IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i4p3866-d1074846.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Economic Performance of Multipurpose Collaborative Robots toward Skillful and Sustainable Viticultural Practices

Author

Listed:
  • Emmanouil Tziolas

    (Human-Machines Interaction (HUMAIN) Lab, Department of Computer Science, International Hellenic University (IHU), 65404 Kavala, Greece)

  • Eleftherios Karapatzak

    (Human-Machines Interaction (HUMAIN) Lab, Department of Computer Science, International Hellenic University (IHU), 65404 Kavala, Greece)

  • Ioannis Kalathas

    (Human-Machines Interaction (HUMAIN) Lab, Department of Computer Science, International Hellenic University (IHU), 65404 Kavala, Greece)

  • Aikaterini Karampatea

    (Department of Agricultural Biotechnology and Oenology, International Hellenic University (IHU), 66100 Drama, Greece)

  • Antonios Grigoropoulos

    (Human-Machines Interaction (HUMAIN) Lab, Department of Computer Science, International Hellenic University (IHU), 65404 Kavala, Greece)

  • Aadil Bajoub

    (Laboratory of Food and Food By-Products Chemistry and Processing Technology (AcopTech), National School of Agriculture, Meknes 50000, Morocco)

  • Theodore Pachidis

    (Human-Machines Interaction (HUMAIN) Lab, Department of Computer Science, International Hellenic University (IHU), 65404 Kavala, Greece)

  • Vassilis G. Kaburlasos

    (Human-Machines Interaction (HUMAIN) Lab, Department of Computer Science, International Hellenic University (IHU), 65404 Kavala, Greece)

Abstract

The increased cost of labor in modern viticulture stemming from the nature of operations that require physical strength and precision, coupled with labor shortages, poses a significant constraint in facilitating and scheduling seasonal activities. Therefore, autonomous collaborative robots present a potential solution for achieving sustainable development objectives and decreasing operational expenditures in agricultural operations. The current paper presents an economic assessment of collaborative robots (or cobots for short) in comparison to conventional labor for four different cultivars in Greece in a lifecycle costing methodological framework. The selected cultivars are Asyrtiko, Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot and Tempranillo, which are cultivated by two private wineries in the area of interest. All the relevant expenses of their annual production were distributed to agricultural operations, and eight scenarios were developed to compare conventional and cobot practices. The results indicate the great potential of cobots regarding specific viticultural operations such as weed control, pruning, herbiciding and topping. The adoption of cobots in these operations has the potential to contribute to sustainable agriculture by reducing labor costs and addressing labor shortages, while also increasing the efficiency and precision of these tasks. Nevertheless, the defoliation and tying operations appeared to be inefficient in most cases in comparison to conventional labor practices. Overall, the annual equivalent costs could be reduced by up to 11.53% using cobots, even though the projected lifetime of the cobots plays a significant role in the cost-effectiveness of autonomous robotic labor in viticulture. In conclusion, cobots could be instrumental in the Greek viticulture, integrating innovation and high-quality products toward sustainable agricultural development.

Suggested Citation

  • Emmanouil Tziolas & Eleftherios Karapatzak & Ioannis Kalathas & Aikaterini Karampatea & Antonios Grigoropoulos & Aadil Bajoub & Theodore Pachidis & Vassilis G. Kaburlasos, 2023. "Assessing the Economic Performance of Multipurpose Collaborative Robots toward Skillful and Sustainable Viticultural Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-20, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:4:p:3866-:d:1074846
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/4/3866/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/4/3866/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kledja Canaj & Andi Mehmeti & Julio Berbel, 2021. "The Economics of Fruit and Vegetable Production Irrigated with Reclaimed Water Incorporating the Hidden Costs of Life Cycle Environmental Impacts," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-13, September.
    2. Emmanouil Tziolas & Stefanos Ispikoudis & Konstantinos Mantzanas & Dimitrios Koutsoulis & Anastasia Pantera, 2022. "Economic and Environmental Assessment of Olive Agroforestry Practices in Northern Greece," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-15, June.
    3. K. J. Arrow, 1971. "The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: F. H. Hahn (ed.), Readings in the Theory of Growth, chapter 11, pages 131-149, Palgrave Macmillan.
    4. Wrzaszcz, Wioletta & Prandecki, Konrad, 2020. "Agriculture and The European Green Deal," Problems of Agricultural Economics / Zagadnienia Ekonomiki Rolnej 311273, Institute of Agricultural and Food Economics - National Research Institute (IAFE-NRI).
    5. Jan Emblemsvag, 2001. "Activity‐based life‐cycle costing," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 16(1), pages 17-27, February.
    6. Bernard Delord & Etienne Montaigne & Alfredo Manuel Coelho, 2015. "Vine planting rights, farm size and economic performance: do economies of scale matter in the French viticulture sector?," Post-Print hal-01506405, HAL.
    7. McCorkle, Dean A. & Dudensing, Rebekka M. & Hanselka, Dan & Hellman, Ed W., 2016. "Economics of Robotic Technology in Texas Wine Grape Production," 2016 Annual Meeting, February 6-9, 2016, San Antonio, Texas 230005, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    8. repec:eme:maj000:02686900110363447 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Chaikind, Stephen, 2012. "The Role of Viticulture and Enology in the Development of Economic Thought: How Wine Contributed to Modern Economic Theory," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 213-225, November.
    10. Franken, Jason & Gómez, Miguel & Ross, R. Brent, 2018. "Social Capital and Entrepreneurship in Emerging Wine Regions," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 419-428, November.
    11. Gaus, Cord-Christian & Urso, Lisa-Marie & Minßen, Till-Fabian & de Witte, Thomas, 2017. "Economics of mechanical weeding by a swarm of small field robots," 57th Annual Conference, Weihenstephan, Germany, September 13-15, 2017 262169, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    12. Luigi Roselli & Arturo Casieri & Bernardo Corrado de Gennaro & Ruggiero Sardaro & Giovanni Russo, 2020. "Environmental and Economic Sustainability of Table Grape Production in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-24, May.
    13. Timothy J. Coelli & D.S. Prasada Rao & Christopher J. O’Donnell & George E. Battese, 2005. "An Introduction to Efficiency and Productivity Analysis," Springer Books, Springer, edition 0, number 978-0-387-25895-9, September.
    14. Giacomo Falcone & Anna Irene De Luca & Teodora Stillitano & Alfio Strano & Giuseppa Romeo & Giovanni Gulisano, 2016. "Assessment of Environmental and Economic Impacts of Vine-Growing Combining Life Cycle Assessment, Life Cycle Costing and Multicriterial Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-34, August.
    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. Emmanouil Tziolas & Eleftherios Karapatzak & Ioannis Kalathas & Chris Lytridis & Spyridon Mamalis & Stefanos Koundouras & Theodore Pachidis & Vassilis G. Kaburlasos, 2023. "Comparative Assessment of Environmental/Energy Performance under Conventional Labor and Collaborative Robot Scenarios in Greek Viticulture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-21, February.
    2. Pompei, Fabrizio, 2013. "Efficiency And Productivity Growth Across The Italian Regions: The Regional Divide Revisited," MPRA Paper 52052, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Al-Amin, A.K.M. Abdullah & Lowenberg-DeBoer, James & Franklin, Kit & Behrendt, Karl, 2021. "Economic Implications of Field Size for Autonomous Arable Crop Equipment," Land, Farm & Agribusiness Management Department 316595, Harper Adams University, Land, Farm & Agribusiness Management Department.
    4. Al-Amin, A.K.M. Abdullah & Lowenberg-DeBoer, James & Franklin, Kit & Behrendt, Karl, 2021. "Economic Implications of Field Size for Autonomous Arable Crop Equipment," Agri-Tech Economics Papers 316595, Harper Adams University, Land, Farm & Agribusiness Management Department.
    5. Rao, B. Bhaskara, 2010. "Estimates of the steady state growth rates for selected Asian countries with an extended Solow model," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 46-53, January.
    6. Raouf Boucekkine & Fernando Del Río & Omar Licandro, 2003. "Embodied Technological Change, Learning‐by‐doing and the Productivity Slowdown," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 105(1), pages 87-98, March.
    7. Abida Hafeez & Karim Bux Shah Syed & Fiza Qureshi, 2019. "Exploring the Relationship between Government R & D Expenditures and Economic Growth in a Global Perspective: A PMG Estimation Approach," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(4), pages 163-174, April.
    8. Foxon, T. J. & Gross, R. & Chase, A. & Howes, J. & Arnall, A. & Anderson, D., 2005. "UK innovation systems for new and renewable energy technologies: drivers, barriers and systems failures," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(16), pages 2123-2137, November.
    9. Lundgren, Tommy & Marklund, Per-Olov & Zhang, Shanshan, 2016. "Industrial energy demand and energy efficiency – Evidence from Sweden," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 130-152.
    10. Agathe Gilain & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2018. "Managing Learning Curves In The Unknown: From ‘Learning By Doing’ To ‘Learning By Designing’," Post-Print hal-01900961, HAL.
    11. Gilberto Tadeu Lima, 2000. "Market concentration and technological innovation in a dynamic model of growth and distribution," BNL Quarterly Review, Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, vol. 53(215), pages 447-475.
    12. Joseph Stiglitz, 2018. "From manufacturing-led export growth to a twenty-first-century inclusive growth strategy: Explaining the demise of a successful growth model and what to do about it," WIDER Working Paper Series 176, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    13. Mikhail Y. Afanasyev & Alexander V. Kudrov, 2021. "Economic Complexity, Embedding Degree and Adjacent Diversity of the Regional Economies," Montenegrin Journal of Economics, Economic Laboratory for Transition Research (ELIT), vol. 17(2), pages 7-22.
    14. van de Klundert, T.C.M.J. & Smulders, J.A., 1991. "Reconstructing growth theory : A survey," Other publications TiSEM 19355c51-17eb-4d5d-aa66-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    15. Stefanie Stantcheva, 2020. "Dynamic Taxation," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 801-831, August.
    16. Richard S. J. Tol & In Chang Hwang & Frédéric Reynès, 2012. "The Effect of Learning on Climate Policy under Fat-tailed Uncertainty," Working Paper Series 5312, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    17. Tiruwork B. Tibebu & Eric Hittinger & Qing Miao & Eric Williams, 2024. "Adoption Model Choice Affects the Optimal Subsidy for Residential Solar," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-19, February.
    18. Michael Fritsch & Viktor Slavtchev, 2007. "What determines the efficiency of regional innovation systems?," Jena Economics Research Papers 2007-006, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    19. Carine Nourry, 2012. "Dasgupta, D.: Modern growth theory," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 105(1), pages 97-100, January.
    20. Arantxa Jarque, 2010. "Hidden effort, learning by doing, and wage dynamics," Economic Quarterly, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, vol. 96(4Q), pages 339-372.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:4:p:3866-:d:1074846. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.