IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/areint/313635.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ecological and economic efficiency of growing maize for grain in short-rotation cultivation of the Western region

Author

Listed:
  • Stasiv, Oleh
  • Kachmar, Oksana
  • Vavrynovych, Oksana
  • Arabska, Ekaterina

Abstract

Purpose. The purpose of the article – to substantiate the economic efficiency and environmental feasibility of maize growing for grain in short-rotational cultivation in the Western region at different levels of anthropogenic loads. Methodology / approach. Ecological and economic assessment of the efficiency of growing maize for grain in short-rotation cultivation with the help of intensive and alternative organomineral fertilization systems was carried out on the basis of the interpretation of information array of data obtained in the conditions of a long-term experimental model range of the Institute of Agriculture of the Carpathian Region during 2016–2020. The economic efficiency was determined by the calculation method according to the technological maps developed by us. Results. It has been proved that the complex use of mineral (N120P100K100) and organic (both traditional – manure, and alternative – winter wheat straw – stubble predecessor in cultivation and green mass of post-harvest sidereal culture) fertilizers contributes to obtaining high productivity of maize grain with a yield of 6.10–6.87 t/ha of grain, 8.20–9.20 t/ha of feed units and 0.49–0.55 t/ha of digestible protein. It has been proven that the highest values of notional net profit (737 USD/ha) and payback of 1 USD of expenses (2.0 USD) are provided for joint application of mineral and alternative organic fertilizers. It has been established that a high conditional level of profitability of growing maize for grain (72–104 %) is formed for the introduction of mineral fertilizers at a dose of N120P100K100 on traditional and alternative organic backgrounds. The ecological-stabilizing role of organomineral fertilizing complexes has been substantiated in soil-grain processes, proposed for use in maize growing for grain. Originality / scientific novelty. For the first time in the conditions of the Western region, there is a scientifically substantiated ecological and economic feasibility of maize growing for grain in short-rotation cultivation with traditional and alternative fertilization systems. Practical value / implications. The proposed approaches for growing maize for grain in short-rotation cultivation of the Western region ensure its high grain productivity at the level of yield of 6.10–6.87 t/ha of grain, 8.20–9.20 t/ha of fodder and 0.49–0.55 t/ha of digestible protein, increase the conditional level of profitability up to 72–104 % for environmentally safe agricultural production.

Suggested Citation

  • Stasiv, Oleh & Kachmar, Oksana & Vavrynovych, Oksana & Arabska, Ekaterina, 2021. "Ecological and economic efficiency of growing maize for grain in short-rotation cultivation of the Western region," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 7(2), June.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:areint:313635
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.313635
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/313635/files/10_Stasiv_article.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.313635?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Veronique Theriault & Melinda Smale & Hamza Haider, 2018. "Economic incentives to use fertilizer on maize under differing agro-ecological conditions in Burkina Faso," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 10(5), pages 1263-1277, October.
    2. Snapp, Sieglinde S. & Grabowski, Philip & Chikowo, Regis & Smith, Alex & Anders, Erin & Sirrine, Dorothy & Chimonyo, Vimbayi & Bekunda, Mateete, 2018. "Maize yield and profitability tradeoffs with social, human and environmental performance: Is sustainable intensification feasible?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 77-88.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bing Deng & Taoyu Chen & Zhenyu Pu & Xia Peng & Xiner Qin & Xiaomei Zhan & Jianghui Wen, 2022. "A Transportation Network Optimization Model for Livestock Manure under Different Terrains Considering Economic and Environmental Benefits," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-18, June.
    2. Dibrova, Anatolii & Dibrova, Larysa & Chmil, Alla & Dibrova, Maksym & Нuz, Mykhailo, 2022. "Modeling the impact of mineral fertilizer costs on effectiveness of production and export corn from Ukraine," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 8(3), September.
    3. Li, Lu & Zhou, Yan & Li, Mo & Cao, Kaihua & Tao, Yanhuai & Liu, Yangdachuan, 2022. "Integrated modelling for cropping pattern optimization and planning considering the synergy of water resources-society-economy-ecology-environment system," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 271(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hualin Xie & Yingqian Huang & Qianru Chen & Yanwei Zhang & Qing Wu, 2019. "Prospects for Agricultural Sustainable Intensification: A Review of Research," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-27, October.
    2. Théodore Nikiema & Eugène C. Ezin & Sylvain Kpenavoun Chogou, 2023. "Bibliometric Analysis of the State of Research on Agroecology Adoption and Methods Used for Its Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-18, November.
    3. Abednego Kiwia & David Kimani & Rebbie Harawa & Bashir Jama & Gudeta W. Sileshi, 2019. "Sustainable Intensification with Cereal-Legume Intercropping in Eastern and Southern Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-18, May.
    4. Jindo, Keiji & Schut, Antonius G.T. & Langeveld, Johannes W.A., 2020. "Sustainable intensification in Western Kenya: Who will benefit?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    5. Kihara, Job & Manda, Julius & Kimaro, Anthony & Swai, Elirehema & Mutungi, Christopher & Kinyua, Michael & Okori, Patrick & Fischer, Gundula & Kizito, Fred & Bekunda, Mateete, 2022. "Contributions of integrated soil fertility management (ISFM) to various sustainable intensification impact domains in Tanzania," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    6. Maria G. Lampridi & Claus G. Sørensen & Dionysis Bochtis, 2019. "Agricultural Sustainability: A Review of Concepts and Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-27, September.
    7. Jha, P.K. & Araya, A. & Stewart, Z.P. & Faye, A. & Traore, H. & Middendorf, B.J. & Prasad, P.V.V., 2021. "Projecting potential impact of COVID-19 on major cereal crops in Senegal and Burkina Faso using crop simulation models," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    8. Han Wang & Sieglinde S Snapp & Monica Fisher & Frederi Viens, 2019. "A Bayesian analysis of longitudinal farm surveys in Central Malawi reveals yield determinants and site-specific management strategies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-17, August.
    9. Oyakhilomen Oyinbo & Jordan Chamberlin & Miet Maertens, 2020. "Design of Digital Agricultural Extension Tools: Perspectives from Extension Agents in Nigeria," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(3), pages 798-815, September.
    10. Hammond, James & van Wijk, Mark & Teufel, Nils & Mekonnen, Kindu & Thorne, Peter, 2021. "Assessing smallholder sustainable intensification in the Ethiopian highlands," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    11. William J. Burke & Sieglinde S. Snapp & Thom S. Jayne, 2020. "An in‐depth examination of maize yield response to fertilizer in Central Malawi reveals low profits and too many weeds," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(6), pages 923-940, November.
    12. Kenneth W. Sibiko & Matin Qaim, 2020. "Weather index insurance, agricultural input use, and crop productivity in Kenya," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 12(1), pages 151-167, February.
    13. Maria Lampridi & Dimitrios Kateris & Claus Grøn Sørensen & Dionysis Bochtis, 2020. "Energy Footprint of Mechanized Agricultural Operations," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-15, February.
    14. Jafar Nabati & Ahmad Nezami & Ehsan Neamatollahi & Morteza Akbari, 2023. "An integrated approach land suitability for agroecological zoning based on fuzzy inference system and GIS," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 2316-2338, March.
    15. Tafadzwanashe Mabhaudhi & Tendai Polite Chibarabada & Vimbayi Grace Petrova Chimonyo & Vongai Gillian Murugani & Laura Maureen Pereira & Nafiisa Sobratee & Laurencia Govender & Rob Slotow & Albert The, 2018. "Mainstreaming Underutilized Indigenous and Traditional Crops into Food Systems: A South African Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-22, December.
    16. Anders, Erin J. & Zulu, Leo C. & Jambo, Emmanuel R., 2020. "Limits to grain-legume technology integration by smallholder farmers: The case of time-sensitive labor demands and food security primacy in Malawi," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    17. Agada, Blessing, 2018. "Changing the fertilizer conversation in Nigeria: The Need for Site Specific Soil-Crop Fertilizer Use," Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security Policy Research Briefs 279873, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics, Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security (FSP).
    18. Sidney Madsen & Rachel Bezner Kerr & Noelle LaDue & Isaac Luginaah & Chipiliro Dzanja & Laifolo Dakishoni & Esther Lupafya & Lizzie Shumba & Catherine Hickey, 2021. "Explaining the impact of agroecology on farm-level transitions to food security in Malawi," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 13(4), pages 933-954, August.
    19. Ayala Wineman & C. Leigh Anderson & Travis W. Reynolds & Pierre Biscaye, 2019. "Methods of crop yield measurement on multi-cropped plots: Examples from Tanzania," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 11(6), pages 1257-1273, December.
    20. Oyakhilomen Oyinbo & Jordan Chamberlin & Tahirou Abdoulaye & Miet Maertens, 2022. "Digital extension, price risk, and farm performance: experimental evidence from Nigeria," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(2), pages 831-852, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness; Crop Production/Industries;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:areint:313635. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://are-journal.com/are .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.