ارزیابی اقتصادی-زیست‌محیطی و تمایل به پرداخت باغ‌داران در استفاده از سمپاش مجهز به فناوری نرخ متغیر
محورهای موضوعی : فصلنامه علمی -پژوهشی تحقیقات اقتصاد کشاورزی
محمود قاسمی نژاد رائینی
1
*
,
رستم فتحی
2
,
سامان آبدانان مهدی زاده
3
,
مرتضی تاکی
4
,
مصطفی مردانی
5
1 - Department of Agricultural Machinery and Mechanization, Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University of Khuzestan, Mollasani, Iran
2 - دانش آموخته دکترای دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی خوزستان
3 - هیئت علمی دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی خوزستان
4 - گروه مهندسی ماشین‌های کشاورزی و مکانیزاسیون، دانشگاه کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی رامین خوزستان
5 - دانشگاه کشاوررزی و منابع طبیعی رامین خوزستان
کلید واژه: تمایل به پرداخت, مکانیزاسیون, نسبت سود به هزینه, هوشمندسازی,
چکیده مقاله :
چکیده
مقدمه و هدف: بحران‌های زیست‌محیطی و تخریب منابع به‌طور قابل‌توجهی بر امنیت غذایی جهانی تأثیر گذاشته است. یکی از مراحل حیاتی در تولید کشاورزی استفاده از سموم شیمیایی است. در کشاورزی سنتی، معمولاً از سمپاش‌های با نرخ پاشش ثابت برای سمپاشی استفاده می‌شود که بدون توجه به تراکم محصول، سموم را به طور یکنواخت اعمال می‌کنند. این روش هزینه‌های اقتصادی و زیست‌محیطی قابل‌توجهی را به همراه دارد. برای افزایش بهره‌وری، کاهش اثرات زیست‌محیطی و کاهش هزینه‌ها، بهبود عملیات سمپاشی ضروری است. یکی از عوامل کلیدی در این زمینه، پذیرش فناوری نرخ متغیر سمپاشی است.
مواد و روش‌ها: در این تحقیق پس از محاسبه میزان صرفه‌جویی در مصرف سموم شیمیایی و بررسی هزینه سمپاشی در دو سناریوی استفاده از سمپاش نرخ متغیر و نرخ ثابت و همچنین محاسبه میزان اثرات زیست‌محیطی در این دو سناریو، برآورد تمایل به پرداخت کشاورزان در استفاده از فناوری نرخ متغیر و همچنین نسبت سود به هزینه با استفاده از روش سرمایه‌گذاری اضافی محاسبه شد.
یافته‌ها: نتایج نشان داد که سمپاش نرخ متغیر توانست 46 درصد در مصرف سموم صرفه‌جویی ایجاد کند. میزان مصرف سموم شیمیایی در حالت سمپاشی نرخ ثابت 23/8 لیتر در هکتار و با سمپاش متغیر 44/4 لیتر در هکتار بود. ارزش نهایی تمایل به پرداخت برای استفاده از سمپاش نرخ متغیر نیز 38/159 میلیون ریال برآورد شد.
بحث و نتیجه‌گیری: نسبت سود به هزینه محاسبه‌شده با استفاده از روش سرمایه‌گذاری اضافی نشان داد که سمپاش‌های مجهز به فناوری نرخ متغیر سمپاشی برای سمپاشی باغ‌ها مقرون به صرفه‌تر هستند.
Abstract
Introduction: Environmental crises and resource degradation have significantly impacted global food security. One critical phase in agricultural production is the application of chemical pesticides. In conventional agriculture, fixed-rate sprayers are typically used, which apply pesticides uniformly regardless of crop density. This method incurs substantial economic and environmental costs. To enhance productivity, reduce environmental impact, and lower costs, it is essential to improve spraying operations. One key factor in this improvement is the adoption of variable rate technology (VRT).
Materials and Methods: In this research, after calculating the amount of saving of chemical pesticides and checking the cost of spraying in two cases of using variable rate and fixed rate sprayers, as well as calculating the amount of environmental impacts in these two scenarios, estimating the willingness to pay by farmers in using variable rate technology and also, the benefit-to-cost ratio was calculated using the additional investment method. In this research, conditional valuation method was used to estimate the willingness to pay for using variable rate spraying in order to protect the environment.
Findings: The results showed that the variable rate sprayer was able to save 46% in pesticide consumption. The final value of willingness to pay for the use of variable rate sprayers was estimated at 159.38 million Rials.
Conclusion: The benefit-to-cost ratio, calculated using the additional investment method, indicated that VRT sprayers are more economical for orchard spraying.
References 1. Abrishami, H. (2008). Basic Econometrics, Written by Damodar, N Gojarati, Tehran University Press.(In Persian).
2. Acharya, G., & Barbier, E. B. (2000). Valuing groundwater recharge through agricultural production in the Hadejia‐Nguru wetlands in northern Nigeria. Agricultural Economics, 22(3), 247-259.
3. Aghasafari, H., & Ghorbani, M. (2015). Whether Farmers are Willing to Financial Participation for Reducing the Adverse Environmental Effects of Contaminated Water? (A case study of Kashaf- Rood Basin in Mashhad). Journal Of Agroecology, 7(2), 202-214. doi: 10.22067/jag.v7i2.33105 (In Persian).
4. Amir Nezhad, H., Khalilian, S., & Asareh, M.H. (2006) Determination of the Preservation and Recreational Value of Sysengan Forest Park Using Paying Forms, Journal of Pajohesh and Sazandegi, 19(3), 24-15(In Persian).
5. Amirnejad, H. & Atai. sallout, K. (2011). Valuation of environmental resources. Avai Masih Publications (In Persian).
6. Amirnejad, H., & Khalilian, S. (2005). Determining the total economic value of the forest ecosystem in northern Iran with an emphasis on environmental-ecological valuation and conservation values. Thesis of the PhD course in Agricultural Economics, Faculty of Agriculture, Tarbiat Modares University (In Persian).
7. Arekhi, S., Khakpour, B. A., & Ata, B. (2019). Logistic Regression Efficiency Assessment for AnticipatingUrban Development in Ilam Using GIS. Geography and Urban Space Development, 6(1), 1-17.
8. Asadpur, H. (2012). Survey Effects of Socio-Economics Factors on Spread Biological Control Technology up on Chilo-Suppersalic in Rice Farms of Mazandaran Province. Agricultural Economics and Development, 19(76), 232-252. doi: 10.30490/aead.2012.58754 (In Persian).
9. Asaei, H., Jafari, A., & Loghavi, M. (2019). Site-specific orchard sprayer equipped with machine vision for chemical usage management. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 162, 431-439.
10. Asgari, A. & Mehrgan, N. (2002). Estimating the willingness to pay of visitors of historical and cultural heritage using the conditional valuation method: the example of Hamedan treasure. Economic researches (sustainable growth and development), summer and autumn 2002. 1(2,3). 93-115 (In Persian).
11. Baidoo, I., Al-Hassan, R. M., Asuming-Brempong, S., Akoto, I., & Asante, F. A. (2013). Willingness to pay for improved water for farming in the Upper East Region of Ghana. Greener Journal of Agricultural Sciences3, 4, 271-279.
12. Baran, M. F., Lüle, F., & Gökdoğan, O. (2017). Energy input-output analysis of organic grape production: A case study from Adiyaman province. Erwerbs-Obstbau, 59(4), 275-279.
13. Bashiri, M., & Kamranrad, R. (2011). Parameter estimation for improving association indicators in binary logistic regression. Research in Production and Operations Management, 2(1), 135-154.
14. Bonales-Revuelta, J., Musule, R., Navarro-Pineda, F. S., & García, C. A. (2022). Evaluating the environmental performance of orange production in Veracruz, Mexico: a life cycle assessment approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 343, 131002.
15. Boyle, K. J., Johnson, F. R., McCollum, D. W., Desvousges, W. H., Dunford, R. W., & Hudson, S. P. (1996). Valuing public goods: discrete versus continuous contingent-valuation responses. Land Economics, 381-396.
16. Calegari, F., Tassi, D., & Vincini, M. (2013). Economic and environmental benefits of using a spray control system for the distribution of pesticides. Journal of Agricultural Engineering, 44(s2).
17. Carson, T. R. (1986). Closing the gap between research and practice: Conversation as a mode of doing research. Phenomenology+ Pedagogy, 73-85.
18. Cobbenhagen, A. T. J. R., Antunes, D. J., van de Molengraft, M. J. G., & Heemels, W. P. M. H. (2021). Opportunities for control engineering in arable precision agriculture. Annual Reviews in Control, 51, 47-55.
19. Dehghanian, S. (2009). Environmental economics for non-economists. Translation. Ajayi, John Asafo. 2018. Publications of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, 336 pages (In Persian).
20. Deveau, J. (2009). Six elements of effective spraying in orchards and vineyards. Ontario, Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.
21. Dou, H., Zhang, C., Li, L., Hao, G., Ding, B., Gong, W., & Huang, P. (2018). Application of variable spray technology in agriculture. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 186, No. 5, p. 012007). IOP Publishing.
22. El Bilali, H., Callenius, C., Strassner, C., & Probst, L. (2019). Food and nutrition security and sustainability transitions in food systems. Food and energy security, 8(2), e00154.
23. Fathi, R., Ghasemi Nejad Raeini., M., Abdanan Mehdizadeh, S., Taki, M & Mardani Najafabadi, M (2024). Development and evaluation of variable rate technology in Orchard spraying. The Journal of Agricultural Machinery (JAM).
24. Ghorbani, M., Nemati, A., & Ghorbani, R. (2011). Studying the Willingness to Pay of Wheat Farmers to Control Weeds in Different Growth Stages (Case Study of Khorasan Razavi). Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development, 25(1)20-28. doi: 10.22067/jead2.v1390i1.8875 (In Persian).
25. Haab, T. C., & McConnell, K. E. (2002). Valuing environmental and natural resources: the econometrics of non-market valuation. Edward Elgar Publishing.
26. Hossein Zad, J., Shorafa, S., Dashti, G., Hayati, B., & Kazemiyeh, F. (2009). An Economic Evaluation of the Environmental Benefits from Pesticides Reduction Program in Khuzestan Province. JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE AND SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION, 2 (20), 4. 101-112 (In Persian).
27. Ilıca, A., & Boz, A. F. (2018). Design of a nozzle-height control system using a permanent magnet tubular linear synchronous motor. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 24(3), 374-385.
28. ISO. (2006). “14040 International Standard. Environmental Management–Life Cycle Assessment–Principles and Framework, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.” 14040 International Standard. Environmental Management–Life Cycle Assessment–Principles and Framework, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
29. Jeanty, P. W. (2007). Constructing krinsky and robb confidence intervals for mean and median willingness to pay (wtp) using stata. In Sixth North American Stata Users’ Group Meeting, Boston (pp. 13-14).
30. Keshavarz. H. G. R., & Ayati, G. H. (2008). A Comparison between Logit Model and Classification Regression Trees (CART) in Customer Credit Scoring Systems.
31. Khanali, M., Akram, A., Behzadi, J., Mostashari-Rad, F., Saber, Z., Chau, K. W., & Nabavi-Pelesaraei, A. (2021). Multi-objective optimization of energy use and environmental emissions for walnut production using imperialist competitive algorithm. Applied Energy, 284, 116342.
32. Lambert, D. M., Lowenberg-DeBoer, J., Griffin, T. W., Peone, J., Payne, T., & Daberkow, S. G. (2004). Adoption, profitability, and making better use of precision farming data.
33. Lee, C. K., & Han, S. Y. (2002). Estimating the use and preservation values of national parks’ tourism resources using a contingent valuation method. Tourism management, 23(5), 531-540.
34. Lehtonen, E., Kuuluvainen, J., Pouta, E., Rekola, M., & Li, C. Z. (2003). Non-market benefits of forest conservation in southern Finland. Environmental Science & Policy, 6(3), 195-204.
35. Lindgren, E., Harris, F., Dangour, A. D., Gasparatos, A., Hiramatsu, M., Javadi, F., ... & Haines, A. (2018). Sustainable food systems—a health perspective. Sustainability science, 13, 1505-1517.
36. Longo, S., Mistretta, M., Guarino, F., & Cellura, M. (2017). Life Cycle Assessment of organic and conventional apple supply chains in the North of Italy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, 654-663.
37. Maddala, G. S. (1983). Qualitative and limited dependent variable models in econometrics. Cambridge: Cambridge, 498.
38. Mitchell, R. C., & Carson, R. T. (2013). Using surveys to value public goods: the contingent valuation method. Rff press.
39. Mohammadi, M. (2013). surveying farmers' willingness to pay to reduce the negative effects of chemical fertilizers on the environment. The first electronic congress of new findings in the environment and agricultural ecosystems. Tehran. https://civilica.com/doc/356518 (In Persian).
40. Molaei, M., Yazdani, S., Sharzei, G., & Gas, A. C. (2009). Estimating preservation Value of Arasbaran Forests Ecosystem Using Contingent Valuation Method. Agricultural Economics, 3(2), 37-63 (In Persian).
41. Mooney, D. F., Larson, J. A., Roberts, R. K., & English, B. C. (2009). Economics of the variable rate technology investment decision for agricultural sprayers.
42. Pearce, D. W., & Turner, R. K. (1989). Economics of natural resources and the environment. Johns Hopkins University Press.
43. Roberts, R. K., English, B. C., Larson, J. A., Cochran, R. L., Larkin, S. L., Marra, M. C., ... & Reeves, J. M. (2006). Use of precision farming technologies by cotton farmers in eleven states. In Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conferences (pp. 3-6).
44. Rodrigo, M. A., Oturan, N., & Oturan, M. A. (2014). Electrochemically assisted remediation of pesticides in soils and water: a review. Chemical reviews, 114(17), 8720-8745.
45. Rufí-Salís, M., Petit-Boix, A., Villalba, G., Gabarrell, X., & Leipold, S. (2021). Combining LCA and circularity assessments in complex production systems: the case of urban agriculture. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 166, 105359.
46. Salcedo, R., Pons, P., Llop, J., Zaragoza, T., Campos, J., Ortega, P., ... & Gil, E. (2019). Dynamic evaluation of airflow stream generated by a reverse system of an axial fan sprayer using 3D-ultrasonic anemometers. Effect of canopy structure. Computers and electronics in agriculture, 163, 104851.
47. Skouinejad, M. M (2019). Engineering economics (Economic evaluation of industrial projects). Publications of Amirkabir University of Technology. pp. 124, 167, 168, and 169 (In Persian).
48. Soheilifard, F., Marzban, A., Raini, M. G., Taki, M., & van Zelm, R. (2020). Chemical footprint of pesticides used in citrus orchards based on canopy deposition and off-target losses. Science of the Total Environment, 732, 139118.
49. Springmann, M., Clark, M., Mason-D’Croz, D., Wiebe, K., Bodirsky, B. L., Lassaletta, L., ... & Willett, W. (2018). Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits. Nature, 562(7728), 519-525.
50. Tang, X. Y., Zhang, H. P., & Li, S. P. (2012). Economic Value of Agricultural Non-Point Source Pollution Control. Chinese Rural Economy.
51. Torras, M. (2000). The total economic value of Amazonian deforestation, 1978–1993. Ecological economics, 33(2), 283-297.
52. Triggs, B., McLauchlan, P. F., Hartley, R. I., & Fitzgibbon, A. W. (2000). Bundle adjustment—a modern synthesis. In Vision Algorithms: Theory and Practice: International Workshop on Vision Algorithms Corfu, Greece, September 21–22, 1999 Proceedings (pp. 298-372). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
53. Veldstra, M. D., Alexander, C. E., & Marshall, M. I. (2014). To certify or not to certify? Separating the organic production and certification decisions. Food Policy, 49, 429-436.
54. Yadav, G. S., Das, A., Lal, R., Babu, S., Datta, M., Meena, R. S., ... & Singh, R. (2019). Impact of no-till and mulching on soil carbon sequestration under rice (Oryza sativa L.)-rapeseed (Brassica campestris L. var. rapeseed) cropping system in hilly agro-ecosystem of the Eastern Himalayas, India. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 275, 81-92.