IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v481y2023ics0304380023001011.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Which rice farming system is more environmentally friendly in Khuzestan province, Iran? A study based on emergy analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Eyni-Nargeseh, Hamed
  • Asgharipour, Mohammad Reza
  • Rahimi-Moghaddam, Sajjad
  • Gilani, Abdolali
  • Damghani, Abdolmajid Mahdavi
  • Azizi, Khosro

Abstract

This research was conducted with the aim of (i) evaluating the sustainability of three rice production systems (DBS: dry bed seeding, TP: transplanting, and WBS: wet bed seeding) in Khuzestan province, Iran, (ii) introducing the most cost-effective and sustainable system, and (iii) providing solutions to increase the systems' sustainability and efficiency. In order to analyze the studied systems during the 2020–2021 growing season, several emergy-based and economic indicators were analyzed. The total emergy inputs supporting the systems are estimated to be 2.69E+16, 4.16E+16, and 3.17E+16 sej ha−1 yr−1 for DBS, TP, and WBS, respectively. The three studied farming systems were determined to be inefficient and unsustainable due to their reliance on purchased resources including labor, fossil fuel, and seed/transplant. According to the environmental loading ratio and modified environmental loading ratio indicators, the WBS and TP systems exerted less pressure on ecosystems and were more sustainable than the DBS system due to the greater quantity of purchased renewable flows (labor and seed/transplant). The results of the emergy renewability, emergy sustainability index, and modified emergy sustainability index indices indicated that the three investigated systems were not sustainable, indicating that high energy consumption in rice farming systems resulted in a significant environmental burden. The economic analysis of rice production systems revealed that the DBS system was economically superior due to its lower total production costs, especially labor costs, when compared with the other two systems. In light of the water scarcity crisis in Iran, the DBS method is recommended due mainly because of its ability to save 30–60% of irrigation water in the studied areas compared with the other two systems that have high water consumption. Due to the lower sustainability and greater environmental pressure of the DBS method compared with the two studied farming systems, it is also recommended to decrease the proportion of nonrenewable inputs (fossil fuel, chemical fertilizers, and herbicides) and increase the proportion of renewable inputs (organic fertilizer).

Suggested Citation

  • Eyni-Nargeseh, Hamed & Asgharipour, Mohammad Reza & Rahimi-Moghaddam, Sajjad & Gilani, Abdolali & Damghani, Abdolmajid Mahdavi & Azizi, Khosro, 2023. "Which rice farming system is more environmentally friendly in Khuzestan province, Iran? A study based on emergy analysis," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 481(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:481:y:2023:i:c:s0304380023001011
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2023.110373
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380023001011
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2023.110373?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. Amaral, Luís P. & Martins, Nélson & Gouveia, Joaquim B., 2016. "A review of emergy theory, its application and latest developments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 882-888.
    2. Zhang, Gaijing & Long, Weiding, 2010. "A key review on emergy analysis and assessment of biomass resources for a sustainable future," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 2948-2955, June.
    3. Asgharipour, Mohammad Reza & Mondani, Farzad & Riahinia, Shahram, 2012. "Energy use efficiency and economic analysis of sugar beet production system in Iran: A case study in Khorasan Razavi province," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 1078-1084.
    4. Brown, Mark T. & Campbell, Daniel E. & De Vilbiss, Christopher & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2016. "The geobiosphere emergy baseline: A synthesis," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 339(C), pages 92-95.
    5. Asgharipour, Mohammad Reza & Amiri, Zahra & Campbell, Daniel E., 2020. "Evaluation of the sustainability of four greenhouse vegetable production ecosystems based on an analysis of emergy and social characteristics”," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 424(C).
    6. Wang, Xiaolong & Chen, Yuanquan & Sui, Peng & Gao, Wangsheng & Qin, Feng & Zhang, Jiansheng & Wu, Xia, 2014. "Emergy analysis of grain production systems on large-scale farms in the North China Plain based on LCA," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 66-78.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Chen, Yuhong & Lyu, Yanfeng & Yang, Xiangdong & Zhang, Xiaohong & Pan, Hengyu & Wu, Jun & Lei, Yongjia & Zhang, Yanzong & Wang, Guiyin & Xu, Min & Luo, Hongbin, 2022. "Performance comparison of urea production using one set of integrated indicators considering energy use, economic cost and emissions’ impacts: A case from China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 254(PC).
    2. Stan Selbonne & Loïc Guindé & François Causeret & Pierre Chopin & Jorge Sierra & Régis Tournebize & Jean-Marc Blazy, 2023. "How to Measure the Performance of Farms with Regard to Climate-Smart Agriculture Goals? A Set of Indicators and Its Application in Guadeloupe," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-21, January.
    3. Cristiano, S. & Ulgiati, S. & Gonella, F., 2021. "Systemic sustainability and resilience assessment of health systems, addressing global societal priorities: Learnings from a top nonprofit hospital in a bioclimatic building in Africa," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    4. Asgharipour, Mohammad Reza & Amiri, Zahra & Campbell, Daniel E., 2020. "Evaluation of the sustainability of four greenhouse vegetable production ecosystems based on an analysis of emergy and social characteristics”," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 424(C).
    5. Fartout Enayat, Fatemeh & Ghanbari, Seyed Ahmad & Asgharipour, Mohammad Reza & Seyedabadi, Esmaeel, 2023. "Emergy ecological footprint analysis of Yaghooti grape production in the Sistan region of Iran," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 481(C).
    6. Qingsong Wang & Hongkun Xiao & Qiao Ma & Xueliang Yuan & Jian Zuo & Jian Zhang & Shuguang Wang & Mansen Wang, 2020. "Review of Emergy Analysis and Life Cycle Assessment: Coupling Development Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, January.
    7. Grande, U. & Piernik, A. & Nienartowicz, A. & Buonocore, E. & Franzese, P.P., 2023. "Measuring natural capital value and ecological complexity of lake ecosystems," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 482(C).
    8. Duian Lu & Jie Cheng & Zhenzhou Feng & Li Sun & Wei Mo & Degang Wang, 2022. "Emergy Synthesis of Two Oyster Aquaculture Systems in Zhejiang Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-20, October.
    9. Hamidreza Shahhoseini & Mahmoud Ramroudi & Hossein Kazemi, 2023. "Emergy analysis for sustainability assessment of potato agroecosystems (case study: Golestan province, Iran)," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 6393-6418, July.
    10. Miguel Angel Avalos-Rangel & Daniel E. Campbell & Delfino Reyes-López & Rolando Rueda-Luna & Ricardo Munguía-Pérez & Manuel Huerta-Lara, 2021. "The Environmental-Economic Performance of a Poblano Family Milpa System: An Emergy Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-19, August.
    11. Jianling Fan & Cuiying Liu & Jianan Xie & Lu Han & Chuanhong Zhang & Dengwei Guo & Junzhao Niu & Hao Jin & Brian G. McConkey, 2022. "Life Cycle Assessment on Agricultural Production: A Mini Review on Methodology, Application, and Challenges," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-16, August.
    12. Zeke Marshall & Paul E. Brockway, 2020. "A Net Energy Analysis of the Global Agriculture, Aquaculture, Fishing and Forestry System," Biophysical Economics and Resource Quality, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 1-27, June.
    13. Giannetti, Biagio F. & Marcilio, Maria De Fatima D.F.B. & Coscieme, Luca & Agostinho, Feni & Liu, Gengyuan & Almeida, Cecilia M.V.B., 2019. "Howard Odum’s “Self-organization, transformity and information”: Three decades of empirical evidence," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 407(C), pages 1-1.
    14. Wang, Xueqi & Liu, Gengyuan & Coscieme, Luca & Giannetti, Biagio F. & Hao, Yan & Zhang, Yan & Brown, Mark T., 2019. "Study on the emergy-based thermodynamic geography of the Jing-Jin-Ji region: Combined multivariate statistical data with DMSP-OLS nighttime lights data," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 397(C), pages 1-15.
    15. Xiaolei Geng & Dou Zhang & Chengwei Li & Yanyao Li & Jingling Huang & Xiangrong Wang, 2020. "Application and Comparison of Multiple Models on Agricultural Sustainability Assessments: A Case Study of the Yangtze River Delta Urban Agglomeration, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-22, December.
    16. Maione, A. & Massarotti, N. & Santagata, R. & Ulgiati, S. & Vanoli, L., 2023. "Integrated environmental accounting of a geothermal grid," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    17. Kuhn, L. & Hou, L. & Chen, X. & Huang, J., 2018. "Agricultural machinery for cleaner air An analysis of the effectiveness of three policy measures for reducing residue burning in Northern China," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277374, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Xingguo Gu & Qixian Lai & Moucheng Liu & Ziqun He & Qingyang Zhang & Qingwen Min, 2019. "Sustainability Assessment of a Qingyuan Mushroom Culture System Based on Emergy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-13, September.
    19. Unakıtan, Gökhan & Aydın, Başak, 2018. "A comparison of energy use efficiency and economic analysis of wheat and sunflower production in Turkey: A case study in Thrace Region," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 279-285.
    20. Campbell, Elliott T., 2015. "Emergy analysis of emerging methods of fossil fuel production," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 315(C), pages 57-68.

    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:ecomod:v:481:y:2023:i:c:s0304380023001011. 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.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    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.