The Influence of Agricultural Production Mechanization on Grain Production Capacity and Efficiency
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Related Works
3. Model Design of the Impact of Agricultural Production Mechanization on Grain Production Capacity and Efficiency
3.1. Design of Production Capacity Model
3.2. Design of Production Efficiency Model
4. Analysis of the Impact of Agricultural Production Mechanization on Grain Production Capacity and Efficiency
4.1. Analysis of the Impact of Agricultural Production Mechanization on Grain Production Capacity
4.2. Analysis of the Impact of Agricultural Production Mechanization on Grain Production Capacity
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Clapp, J.; Moseley, W.G. This food crisis is different: COVID-19 and the fragility of the neoliberal food security order. J. Peasant Stud. 2020, 47, 1393–1417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Panukhnyk, O.; Popadynets, N.; Fedotova, Y. Analysis and modeling of factor determinants of food provision at consumer market of Ukraine. Global J. Environ. Sci. Manag. 2019, 5, 215–226. [Google Scholar]
- Irtyshcheva, I.; Ponomarova, M.; Dolzhykova, I. Conceptual fundamentals of development of the food security system. Balt. J. Econ. Stud. 2019, 5, 57–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, P.; Chen, H.; Kopittke, P.M.; Zhao, F.J. Cadmium contamination in agricultural soils of China and the impact on food safety. Environ. Pollut. 2019, 249, 1038–1048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fedorova, M. Seeds as technology: The Russian agricultural bureau in New York and soviet agricultural modernization, 1921–1926. Russ. Rev. 2021, 80, 209–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teodorescu, F.R.; Mrcu, L.; Coman, C.; Tudor, V.C. Analysis of the agricultural labor force and its impact on agricultural products obtained in the South-Muntenia region. Rom. Biotechnol. Lett. 2021, 26, 2640–2649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, J.C.; Xu, Z.G.; Zheng, Q.F.; Hua, L.L. Is the feminization of labor harmful to agricultural production? The decision-making and production control perspective. J. Int. Agric. 2019, 18, 220–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weber, T.L.; Romero, C.M.; MacKenzie, M.D. Biochar—Manure changes soil carbon mineralization in a Gray Luvisol used for agricultural production. Can. J. Soil Sci. 2021, 102, 225–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Periyasamy, P. Estimation of economic loss of agricultural production and livestock population in Tamil Nadu due to sago industrial pollution: A case study. Grassroots J. Nat. Resou. 2021, 4, 165–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alsaour, L. Monetary policy and its impact on agricultural output for the period (1990–2017) republic of Iraq and Egypt as a model. Tanmiyat Al-Rafidain. 2020, 39, 24–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Askerov, M. New materials for the production of replaceable parts of tillage agricultural machinery. Bull. Tech. Univ. KhPI Series N Solut. Mod. Technol. 2021, 2, 3–8. [Google Scholar]
- Jaleta, M.; Baudron, F.; Krivokapic-Skoko, B.; Erenstein, O. Agricultural mechanization and reduced tillage: Antagonism or synergy? Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 2019, 17, 219–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gandasari, D. Analysis of Innovation attributes in the innovation adoption of agricultural mechanization technology in farmers. J. Komun. Pembang. 2021, 19, 38–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, Z.; Dang, J.; Pang, Y.; Xu, W. Threshold effect or spatial spillover? The impact of agricultural mechanization on grain production. J. Appl. Econ. 2021, 24, 478–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hilal, Y.Y.; Rajab, R.H.; Seddiq, A. Plural genetic algorithms approach to control agricultural mechanization and wheat production. J. Mech. Eng. Res. Develop. 2020, 43, 373–383. [Google Scholar]
- Rahman, A.; Ali, M.R.; Kabir, M.S.N.; Rahman, M.M.; Hossen, M.A. Agricultural mechanization in Bangladesh: Status and challenges towards achieving the sustainable development goals (SDGs). AmaAgric. Mech. Asia Afr. Lat. Amer. 2020, 51, 106–120. [Google Scholar]
- Shaqiri, F.; Vasa, L. Efficiency and sustainability questions of the agricultural production in Kosovo. Visegr. J. Bioeconomy Sustain. Develop. 2020, 9, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, W.; Zhang, P. Relationship and integrated development of low-carbon economy, food safety, and agricultural mechanization. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 68679–68689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sammauria, R.; Kumawat, S.; Kumawat, P.; Singh, J.; Jatwa, T.K. Microbial inoculants: Potential tool for sustainability of agricultural production systems. Arch. Microbiol. 2020, 202, 677–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mwanguhya, J.; Ekere, W. A stochastic production frontier approach: Determinants of technical efficiency in small scale tea farmers. J. Appl. Agr. Econ. Policy Anal. 2021, 4, 47–53. [Google Scholar]
- Mile, B.N.; Ijirshar, V.U.; Asom, S.T.; Sokpo, J.T.; Fefa, J. Empirical analysis of government agricultural spending and agricultural output in Nigeria. Asian J. Econ. Bus. Account. 2021, 21, 7–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ogundele, T.; Ogundele, B. Agricultural output and economics growth in Nigeria Afolabi OgundeleIbukun. J. Agr. Econ. 2020, 3, 184–189. [Google Scholar]
- Mulu, A.; Negesso, K.D. Effect of climate change on agricultural output in Ethiopia. J. Perspekt. PembiayaanDan Pembang. Drh. 2020, 8, 195–208. [Google Scholar]
- Temirbai, J.; Sarsengalii, B. Improving the Economic Efficiency of Agricultural Production by its Diversification in the Republic of Karakalpakstan. Bull. Sci. Pract. 2020, 6, 306–312. [Google Scholar]
- Coti-Zelati, P.E.; Teixeira, M.; Machado, M.M.; Araújo, D.L.A.D.; Pereira, R.M.D. Perception of the sociology of absences in the agricultural machinery industry supply chain. Rev. Econ. Sociol. Rural 2021, 60, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kudnar, N.S.; Padole, M.S.; Salunke, V.S.; Bhagat, R. Traditional crop diversity and its conservation on-farm for sustainable agricultural production in Bhandara district India. Int. J. Sci. Res. 2021, 8, 35–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Podorozhniak, A.; Balenko, O.; Sobol, V. Model and algorithms for determining the location and position of agricultural machinery during the movement. Innov. Technol. Sci. Solut. Ind. 2021, 2, 32–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lim, H.; Yun, B.U.; Bang, B.J. Protection design method and reliability test evaluation method for electronic units of outdoor agricultural machinery. Trans. Korean Inst. Elect. Eng. P 2021, 70, 114–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Varchenko, O.M.; Gerasimenko, I.; Dmytryk, A.; Vernyuk, N. Features of formation of distribution marketing channels of agricultural production of personal peasant economy (PF). Ekon. Kata Uprav. L APK 2021, 1, 198–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Variable Number | Variable Name | Variable Explanation | Variable Dimension | Maximum Value | Minimum | Average Value | Sample Size |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A1 | Total food production capacity | Total food output | Tons | 6325 | 154 | 2077.55 | 315 |
A2 | Mechanical power resource input | Total power of agricultural machinery * ratio of grain sown area | Ten thousand kilowatts | 9071.74 | 143.31 | 2286.56 | 315 |
A3 | Mechanical service revenue | Total income from agricultural machinery services * ratio of grain sown area | Billion | 296.31 | 4.87 | 74.17 | 315 |
A4 | Labor input | Number of agricultural employees * ratio of grain sown area | 10,000 People | 2105.42 | 76.82 | 716.74 | 315 |
A5 | Land input | Grain sown area | Thousand hectares | 11,764.35 | 376.71 | 4141.23 | 315 |
A6 | Fertilizer input | Fertilizer usage * ratio of grain sown area | Tons | 6.32 | 2.86 | 4.71 | 315 |
A7 | Crop damage | Grain affected area/grain sown area | / | 0.97 | 0.03 | 0.26 | 315 |
Crop Type | Variable Number | Variable Name | Variable Explanation | Variable Dimension | Maximum Value | Minimum | Average Value | Sample Size |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Rice crops | B1 | Rice yield per mu | Output of main products per mu of rice crops | Kilogram | 718.21 | 274.41 | 492.45 | 300 |
B2 | Mechanization cost per mu of rice | Mechanized operation cost per mu of rice crops | Yuan | 20.32 | 0.01 | 84.31 | 300 | |
B3 | The amount of labor input per mu of rice | Labor usage per mu of rice crops | Day | 26.71 | 3.04 | 9.81 | 300 | |
B4 | Fertilizer input per mu of rice | Fertilizer usage per mu of rice crops | Kilogram | 39.64 | 13.67 | 22.56 | 300 | |
B5 | Other expenses per mu of rice | Other services and miscellaneous charges per acre of rice crops | Yuan | 198.71 | 69.77 | 113.46 | 300 | |
Wheat crops | C1 | Output capacity per mu of wheat | Output of main products per mu of wheat crops | Kilogram | 495.26 | 100.81 | 341.37 | 190 |
C2 | Mechanization cost per mu of wheat | Mechanized operation cost per mu of wheat crops | Yuan | 131.47 | 4.96 | 71.35 | 190 | |
C3 | The amount of labor input per mu of wheat | Labor usage per mu of wheat crops | Day | 14.27 | 0.27 | 7.21 | 190 | |
C4 | Fertilizer input per mu of wheat | Fertilizer usage per mu of wheat crops | Kilogram | 38.13 | 10.14 | 23.51 | 190 | |
C5 | Other expenses per mu of wheat | Other services and miscellaneous charges per acre for wheat crops | Yuan | 162.75 | 40.81 | 87.42 | 190 | |
Corn crops | D1 | Yield capacity per mu of corn | Main product output per mu of corn crops | Kilogram | 691.61 | 231.76 | 457.43 | 245 |
D2 | Mechanization cost per mu of corn | Mechanized operation cost per mu of corn crops | Yuan | 127.81 | 0.01 | 47.51 | 245 | |
D3 | The amount of labor input per mu of corn | Corn crops labor usage per acre | Day | 23.94 | 2.67 | 8.82 | 245 | |
D4 | Fertilizer input per mu of corn | Fertilizer usage per mu of corn crops | Kilogram | 33.87 | 13.81 | 23.91 | 245 | |
D5 | Other expenses per mu of corn | Other services and miscellaneous charges per acre for corn crops | Yuan | 182.42 | 17.94 | 77.23 | 245 |
Crop Type | Variable Number | Variable Name | Variable Explanation | Variable Dimension | Maximum Value | Minimum | Average Value | Sample Size |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Rice crops | E1 | Rice production efficiency | Agricultural productivity of rice crops | / | 0.9892 | 0.6261 | 0.8663 | 300 |
E2 | Agricultural machinery service supply level | Number of agricultural machinery employees per hectare of rice crop sown area | People | 0.6453 | 0.0754 | 0.2827 | 300 | |
E3 | Agricultural machinery service utilization | Agricultural machinery operation cost as a percentage of total service cost | % | 0.4735 | 0.0001 | 0.2486 | 300 | |
E4 | Average years of education for farmers | Average years of education of rural residents | Year | 8.2163 | 5.6349 | 7.3891 | 300 | |
E5 | Percentage of farmers in basic education | Rural population with junior high school education or above in the total population | % | 0.6953 | 0.2433 | 0.5346 | 300 | |
E6 | Rice planting scale | Planting area of rice crops under a unit farmer | mu | 9.2354 | 0.0731 | 2.1135 | 300 | |
E7 | Disaster status of rice | Proportion of affected area of rice crops in planted area | % | 0.9461 | 0.0257 | 0.2381 | 300 | |
E8 | Rice irrigation status | Proportion of effective irrigated area of rice crops in planted area | % | 0.6472 | 0.1532 | 0.3642 | 300 | |
Wheat crops | F1 | Wheat production efficiency | Agricultural productivity of wheat crops | / | 0.9862 | 0.6172 | 0.8172 | 200 |
F2 | Agricultural machinery service supply level | Number of agricultural machinery employees per hectare of wheat crop sown area | people | 0.6453 | 0.0813 | 0.3121 | 200 | |
F3 | Agricultural machinery service utilization | Agricultural machinery operation cost as a percentage of total service cost | % | 0.3871 | 0.0516 | 0.2453 | 200 | |
F4 | Average years of education for farmers | Average years of education of rural residents | year | 8.5271 | 5.6341 | 7.3542 | 200 | |
F5 | Percentage of farmers in basic education | Rural population with junior high school education or above in the total population | % | 0.6982 | 0.2532 | 0.5301 | 200 | |
F6 | Wheat planting scale | Wheat crop planting area under unit farmer | mu | 7.0347 | 0.2138 | 2.2794 | 200 | |
F7 | Wheat disaster situation | Proportion of affected area of wheat crops in planted area | % | 0.6776 | 0.0265 | 0.2543 | 200 | |
F8 | Irrigation status of wheat | Proportion of effective irrigation area of wheat crops in planting area | % | 0.9247 | 0.2341 | 0.4102 | 200 | |
corn crops | G1 | corn production efficiency | Agricultural productivity of corn crops | / | 0.9643 | 0.6152 | 0.7561 | 250 |
G2 | Agricultural machinery service supply level | The number of agricultural machinery employees per hectare of corn crop sown area | people | 0.6452 | 0.0768 | 0.2953 | 250 | |
G3 | Agricultural machinery service utilization | Agricultural machinery operation cost as a percentage of total service cost | % | 0.2464 | 0.0000 | 0.0984 | 250 | |
G4 | Average years of education for farmers | Average years of education of rural residents | year | 8.5421 | 5.6342 | 0.7321 | 250 | |
G5 | Percentage of farmers in basic education | Rural population with junior high school education or above in the total population | % | 0.6983 | 0.2541 | 0.5223 | 250 | |
G6 | corn planting scale | Corn crop planting area under a unit farmer | mu | 16.6578 | 0.3452 | 3.0673 | 250 | |
G7 | Disaster status of corn | Proportion of affected area of corn crops in planted area | % | 0.6783 | 0.0164 | 0.2541 | 250 | |
G8 | Irrigation status of corn | Proportion of effective irrigation area of corn crops in planting area | % | 0.9217 | 0.1459 | 0.3842 | 250 |
Variable Name | Numeric Type | Dynamic Variable Equation | Income Variable Equation | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fixed Effects | Random Effects | Fixed Effects | Random Effects | ||
Mechanical power resource input | Coefficient value | 0.0976 | 0.0843 | / | / |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | / | / | |
Mechanical service revenue | Coefficient value | / | / | 0.0437 | 0.0531 |
Significance level | / | / | 5% | 1% | |
Labor input | Coefficient value | 0.0223 | −0.167 | −0.0346 | −0.0533 |
Significance level | >10% | >10% | >10% | >10% | |
Land input | Coefficient value | 0.3871 | 0.3581 | 0.4521 | 0.3841 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | 1% | 1% | |
Fertilizer input | Coefficient value | 4265 | 0.5821 | 0.4726 | 0.6563 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | 1% | 1% | |
Crop damage | Coefficient value | −0.2413 | −0.2527 | −0.2543 | −0.2641 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | 1% | 1% | |
Constant term | Coefficient value | 1.2547 | 0.4832 | 1.5022 | 0.5607 |
Significance level | 1% | >10% | 1% | 5% | |
Hausman test | Coefficient value | 13.24 | / | 16.52 | / |
Significance level | 5% | / | 1% | / | |
F value | Coefficient value | 105.14 | / | 82.91 | / |
Significance level | 1% | / | 1% | / | |
VIF range | (1.17, 7.78) | (1.17, 7.78) | (1.19, 7.68) | (1.19, 7.68) | |
Sample size | 315 | 315 | 315 | 315 |
Rice Crop Analysis | Wheat Crop Analysis | Analysis of Corn Crops | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Variable Name | Numeric Type | Model Analysis | Variable Name | Numeric Type | Model Analysis | Variable Name | Numeric Type | Model Analysis | |||
Fixed Effects | Random Effects | Fixed Effects | Random Effects | Fixed Effects | Random Effects | ||||||
Mechanization cost per mu of rice | Logarithm | 0.0311 | 0.0338 | Mechanization cost per mu of wheat | Logarithm | 0.0827 | 0.0753 | Mechanization cost per mu of corn | Logarithm | 0.0233 | 0.0274 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | Significance level | 1% | 1% | Significance level | 5% | 1% | |||
The amount of labor input per mu of rice | Logarithm | −0.0224 | −0.0128 | The amount of labor input per mu of wheat | Logarithm | −0.0332 | −0.0511 | The amount of labor input per mu of corn | Logarithm | −0.0762 | −0.0735 |
Significance level | >10% | >10% | Significance level | >10% | 5% | Significance level | >10% | >10% | |||
Fertilizer input per mu of rice | Logarithm | 0.2781 | 0.2642 | Fertilizer input per mu of wheat | Logarithm | 0.2341 | 0.4032 | Fertilizer input per mu of corn | Logarithm | 0.2122 | 0.2342 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | Significance level | 1% | 1% | Significance level | 1% | 1% | |||
Other expenses per mu of rice | Logarithm | 0.1368 | 0.1783 | Other expenses per mu of rice | Logarithm | 0.1322 | 0.0261 | Other expenses per mu of corn | Logarithm | 0.0913 | 0.0957 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | Significance level | 5% | >10% | Significance level | 1% | 1% | |||
Constant term | Logarithm | 4.6867 | 4.5704 | Constant term | Logarithm | 4.2781 | 4.2317 | Constant term | Logarithm | 5.2312 | 5.0524 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | Significance level | 1% | 1% | Significance level | 1% | 1% | |||
Hausman test | Logarithm | 8.46 | / | Hausman test | Logarithm | 48.33 | / | Hausman test | Logarithm | 15.34 | / |
Significance level | 10% | / | Significance level | 1% | / | Significance level | 5% | / | |||
F test | Logarithm | 42.73 | / | F test | Logarithm | 12.27 | / | F test | Logarithm | 19.41 | / |
Significance level | 1% | / | Significance level | 1% | / | Significance level | 1% | / | |||
VIF test | (1.38, 2.57) | (1.38, 2.57) | VIF test | (1.36, 3.72) | (1.36, 3.72) | VIF test | (1.52, 2.43) | (1.52, 2.43) | |||
Sample size | 300 | 300 | Sample size | 190 | 190 | Sample size | 245 | 245 |
Variable Name | Numeric Type | Model Analysis | |
---|---|---|---|
Supply Level Model | Utilization Model | ||
Agricultural machinery service supply level | Logarithm | 0.0192 | / |
Significance level | 1% | / | |
Agricultural machinery service utilization | Logarithm | / | 0.0059 |
Significance level | / | 1% | |
Average years of education for farmers | Logarithm | −0.0053 | / |
Significance level | 5% | / | |
Percentage of farmers in basic education | Logarithm | / | −0.0069 |
Significance level | / | 1% | |
Rice planting scale | Logarithm | −0.0415 | −0.0162 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | |
Disaster status of rice | Logarithm | −0.0076 | −0.0061 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | |
Rice irrigation status | Logarithm | 0.0234 | 0.0762 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | |
Constant term | Logarithm | 0.9754 | 0.8973 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | |
LR test | Logarithm | 1892.66 | 1807.92 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | |
VIF test | (1.16, 1.35) | (1.16, 1.35) | |
Sample size | 300 | 300 |
Variable Name | Numeric Type | Model Analysis | |
---|---|---|---|
Supply Level Model | Utilization Model | ||
Agricultural machinery service supply level | Logarithm | 0.0587 | / |
Significance level | 1% | / | |
Agricultural machinery service utilization | Logarithm | / | 0.0148 |
Significance level | / | 5% | |
Average years of education for farmers | Logarithm | −0.1041 | −0.1304 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | |
Percentage of farmers in basic education | Logarithm | / | / |
Significance level | / | / | |
Wheat planting scale | Logarithm | 0.0097 | 0.0098 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | |
Wheat disaster situation | Logarithm | −0.0121 | −0.0095 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | |
Irrigation status of wheat | Logarithm | 0.0028 | 0.0173 |
Significance level | >10% | 1% | |
Constant term | Logarithm | 1.0461 | 0.9013 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | |
LR test | Logarithm | 976.24 | 994.13 |
Significance level | 5% | 1% | |
VIF test | (1.24, 1.73) | (1.24, 1.73) | |
Sample size | 200 | 200 |
Variable Name | Numeric Type | Model Analysis | |
---|---|---|---|
Supply Level Model | Utilization Model | ||
Agricultural machinery service supply level | Logarithm | 0.0241 | / |
Significance level | 1% | / | |
Agricultural machinery service utilization | Logarithm | / | 0.0607 |
Significance level | / | 1% | |
Average years of education for farmers | Logarithm | 0.1087 | / |
Significance level | 1% | / | |
Percentage of farmers in basic education | Logarithm | / | 0.0823 |
Significance level | / | 1% | |
Corn planting scale | Logarithm | −0.0141 | −0.0211 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | |
Disaster status of corn | Logarithm | −0.0075 | −0.0028 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | |
Irrigation status of corn | Logarithm | 0.0036 | 0.0029 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | |
Constant term | Logarithm | 0.4963 | 0.6587 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | |
LR test | Logarithm | 1082.78 | 1093.43 |
Significance level | 1% | 1% | |
VIF test | (1.34, 1.50) | (1.34, 1.50) | |
Sample size | 250 | 250 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Liu, X.; Li, X. The Influence of Agricultural Production Mechanization on Grain Production Capacity and Efficiency. Processes 2023, 11, 487. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11020487
Liu X, Li X. The Influence of Agricultural Production Mechanization on Grain Production Capacity and Efficiency. Processes. 2023; 11(2):487. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11020487
Chicago/Turabian StyleLiu, Xiangjuan, and Xibing Li. 2023. "The Influence of Agricultural Production Mechanization on Grain Production Capacity and Efficiency" Processes 11, no. 2: 487. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11020487
APA StyleLiu, X., & Li, X. (2023). The Influence of Agricultural Production Mechanization on Grain Production Capacity and Efficiency. Processes, 11(2), 487. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11020487