Abstract
Increasing the resource use efficiency of agricultural production is considered as a central element in Sustainable Intensification (SI) of agriculture, which is a promising strategy to satisfy increasing demand for food while reducing negative impacts on farm economy and environment. One challenge for SI is that degradation of agricultural soils and resulting crop yield losses are affecting negatively farmers' incomes and environment. This study analyses economic profitability of soil renovation investments aimed for tackling soil compaction in a regional context of south-west Finland, where some individual land parcels are compacted on many farms, implying crop yield losses, which we assume as −30%. We use a dynamic optimisation farm model with multiple input-use responses on crop yields. Explicit field parcel-specific crop-rotation constraints are accounted for in solving the farmers' decision problem of soil-renovation investments. Our results calculated over a 30 year time period suggest that soil-renovation investments are profitable since they produce a positive net present value (NPV) assuming 2000–2014 average crop prices, at all discount rates up to 10% when 30% yield decrease due to soil compaction is assumed. Higher than average crop prices would increase the value of soil renovation investment significantly while lower than average future crop prices would have a relatively small effect on the profitability of soil-renovation investment. The payback times of soil-renovation investments are approximately 8–11 years, depending on the discount rate, but largely independent on crop prices. Soil renovation increases production of higher valued crops, but the utilisation of the whole production potential of a farm is dependent on crop prices. We found that the full increased production potential may not be utilized after the renovation investment if not utilized already without the investment. It is concluded that one may recommend soil-renovation investments as a profitable long-term investment in a typical case, but one cannot recommend the soil renovation if no significant yield gains are possible, or if only low valued crop are to be produced. Nevertheless the field parcel-specific restrictions to avoid soil compaction after the renovation are important to be accounted for in evaluating the profitability of soil renovation at the farm level, since avoiding soil compaction is one part of more sustainable production strategy.
Highlights
Farmers typically have field parcels with different productivity levels
Varsinais-Suomi cereal farms are affected by the 5% minimum area requirement for an ecological area under the EU's CAP, and by the maximum area restriction (15%) under nature management fields (NMF) and maximum overall set-aside area restriction (25%), as specified in the CAP agri-environmental scheme implemented at the national level
The area of NMF is the maximum area allowed by the agri-environmental scheme, mostly allocated on field parcels 3 and 7 due to lower yield expectations (Table 3)
Summary
Farmers typically have field parcels with different productivity levels. If soil quality and productivity in individual field parcels can be influenced by farm level actions, a farmer faces a decision problem: Is it economically profitable to invest in soil improvements? What are the management implications? It is not easy to evaluate the profitability of soil-renovation investments, since they can be closely linked to the choice of crop rotation and other constraints with dynamic consequences for a farm. If soil quality and productivity in individual field parcels can be influenced by farm level actions, a farmer faces a decision problem: Is it economically profitable to invest in soil improvements? Future earnings from higher crop yields are dependent on uncertain future crop prices This problem of farmers has wider societal, environmental and market implications. Sustainable intensification of agriculture is seen as an important strategy to respond to increased global food demand and to improve the environmental effects of agriculture (Tilman et al, 2011). This is hardly possible without increasing the effective utilisation of farming inputs. Since inputs such as fertilisers are poorly utilized and can lead to nutrient leaching if soil is degraded, soil improvement is one important aspect of sustainable intensification (Soanea and van Ouwerkerk, 1995)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
