Advertisement

Effects of the Modern Technologies on the Economic Efficiency of Cropping Systems

  • K. HillerEmail author
  • M. Frühauf
  • T. Meinel
  • P. Tillack
Chapter
Part of the Innovations in Landscape Research book series (ILR)

Abstract

Non-adaptive land use in the Russian dry step generates negative ecological effects and damages arable land. For this reason, research studies have to show how adaptive cropping systems can help to promote soil fertility and economic benefit. This paper represents an examination of the economic effects of alternative cultivation methods which were tested in Southwestern Siberia. For research purposes, a traditional farming system, an expanded conventional system and a direct seeding system were compared to each other, especially the gross margins per hectare as well as by year. Overall, the adapted forms produce higher contribution margins than the conventional system. The main reason for lower contribution margin in the conventional system is the fallow period in the crop rotation, which produces no crop yield. Adding field pea and oilseed rape in rotation with the primary cash crop, wheat, represents an alternative to fallow periods. The reduced intensity of tillage in the adapted systems also helps to decrease labour and machinery costs by saving working hours and fuel.

Keywords

Russian dry step Direct seeding Gross margin Alternative farming systems 

References

  1. Author (1987) Atlas Altaiskogo kraia [Atlas of Altai Krai]. Moscow/BarnaulGoogle Scholar
  2. Bergmann A, Frühauf M (2011) Regionalklimatische Untersuchungen in der Südwestsibirischen Kulunda-Steppe [Regional climatic investigations in the southwest Siberian Kulunda steppe]. Geoöko 32:160–194 (in German)Google Scholar
  3. Doluschitz R, Morath C, Pape J (2011) Agrarmanagement – Unternehmensführung in Landwirtschaft und Agribusiness [Agricultural management—business management in agriculture and agribusiness]. Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart (in German)Google Scholar
  4. Heckmann M (2013) Pflanzenbaulicher und ökonomischer Vergleich des Anbaurisikos verschiedener Ackerbausysteme unter aktuellen und zukünftigen Klimaszenarien [Plant cultivation and economic comparison of the cultivation risk of different crop systems under current and future climate scenarios]. Dissertation, University of Göttingen (in German)Google Scholar
  5. Meinel T (2002) Die geoökologischen Folgewirkungen der Steppenumbrüche in den 50er Jahren in Westsibirien [The geoecological consequences of the steppe breaches in the 1950s in Western Siberia]. Dissertation, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg (in German)Google Scholar
  6. Meinel T, Schmidt D (2003) Ackerbaukonzeption für die Region Altai Krai West-Sibirien [Arable farming concept for the Altai Krai region of Western Siberia]. Eschborn: GTZ, pp 1–47 (in German)Google Scholar
  7. Merls S (2011) Sowjetisierung in Wirtschaft und Landwirtschaft [Sovietization in economy and agriculture]. In: Europäische Geschichte Online (EGO), Institut für Europäische Geschichte (ed.). http://www.ieg-ego.eu/merls-2011-de. Accessed 21 Aug 2015 (in German)
  8. Mußhoff O, Hirschauer N (2011) Modernes Agrarmanagement: Betriebswirtschaftliche Analyse- und Planungsverfahren [Modern agricultural management-business analysis and planning procedures], 2nd edn. Franz Vahlen, Munich (in German)Google Scholar
  9. Morris NL, Miller PCH, Orson JH, Froud-Williams RJ (2009) The effect of wheat straw residue on the emergence and early growth of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris) and oilseed rape (Brassica napus). Eur J Agron 30:151–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. MSKH [Ministerstvo sel’skogo khoziaistva Rossiiskoi Federatsii] (2015) Ministry of Agriculture of the Russian Federation. http://www.mcx.ru/navigation/docfeeder/show/169.htm. Accessed 5 Aug 2015 (in Russian)
  11. Ngwira AR, Aune JB, Mkwinda S (2012) On-farm evaluation of yield and economic benefit of short-term maize legume intercropping systems under conservation agriculture in Malawi. Field Crops Res 132:149–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ozpinar S (2006) Effects of tillage systems on weed population and economics for winter wheat production under the Mediterranean dryland conditions. Soil Tillage Res 87:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Paramonov EG, Ischugin JN, Simonenko AP (1997) Kulundinskii step: problemy opustynivaniia [Kulunda step: problems of desertification]. Altai University Publishing, Barnaul (in Russian)Google Scholar
  14. Radke H-D (2009) Kostenrechnung [Accounting]. Haufe-Verlag, Freiburg (in German)Google Scholar
  15. Rudaya N, Nazarova L, Nourgaliev D, Palagushkina O, Papin D, Frolova L (2012) Mid-late Holocene environmental history of Kulunda, southern West Siberia: vegetation, climate and humans. Quatern Sci Rev 48:32–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sanchez-Giron V, Serrano A, Hernaz JL, Navarrete L (2004) Economic assessment of three long-term tillage systems for rainfed cereal and legume production in semiarid central Spain. Soil Tillage Res 78:35–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. SAS Institute (2015). SAS/STAT® 9.4 User’s Guide. https://support.sas.com/documentation/onlinedoc/stat/index.html
  18. Schneeberger W, Peyerl H (eds) (2011) Betriebswirtschaftslehre für Agrarökonomen [Business administration for agricultural economists]. Facultas Verlags- und Buchhandels AG, Wien (in German)Google Scholar
  19. Schneider M (2008) Fruchtfolgegestaltung und konservierende Bodenbearbeitung/Direktsaat – Eine pflanzenbaulich/ökonomische Analyse [Crop rotation and conservation tillage/direct seed - A plant-based/economic analysis]. Dissertation, Technical University Munich (in German)Google Scholar
  20. Schreiner V, Meyer BC (2014) Indicators of land degradation in steppe regions: soil and morphodynamics in the Northern Kulunda. In: Mueller L, Saparov A, Lischeid G (eds) Novel measurement and assessment tools for monitoring and management of land and water resources in agricultural landscapes of Central Asia, environmental science and engineering. Springer, Cham, pp 535–548Google Scholar
  21. Sime G, Aune JB, Mohammed H (2015) Agronomic and economic response of tillage and water conservation management in maize, central rift valley in Ethiopia. Soil & Tillage Research 148:20–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sturny WG, Chervet A, Maurer-Troxler C, Ramseier L, Müller M, Schafflützel R, Richner W, Streit B, Weisskopf P, Zihlmann U (2007) Direktsaat und Pflug im Systemvergleich - eine Synthese [direct seed and plough in comparison - a synthesis]. Agrarforschung 14(8):350–357 (in German)Google Scholar
  23. Wie Su, Lu J, Wang W, Li X, Ren T, Cong R (2014) Influence of rice straw mulching on seed yield and nitrogen use efficiency of winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) in intensive rice–oilseed rape cropping system. Field Crops Res 159:53–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Agrar-Genossenschaft Altmärkische Höhe eGAltmärkische HöheGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Geosciences and GeographyMartin-Luther-Universität Halle-WittenbergHalleGermany
  3. 3.TOO AmazoneAstanaKazakhstan
  4. 4.Erlicht 35Reichenbach im VogtlandGermany

Personalised recommendations