iran. Agricultural Engineering International: CIGR Journal, 12(3-4), 87-91.

Moonilall, N.I., Homenauth, O., Lal, R., 2020. Emergy analysis for maize fields under different amendment applications in Guyana. Journal of Cleaner Production, 120761.

Moore, J., Pagani, F., Quayle, M., Robinson, J., Sawada, B., Spiegelman, G., Van Wynsberghe, R., 2005. Recreating the university from within: Collaborative reflections on the University of British Columbia's engagement with sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 6(1), 65-80.

Notarnicola, B., Sala, S., Anton, A., McLaren, S.J., Saouter, E., Sonesson, U., 2017. The role of life cycle assessment in supporting sustainable agri-food systems: A review of the challenges. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, 399-409.

Odum, H.T., Brown, M., Brandt-Williams, S., 2000. Handbook of emergy evaluation. Center for environmental policy.

Ortega, E., Cavalett, O., Bonifácio, R., Watanabe, M., 2005. Brazilian soybean production: emergy analysis with an expanded scope. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 25(4), 323-334.

Ozkan, B., Akcaoz, H., Fert, C., 2004. Energy input–output analysis in Turkish agriculture. Renewable energy, 29(1), 39-51.

Ren, C., Liu, S., van Grinsven, H., Reis, S., Jin, S., Liu, H., Gu, B., 2019. The impact of farm size on agricultural sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 220, 357-367.

Schmitz, A., Moss, C.B., 2015. Mechanized agriculture: machine adoption, farm size, and labor displacement. AgBioForum, 18(278-296).

Tabar, I.B., Keyhani, A., Rafiee, S., 2010. Energy balance in Iran's agronomy (1990–2006). Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14(2), 849-855.

Journal of Emergy, Life Cycle and System Analysis in Agriculture

Role of mechanization on the sustainability of sugar beet production using emergy approach

References

References

Volume 2, Issue 1 - Serial Number 2
June 2022
Pages 15-24

Role of mechanization on the sustainability of sugar beet production using emergy approach

References

References

Volume 2, Issue 1 - Serial Number 2June 2022Pages 15-24

Volume 2, Issue 1 - Serial Number 2
June 2022
Pages 15-24