Evaluation and Comparison of Rain Fed and Irrigated Wheat Sustainability in Golestan Province

Subject Areas : Environmental Economics

farzaneh  bahadoran ¹ (M.Sc. Student, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Goragan, Iran)
Azam  Rezaee ² (Assistant Professor, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Goragan Iran. *(Corresponding Author))
farshid  eshraghi ³ (Assistant Professor, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Goragan Iran.)
Ali  keramatzadeh ⁴ (Assistant Professor, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Goragan Iran.)

Received: 2018-09-15 Accepted : 2019-01-23 Published : 2020-09-22

Keywords: Analytical Hierarchy, Golestan, Sustainability, irrigated and rainfed wheat,

Abstract :

Background and Objective: The present study was conducted to evaluate and compare the sustainability of rain fed and irrigated wheat products in Golestan province. Method: The required data were collected from Golestan Agricultural Jihad Organization, Agricultural Jihad Agricultural Production Cost System and also by completing the questionnaires. Also, to weighing criteria and sub-criteria that determines the sustainability, some expert’s opinions in agricultural economics, agricultural extension and education, environment, agronomy and plant protection were used. Finally, using aggregation of economic, social and environmental indicators, the sustainability of the irrigated and rain fed wheat in Golestan province during 2015-2016 was evaluated and compared. Hierarchical analysis method was used for achieving the research purpose. Findings: The results of this study showed that rain fed wheat in the environmental indices (fertilizer use, pesticides use, irrigation water, farm machinery and combined agriculture) with the score of 0.679is more compatible with the environment than irrigated wheat with a score of 0.331. Also, in economic indices (gross margin of agriculture, product gross margin, crop yield and insurance yield), irrigated wheat with the score of 0.538 was more sustainable than rain fed wheat, with a sustainability score of 0.462. Finally, in social indicators (level of education, age of farmers, labor sub jobs and family size), rainfed wheat with a score of 0.56 is more sustainable than irrigated wheat with a score of 0.44. In addition, the overall sustainability index indicates that rainfed wheat is more sustainable than irrigated wheat. Discussion and Conclusion: According to the results, it is recommended that wheat cultivation should be promoted with dehydration-resistant species.

References:

1. Ommani AR, Chizari M, Salmanzadeh C and Farj Allah Hosseini J, 2009. Predicting adoption behavior of farmers regarding on-farm sustainable water resources management (SWRM): Comparison of models. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 33:595-616.


2. Sharghi T, Sedighi H and RoknoddinEftekhari A, 2010. Effective factors in achieving sustainable agriculture. American Journal of Agricultural and Biological Sciences, 5: 235-341.


3. Rezaei, A., Mortazavi, S., Pikani, G., Khalilian, P. (2014). Evaluation and comparison of the stability of agricultural crops in the east of Zayandeh Rood basin under drought conditions using multi-criteria decision technique. Journal of Environmental Studies, Volume 40, Issue 2, 529-540.(in persian)


4. Manafi Malaayosfi, M., Vitali, B., Prerezar, A., Nematian, J. (2017). Evaluation of agricultural and natural resources sustainability in the cities of East Azarbaijan province: application of the combined index approach. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, Volume 27, Number 3: 187-199. (in persian)


5. Mohammadi, Y., Iravani, H., Kalantari, Kh. (2014). Evaluation of the Sustainability of Rice Production in Iran Using the Combined Index (Applied Methodology), Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development Research, Volume 45, number 1:79-90.(in persian)


6. Bryam-Nezhad, V, Sadr al-Sharifi, S.M. (2005). Sustainability Modeling in Water Resources Using Multi-Criteria Decision Making Techniques. Journal of Agricultural Science, Year 11, No. 4: 23-15. (in Persian)


7. Shahnoshi, N. (2011), Drought risk management for sustainable use of agricultural resources in Golestan province. Conference on the quantitative and qualitative sustainability of water resources of the country. (in Persian)


8. DadashishSaray, M., Dashti, A., Hayati, B., Ghehremanzadeh, M. (2015). Hierarchical Analytical Combination Application and Topsis Technique in Determining the Weighting of Criteria and Assessing Agricultural Sustainability (Case Study: Selected Cities of East Azarbaijan Province). Journal of Agricultural Knowledge and Sustainable Production. Vol. 25, No. 1: 157-147. (in Persian)


9. Mohammadzadeh, H, (2017). Provide a framework for assessing the sustainability of agricultural schemes for the payment of facilities. Master's thesis. Agricultural Management Group. Islamic Azad University, Maku Branch. (in Persian)


10. Tiwari, D. N., R. Loof, et al. (1999). "Environmental–economic decision-making in lowland irrigated agriculture using multi-criteria analysis techniques." Agricultural Systems60(2): 99-112.


11. Van Cauwenbergh, N.,K. Biala, et al. (2007). "SAFE—A hierarchical framework for assessing the sustainability of agricultural systems." Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment120(2–4): 229-242.


12. Mancini, F., A. J. Termorshuizen, et al. (2008). "Increasing the environmental and social sustainability of cotton farming through farmer education in Andhra Pradesh, India." Agricultural Systems96(1): 16-25.


13. Dantsis, T., C. Douma, et al. (2010). "A methodological approach to assess and compare the sustainabilitylevel of agricultural plant production systems." Ecological Indicators10(2): 256-263.


14. Liu, F. and H. Zhang (2013). "Novel methods to assess environmental, economic, and social sustainability of main agricultural regions in China." Agronomy for Sustainable Development: 1-13.Mancini, F., A. J. 


15. Widayati, Tri; Waridin; Yusuf, Edy.(2017). Strategies for Environmental, Economic, and Social Sustainability of Potato Agriculture in Dieng plateau Central Java IndonesiaJournal of Environmental Management & Tourism; Craiova. Vol. 8, Iss. 1(17) : 259-269.


16. Belton, V. and T. J. Stewart (2002). Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach, Springer.Dantsis, T., C. Douma, et al. (2010). "A methodological approach to assess and compare the sustainability level of agricultural plant production systems." Ecological Indicators10(2): 256-263.


17. Mendoza, G. and H. Martins (2006). "Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management: a critical review of methods and new modelling paradigms." Forest ecology and management230(1): 1-22.


18. Mouron, P., B. Heijne, et al. (2012). "Sustainability assessment of crop protection systems: SustainOS methodology and its application for apple orchards." Agricultural Systems113(0): 1-15.


19. Saaty, T. L. (2008). "Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process." International Journal of Services Sciences1(1): 83-98.


20. Van Passel, S., F. Nevens, et al. (2007). "Measuring farm sustainability and explaining differences in sustainable efficiency." Ecological Economics62(1): 149-161.


21. Raiffa, H. and R. Keeney (1976). "Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs." Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs.