| تعداد نشریات | 282 |
| تعداد نشریات سازمان | 80 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 3,219 |
| تعداد مقالات | 35,690 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 53,560,942 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 92,841,228 |
بررسی کارایی و مصرف انرژی در تولید چغندر قند | ||
| چغندرقند | ||
| مقاله 9، دوره 40، شماره 2، مهر 1403، صفحه 251-268 اصل مقاله (829.51 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: کامل علمی - پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22092/jsb.2025.367487.1376 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| حمید محمدی* 1؛ علیرضا سرگزی2؛ الهه آهنی3؛ محمد جواد مهدی زاده راینی2 | ||
| 1استادیار اقتصاد کشاورزی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه زابل، زابل، ایران. | ||
| 2اقتصاد کشاورزی- دانشکده کشاورزی- دانشگاه زابل- زابل- ایران | ||
| 3مدرس گروه حسابداری و اقتصاد کشاورزی دانشگاه بزرگمهر قائنات و تربت حیدریه، تربت حیدریه، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| افزایش سطح تکنولوژی، سرمایهگذاری در بخش کشاورزی و کاربرد نهادههای تولید اثرات مهمی بر افزایش تولید محصولات کشاورزی دارد. از طرفی افزایش سطح نهادهها و فناوری به دلیل کمبود منابع در دسترس، با محدودیت روبهرو است؛ لذا بهترین راه جهت افزایش تولید، بهبود کارایی و بهرهوری است. پژوهش حاضر با هدف تعیین کارایی و مصرف انرژی در تولید چغندرقند در سال زراعی 99-1398 انجام گرفت. جامعه آماری این تحقیق، جمعیت چغندرکاران دشت اسلامآباد شهرستان قائنات در استان خراسان جنوبی بودند. اطلاعات لازم از طریق مصاحبه با کارشناسان و تکمیل 48 پرسشنامه از میان چغندرکاران نمونه شهرستان قائنات به روش تصادفی جمعآوری گردید. پس از تعیین مقدار مصرف هر نهاده در تولید یک هکتار از محصول، کارایی کشاورزان تعیین و برای تعیین مقدار مصرف انرژی مقدار هر نهاده مصرفی به همارز انرژی آن تبدیل شد. میانگین کارایی بهینه کشاورزان در حالت ستاده محور برابر 76/1 محاسبه شد. بهعبارتی 27 درصد کشاورزان روی مرز کارا واقع شدند و از کارایی بالقوه برخوردار بودند. انرژیهای ورودی برای تولید چغندرقند 5/403 گیگاژول در هکتار، از متوسط نیروی انسانی، سوخت دیزل، آب آبیاری، کودها، سموم شیمیایی، بذر مصرفی محاسبه شد. کارایی انرژی برای چغندرقند 09/1 و بهرهوری انرژی 06/0 کیلوگرم است. کل انرژی ورودی چغندرقند برابر 5/403 گیگاژول در هکتار معادل 12 درصد است که مهمترین دلیل آن وابستگی روزافزون نظامهای زراعی کشور به منابع تجدیدناپذیر است. در این راستا هدایت نظامهای زراعی بهسمت کشاورزی پایدار و استفاده بهینه از منابع تولید و کاهش مصرف نهاده انرژی بهویژه نهادههای با مصرف بالا از جمله کودهای شیمیایی و سوخت ضروری است. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| تحلیل پوششی دادهها؛ چغندرقند؛ قائنات؛ کارایی مصرف انرژی | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Investigating the efficiency and energy consumption in sugar beet production | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| H. Mohammadi1؛ Alireza Sargazi2؛ elahe ahani3؛ Mohammadjavad Mehdizadeh rayeni2 | ||
| 1Assistant professor of Agricultural Economics, Faculty of Agriculture, Zabol University. Zabol, Iran. | ||
| 2Agricultural Economics - Faculty of Agriculture - Zabol University - Zabol - Iran | ||
| 3Agricultural Economics and Accounting Department, Bozorgmehr University of Qaenat and Torbat Heydariyeh, Torbat Heydariyeh, Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Extended Abstract Introduction Increasing sugar beet production through intensified use of production factors and major technological breakthroughs involves considerable limits. A policy to implement a planting pattern adapted to the ecological and climate conditions of each region, identifying which crop types are compatible with those conditions and provide the highest yield to growers, has been presented. The importance of this issue is reflected in the notified programme, where cereals and irrigated sugar beet are among the crops designated for cultivation in temperate areas, such as South Khorasan Province. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate how energy is consumed in agro-ecosystems in order to increase their output and their long-term stability. The aim of efficiency calculation in economics is to avoid waste of resources and to determine whether the output of the economic unit is in the best and most profitable condition. Materials and Methods The efficiency of sugar beet growers was measured using a bounded Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) approach. Calculating the computational efficiency of an optimal or efficient approach is referred to as best relative efficiency or optimistic efficiency. The pessimistic DEA model calculates the set of most unfavorable weights for each unit. One of the main objectives of this study was to calculate the direct energy consumption of sugar beet production. Electrical energy consumption was considered as one of the inputs. After calculating the energy associated with the effective inputs contributing to the total input energy of the product, energy efficiency indices, energy productivity, and net energy were calculated. The statistical population of this study consisted of sugar beet growers in the Islamabad Plain of Qaen county. The necessary data were collected through expert interviews and by completing 48 questionnaires from a random sample of sugar beet growers in Qaen county. After determining the quantity of each input used per hectare of crop, growers’ efficiency was evaluated. To determine energy consumption, the quantity of each input used was converted into its energy equivalent. Results and Discussion Of the units studied, 11 units exhibited the required efficiency and were considered as reference units for the managing input consumption. Additionally, 23 units were found to have below-average efficiency, producing less output with the same input compared with other units. A production rate of 0.70 sugar beet per input unit indicates a higher yield with optimal and specific input consumption. Notably, 8.3% of the growers did not use inputs effectively or efficiently. The energy output or sugar beet production, was calculated to be 442.61 gigajoules per hectare, which exceeds the average total energy consumption. Examination of the proportion of inputs consumed per hectare revealed that the most significant ratios were attributed to various fertilizers (28%), diesel fuel (26%), and chemical pesticides (12%). Overall, the average total energy input was 12%, and the average energy output was 13%. The energy input for sugar beet production, estimated at 403.5 gigajoules per hectare, was calculated on the basis of the average consumption of labor, diesel fuel, irrigation water, fertilizer, chemical pesticides, and seed. The energy efficiency ratio for sugar beet was 1.09, and the energy efficiency of 0.06 kg of sugar beet per unit of energy was recorded. Low efficiency in these units can be improved by increasing production without increasing input consumption. According to the results of the study, improving input efficiency is recommended as an effective approach to reduce environmental impacts while increasing economic output per hectare. On average, 22% of growers demonstrated better technical performance than thier peers. Therefore, it is necessary to provide a platform for successful sugar beet growers to share their experience and methods with others. Furthermore, the average output-oriented efficiency of 1.76 per unit of sugar beet production indicates that a lower value corresponds to higher efficiency, i.e., less input consumption for producing a given quantity of product. Overall, 8.3% of growers did not use inputs efficiently or effectively. The results of energy efficiency suggest that managing agricultural systems by optimizing the use of chemical fertilizers, introducing varieties with high nutrient uptake efficiency, and implementing crop rotation can reduce chemical fertilizer use on fields. After fertilizers, the largest share of total energy inputs is attributed to fuel consumption (diesel) estimated at 946.08 gigajoules per hectare. The average energy efficiency of 1.09 indicates an increase in energy consumption due to higher yield growth than energy input, consistent with findings from studies on Iranian agricultural products. Conclusion Based on the results of this research, the following recommendations are proposed: identifying efficient units and using them as models, while also recognizing inefficient units and giving them particular attention, can facilitate improvements in overall effectiveness. Evaluating the underlying causes of inefficiency in the field is essential for informed decision-making and performance enhancement.. Efforts should also focus on optimizing energy consumption by reducing reliance on non-renewable energy sources and increasing the adoption of renewable alternatives. Furthermore, pro,oting the use of organic fertilizers can significantly contribute to lowering energy consumption in this sector. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| Data coverage analysis, Energy consumption efficiency, Energy ratio | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Areal FJ, Pede VO. Modeling spatial interaction in stochastic frontier analysis. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems. 2021; 5. Doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/673039. Amini M, Fatahiardakani A, Bostan Y, Neshat A. The effect of guaranteed purchase policy of wheat crop on the economic value of groundwater resources (Case study: Malayer city). 8th National Conference on Water Resources Management of Iran, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. 2021; PP. 1171-96 (In Persian with English abstract). Anonymous, Agricultural Jihad Organization South Khorasan, Qayenat county, Statistics and Information Department. 2017; https://kj-agrijahad.ir/ghaen. Ahani E, Mohammadi H, Esfahany SM. Determining the efficiency of farmers by emphasizing the correct management of chemical inputs consumption and environmental effects (case study: beet growers of Qain city), Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. 2023; 10(25): 89-107. (In Persian with English abstract). Adom PK, Amakye K, Abrokwa KK, Quaidoo C. Estimate of transient and persistent energy efficiency in Africa: A stochastic frontier approach. Energy Conversion and Management. 2018; 166: 556-568. Doi:https://doi.org/1016/j.e.2018.04.038. Azizi H, Jahed R. Improved data envelopment analysis models for evaluating interval efficiencies of decision-making units. Computers and Industrial Engineering. 2011; 61(3), 897-901. Doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2011.04.017. (In Persian with English abstract). Babaeian M, Tavassoli A Hosein salehi M. Quantification energy use pattern and greenhouse gas emissions in cultivation of sugar beet (Case study: Village farms of Hossein abad of Shirvan city). Rural Development Strategies, 2021, 2(8):201-212. (In Persian with English abstract). Ebrahimipak NA, Mostashari M. Evaluation of irrigation water management and boron fertilizer to increase water use efficiency of sugar beet. Water and Irrigation Management. 2012; 2(2): 53-67. Doi:https://doi.org/10.22059/JWIM.2013.30340. (In Persian with English abstract). Farrell MJ. The Measurement of Productive Efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General). 1957; 120(3), 253-290. Doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/2343100 Fulai Y, Xiaoqiang L, Wenqiang B, Junliang F, Fucang Z, Youzhen X, Xianghao H, Shengzhao P, Yulong D, Hualiang Z. Multi- objective optimization of water and nitrogen regimes for drip-fertigated sugar beet in a desert climate, Volume 288, 1 November 2022, 108703. Doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2022.108703. Kordavani F, Jamialahmadi M, Bakhshi MR. Econometric analysis of energy use in cereal production of Iran (Case study: wheat, barley, corn, rice), Journal of Agricultural Economics Research, 2018; 10 (1): 133-148. Doi:https://doi.org/20.1001.1.20086407.1397.10.37.7.7(In Persian with English abstract). Kariminaderi Mahdi K, Esfahani SMJ. Efficiency of saffrons in shahik Qaen region (Application of Data Envelopment analysis using efficient and inefficient borders). Journal of Saffron Agronomy and Technology. 2015; 3 (3): 240-229. Doi:https://doi.org/10.22048/jsat.2015.10389 (In Persian with English abstract). Kitani O. CIGR handbook of agricultural engineering. Energy and biomass engineering. 1999; PP. 330. Doi: https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/full/10.5555/19992401754 Najafi F, Sani M, Nazari M, Neshat A. Efficiency estimation and ranking of Iranian sugar beet producers. Agricultural Economics and Development. 2020b; 28(3): 125-145. Doi:https://doi.org/10.30490/AEAD.2020.252671.0 (In Persian with English abstract) Ohadi N, Ahani A, Moradi A. Determination of technical efficiency in dairy farms of Sirjan city using fuzzy data envelopment analysis method, Journal of Agricultural Economics Research. 2020; 12 (47):237-252. Doi:https://doi.org/20.1001.1.20086407.1399.12.47.10.4 (In Persian with English abstract) Titus MA, Vamosiu A, Buenaflor SH, Lukszo CM. Persistent cost efficiency at public community colleges in the US: a stochastic frontier analysis. Research in Higher Education. 2021; 62(8): 1168-1197. Van Nguyen Q, Pascoe S, Coglan L, Nghiem S. The sensitivity of efficiency scores to input and other choices in stochastic frontier analysis: an empirical investigation. Journal of Productivity Analysis. 2021; 55(1): 31-40. Doi https://doi.org/10.1007/s11123-020-00592-8 Wang YM, Yang JB. Measuring the performances of decision-making units using interval efficiencies. Computational and Applied Mathematics. 2007; 198: 253-267. Ying W, Pishgar-Komleh SH, Ghahderijani M, Sefeedpari P. Energy consumption and CO2 emissions analysis of potato production based on different farm size levels in Iran. Journal of Cleaner production. 2012; 33: 183-191. Doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.04.008. Zahedi M, Eshghe zadeh HR, Madani F. Energy efficiency and productivity in potato and sugar beet production systems in Isfahan province. Production and Processing of Agricultural and Horticultural Products. 2015. 7(5):180-192. (In Persian with English abstract). Doi:https://doi.org/10.18869/acadpub.jcpp.5.17.181 | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 480 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 413 |
||