IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v180y2020ics0308521x19307103.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating profitability of soil-renovation investments under crop rotation constraints in Finland

Author

Listed:
  • Purola, Tuomo
  • Lehtonen, Heikki

Abstract

Increasing the resource use efficiency of agricultural production is considered as a central element in Sustainable Intensification (SI) of agriculture, which is a promising strategy to satisfy increasing demand for food while reducing negative impacts on farm economy and environment. One challenge for SI is that degradation of agricultural soils and resulting crop yield losses are affecting negatively farmers' incomes and environment. This study analyses economic profitability of soil renovation investments aimed for tackling soil compaction in a regional context of south-west Finland, where some individual land parcels are compacted on many farms, implying crop yield losses, which we assume as −30%. We use a dynamic optimisation farm model with multiple input-use responses on crop yields. Explicit field parcel-specific crop-rotation constraints are accounted for in solving the farmers' decision problem of soil-renovation investments. Our results calculated over a 30 year time period suggest that soil-renovation investments are profitable since they produce a positive net present value (NPV) assuming 2000–2014 average crop prices, at all discount rates up to 10% when 30% yield decrease due to soil compaction is assumed. Higher than average crop prices would increase the value of soil renovation investment significantly while lower than average future crop prices would have a relatively small effect on the profitability of soil-renovation investment. The payback times of soil-renovation investments are approximately 8–11 years, depending on the discount rate, but largely independent on crop prices. Soil renovation increases production of higher valued crops, but the utilisation of the whole production potential of a farm is dependent on crop prices. We found that the full increased production potential may not be utilized after the renovation investment if not utilized already without the investment. It is concluded that one may recommend soil-renovation investments as a profitable long-term investment in a typical case, but one cannot recommend the soil renovation if no significant yield gains are possible, or if only low valued crop are to be produced. Nevertheless the field parcel-specific restrictions to avoid soil compaction after the renovation are important to be accounted for in evaluating the profitability of soil renovation at the farm level, since avoiding soil compaction is one part of more sustainable production strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • Purola, Tuomo & Lehtonen, Heikki, 2020. "Evaluating profitability of soil-renovation investments under crop rotation constraints in Finland," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:180:y:2020:i:c:s0308521x19307103
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2019.102762
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X19307103
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2019.102762?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dueri, S. & Calanca, P.L. & Fuhrer, J., 2007. "Climate change affects farm nitrogen loss - A Swiss case study with a dynamic farm model," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 93(1-3), pages 191-214, March.
    2. Petsakos, Athanasios & Rozakis, Stelios, 2015. "Calibration of agricultural risk programming models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(2), pages 536-545.
    3. Liu, Xing & Lehtonen, Heikki & Purola, Tuomo & Pavlova, Yulia & Rötter, Reimund & Palosuo, Taru, 2016. "Dynamic economic modelling of crop rotations with farm management practices under future pest pressure," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 65-76.
    4. Berntsen, J. & Petersen, B. M. & Jacobsen, B. H. & Olesen, J. E. & Hutchings, N. J., 2003. "Evaluating nitrogen taxation scenarios using the dynamic whole farm simulation model FASSET," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 817-839, June.
    5. Raskin, Rob & Cochran, Mark J., 1986. "Interpretations And Transformations Of Scale For The Pratt-Arrow Absolute Risk Aversion Coefficient: Implications For Generalized Stochastic Dominance," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 11(2), pages 1-7, December.
    6. Cao, Ruixuan & Carpentier, Alain & Gohin, Alexandre, 2011. "Measuring farmers’ risk aversion: the unknown properties of the value function," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114623, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Sami Myyrä & Elise Ketoja & Markku Yli-Halla & Kyöisti Pietola, 2005. "Land Improvements under Land Tenure Insecurity: The Case of pH and Phosphate in Finland," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(4).
    8. Vogeler, I. & Beukes, P. & Burggraaf, V., 2013. "Evaluation of mitigation strategies for nitrate leaching on pasture-based dairy systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 21-28.
    9. Purola, Tuomo & Lehtonen, Heikki & Liu, Xing & Tao, Fulu & Palosuo, Taru, 2018. "Production of cereals in northern marginal areas: An integrated assessment of climate change impacts at the farm level," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 191-204.
    10. Myyra, Sami & Pietola, Kyosti, 2005. "Land Improvements Under Land Tenure Insecurity: The Case of Liming in Finland," 94th Seminar, April 9-10, 2005, Ashford, UK 24418, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Nathaniel D. Mueller & James S. Gerber & Matt Johnston & Deepak K. Ray & Navin Ramankutty & Jonathan A. Foley, 2012. "Closing yield gaps through nutrient and water management," Nature, Nature, vol. 490(7419), pages 254-257, October.
    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. Guido M. Bazzani & Roberta Spadoni, 2021. "Generating cropping schemes from FADN data at the farm and territorial scale," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 23(3), pages 1-32.
    2. Rämö, Janne & Tupek, Boris & Lehtonen, Heikki & Mäkipää, Raisa, 2023. "Towards climate targets with cropland afforestation – effect of subsidies on profitability," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    3. Anzhen Qin & Dongfeng Ning & Zhandong Liu & Sen Li & Ben Zhao & Aiwang Duan, 2022. "Impacts of Irrigation Time and Well Depths on Farmers’ Costs and Benefits in Maize Production," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-15, March.
    4. Piotr Bórawski & Marta Guth & Aneta Bełdycka-Bórawska & Krzysztof Józef Jankowski & Andrzej Parzonko & James W. Dunn, 2020. "Investments in Polish Agriculture: How Production Factors Shape Conditions for Environmental Protection?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-26, October.

    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. Purola, Tuomo & Lehtonen, Heikki & Liu, Xing & Tao, Fulu & Palosuo, Taru, 2018. "Production of cereals in northern marginal areas: An integrated assessment of climate change impacts at the farm level," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 191-204.
    2. Liu, Xing & Lehtonen, Heikki & Purola, Tuomo & Pavlova, Yulia & Rötter, Reimund & Palosuo, Taru, 2016. "Dynamic economic modelling of crop rotations with farm management practices under future pest pressure," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 65-76.
    3. Leonhardt, Heidi & Penker, Marianne & Salhofer, Klaus, 2019. "Do farmers care about rented land? A multi-method study on land tenure and soil conservation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 228-239.
    4. Christine Léger Léger-Bosch, 2019. "Farmland tenure and transaction costs: Public and collectively owned land vs conventional coordination mechanisms in France [Régime de tenure foncière et coûts de transaction: terres publiques et c," Post-Print hal-02573765, HAL.
    5. Guido M. Bazzani & Roberta Spadoni, 2021. "Generating cropping schemes from FADN data at the farm and territorial scale," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 23(3), pages 1-32.
    6. Lankoski, Jussi, 2013. "Counterfactual approach for assessing agri-environmental policy: The case of the Finnish water protection policy," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 94(2).
    7. Thanyaporn Chankrajang, 2015. "Partial Land Rights and Agricultural Outcomes: Evidence from Thailand," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 91(1), pages 126-148.
    8. Zhang, Hongliang & Mu, Jianhong E. & McCarl, Bruce A., 2018. "Adaptation to climate change via adjustment in land leasing: Evidence from dryland wheat farms in the U.S. Pacific Northwest," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 424-432.
    9. Kyösti Pietola & Sami Myyrä & Eija Pouta, 2011. "The Effects of Changes in Capital Gains Taxes on Land Sales: Empirical Evidence from Finland," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(4), pages 582-594.
    10. Palosuo, Taru & Hoffmann, Munir P. & Rötter, Reimund P. & Lehtonen, Heikki S., 2021. "Sustainable intensification of crop production under alternative future changes in climate and technology: The case of the North Savo region," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    11. Muawanah, Umi, 2015. "Does Land Conflict Matter to Farm Productivity? A Case Study of Cambodia," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), vol. 15(2), December.
    12. Lyu, Kaiyu & Chen, Kevin & Zhang, Huaizhi, 2019. "Relationship between land tenure and soil quality: Evidence from China’s soil fertility analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 345-361.
    13. Leonhardt, Heidi, 2017. "Tenancy and Soil Conservation in Austria: Analysing the Crop Choice of Farmers," 57th Annual Conference, Weihenstephan, Germany, September 13-15, 2017 262006, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    14. Vogeler, Iris & Vibart, Ronaldo & Cichota, Rogerio, 2017. "Potential benefits of diverse pasture swards for sheep and beef farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 78-89.
    15. Heikki Lehtonen & Taru Palosuo & Panu Korhonen & Xing Liu, 2018. "Higher Crop Yield Levels in the North Savo Region—Means and Challenges Indicated by Farmers and Their Close Stakeholders," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-14, June.
    16. de Frutos Cachorro, Julia & Gobin, Anne & Buysse, Jeroen, 2018. "Farm-level adaptation to climate change: The case of the Loam region in Belgium," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 164-176.
    17. Adewale Henry Adenuga & Claire Jack & Ronan McCarry, 2021. "The Case for Long-Term Land Leasing: A Review of the Empirical Literature," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-21, March.
    18. Britz, Wolfgang & Linda, Arata, "undated". "How Important Are Crop Shares In Managing Risk For Specialized Arable Farms? A Panel Estimation Of A Programming Model For Three European Regions," 56th Annual Conference, Bonn, Germany, September 28-30, 2016 244801, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    19. Pouta, Eija & Myyra, Sami & Hanninen, Harri, 2009. "Heterogeneous farmland owners: two approaches for objective based classification," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 50787, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. Cao, Juan & Zhang, Zhao & Tao, Fulu & Chen, Yi & Luo, Xiangzhong & Xie, Jun, 2023. "Forecasting global crop yields based on El Nino Southern Oscillation early signals," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).

    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:eee:agisys:v:180:y:2020:i:c:s0308521x19307103. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    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.