Yield or profit: alternatives to the development of national crop production

The purpose of the article is to determine with the help of econometric and optimization methods the priority strategies of agrarian business in the field of crop production and to compare with the existing leaders in the use of innovations in the field of crop production. Research methods. The study is based on the use of econometric analysis methods to build trends in grain yield dynamics in leading countries in the use of innovative agricultural technologies and optimization methods for the study of dominant strategies used by agricultural enterprises in crop production. Research results. As a result of using the declining marginal grain yield depending on the amount of costs, which are determined by the cost of importing technology per 1 ha, the optimal cost values for both maximum yield and maximum profit. It is shown that at certain time intervals the costs of farmers were excessively high not only in terms of profit optimization but also to optimize yields. It is assumed that taking into account the latest innovation trends, agribusiness will move to a strategy of profit maximization Scientific novelty. As a result of econometric analysis it is shown that the use as a target function of yield leads to a significant increase in the variability of this indicator, while a moderate increase in yield is accompanied by significantly less variability. Quantitative indicators of the impact of climate risks on grain yields in Ukraine have been obtained, which explain approximately 50% of the variance in the grain yield indicator in Ukraine. Practical significance. It is shown that the representation of marginal yield in the form of a decreasing linear function is confirmed in practice. Further research, which in the presence of detailed information on the production processes of individual enterprises can be conducted by panel regression (observation points are spaced in space and time), can provide a more detailed picture of the efficiency of individual production components in their areas of interaction. Tabl.: 4. Figs.: 3. Refs.: 19.