Crop Science Research in Arid Regions

Crop Science Research in Arid Regions

Evaluation of economic and ecological characteristics of wheat production system in Sistan region using emergy analysis technique

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
1 PhD Student, Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran
2 Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran
Abstract
Introduction: Wheat is the most important agricultural product in Sistan, which, depending on the availability of water, provides a substantial portion of the region's farmers with a living. Consequently, farmers attempt to expand their cultivated area. But any progress towards increasing production will be valuable if it continues for an extended period of time, particularly the continuation of the production of this product, which is of great importance in terms of meeting a portion of families' food needs and generating income for its producers. Proper management of the production system, environment, and natural resources is required to ensure the long-term sustainability of this crop. In order to determine whether this production system will continue to exist in the future, it is necessary to examine the production stability of these systems by analyzing the total input and the effect of these inputs on the substrate and the surrounding environment. Consequently, it was decided to evaluate the sustainability of wheat production in the Sistan region by employing the emergy analysis technique and determining the contribution of each input and their impact on the production system and the surrounding ecosystems using this method's indicators. The emergy exchange ratio was used to assess the sustainability of wheat systems in this article.
Materials and Methods: In 2020, wheat fields in Sistan (including Zabol, Zahak, Hamoun, Nimrouz, and Hirmand) were surveyed for this study. Each category was further subdivided into renewable and nonrenewable categories. Regional meteorological stations recorded renewable environmental inputs. The USLE model was used to calculate soil erosion, and wheat fields were measured for organic matter changes. The amount of economic inputs was determined by interviewing wheat farmers, and the amount of machinery was based on its lifespan. The ISO1928 method defines energy output in calories. Multiplying the total input current by the transformities yielded solar emjoules (sej). In addition to inputs, emergy indices, a function of environmental and purchased flows, must be calculated to evaluate wheat production sustainability. The desired indicators for this study are transfomity (Tr), specific emergy (SpE), emergy renewability percentage (R%), emergy yield ratio (EYR), environmental load ratios (ELR and ELR*), environmental sustainability indices (ESI and ESI*), emergy investment ratios (EIR and EIR*), and emergy exchange ratio (EER).
Results and Discussion: It was important that environmental inputs contributed 5.35E+16 sej ha-1 yr-1to the total inputs that the production system required. Both EYR and EIR have favourable values, as a result of the strong impact that environmental inputs have on the production process. Considering that all methods of production include the use of natural resources, it is inevitable that there would be negative effects on the surrounding ecosystem. As a result of the significance of this matter, an index that has been given the name environmental loading ratio has been established in order to provide an approximation of the amount of pressure that this system puts on the environment. The determined value of this index is 3.85, which suggests that the manufacturing system only puts a moderate amount of stress on the environment. However, taking into account the fact that this system was sustained by 34% renewable resources, the revised environmental load ratio index caused the production system to behave more flexibly with the ecosystems that were located in its immediate vicinity.
Conclusion: The normal operation of a production system requires the interaction of natural and purchased inputs, and the absence of one of these inputs causes more of the other type to be introduced. The substantial contribution of natural resources to the production process, relative to purchased inputs, demonstrated that wheat production in the Sistan region is traditional. This traditional production method has had the greatest impact on wheat production in the region due to soil erosion. Therefore, management practices that preserve plant residues within the field can have a positive effect on the region's wheat production.  
Keywords

Acevedo, M., Zurn, J. D., Molero, G., Singh, P., He, X., Aoun, M., ... & McCandless, L., 2018. The role of wheat in global food security. In Agricultural development and sustainable intensification, pp. 81-110.
Amaral, L.P., Martins, N. and Gouveia, J.B., 2016. A review of emergy theory, its application and latest developments. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 54, pp.882-888. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.10.048
Amini, S.h., Rohani, A., Aghkhani, M.H., Abbaspour-Fard, M.H. and Asgharipour, M.R., 2020. Sustainability assessment of rice production systems in Mazandaran Province, Iran with emergy analysis and fuzzy logic. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 40, p.100744. doi: 10.1016/j.seta.2020.100744
Amiri, Z., Asgharipour, M.R., Campbell, D.E. and Armin, M., 2019. A sustainability analysis of two rapeseed farming ecosystems in Khorramabad, Iran, based on emergy and economic analyses. Journal of Cleaner Production, 226, pp.1051-1066. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.091
Amiri, Z., Asgharipour, M.R., Campbell, D.E., Azizi, Kh., Kakolvand, E. and Hassani Moghadam, E., 2021. Conservation agriculture, a selective model based on emergy analysis for sustainable production of shallot as a medicinal-industrial plant. Journal of Cleaner Production, 292, p.126000. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126000
Asgharipour, M.R., Amiri, Z. and Campbell, D.E., 2020. Evaluation of the sustainability of four greenhouse vegetable production ecosystems based on an analysis of emergy and social characteristics. Ecological Modelling, 424, p.109021. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2020.109021
Asgharipour, M.R., Shahgholi, H., Campbell, D.E., Khamari, I. and Ghadiri, A., 2019. Comparison of the sustainability of bean production systems based on emergy and economic analyses. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 191, pp: 2-25. doi: 10.1007/s10661-018-7123-3
Bastianoni, S., Pulselli, F.M., Castellini, C., Granai, C., Dal Bosco, A. and Brunetti, M., 2009. Emergy evaluation and the management of systems towards sustainability: A response to Sholto Maud. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment, 120, pp.472-474. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2006.08.010
Battenfield, S.D., Guzman, C., Gaynor, R.C., Singh, R.P., Pena, R.J., Dreisigacker, S. and Poland, J. A., 2016. Genomic selection for processing and end-use quality traits in the CIMMYT spring bread wheat breeding program. The Plant Genome, 9, pp.1-12. doi: 10.3835/plantgenome2016.01.0005
Brandt-Williams, S.L., 2002. Handbook of emergy evaluation: a compendium of data for emergy computation issued in a series of Folios. Center for Environmental Policy Environmental Engineering Science. University of Floriga, Gainesville.
Brown, M.T., Odum, H.T. and Jorgensen, S.E., 2004. Energy hierarchy and transformity in the universe. Ecological Modelling, 178, pp.17-28. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2003.12.002
Brown, M.T. and Ulgiati, S., 1998. Emergy-based indices and ratio to evaluate sustainability: monitoring economies and technology toward environmentally sound innovation. Ecological Engineering, 9, pp.51-69. doi: 10.1016/s0925-8574(97)00033-5
Brown, M.T. and Ulgiati, S., 2004. Emergy analysis and environmental accounting. Encyclopedia of Energy, 2, pp.329-354.
Brandt-Williams, S.L., 2002. Handbook of emergy evaluation: a compendium of data for emergy computation issued in a series of Folios. Center for Environmental Policy Environmental Engineering Science. University of Floriga, Gainesville.
Brown, M.T., Campbell, D.E., De Vilbiss, Ch. and Ulgiati, S., 2016. The geobiosphere emergy baseline: A synthesis. Ecological Modelling, 339, pp.92-95. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2016.03.018
Campbell, D.E. and Erban, L., 2016. A reexamination of the emergy input to a system from the wind. In: Brown, M.T., Sweeney, S., Campbell, D.E., Huang, S., Rydberg, T., Ulgiati, S. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth Biennial Emergy Research Conference, pp.13–19 Gainesville.
Campbell, D.E., Brandt-Williams, S.L. and Meisch, M.E.A., 2005. Environmental accounting using emergy: evaluation of the state of West Virginia (No. EPA/600/R-05/006). USEPA, Narragansett, RI.
Cavalett, O., Queiroz, J.F.D. and Ortega, E., 2006. Emergy assessment of integrated production systems of grains, pig and fish in small farms in the South Brazil. Ecological Modelling, 193, pp.205-224. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2005.07.023
Cochran, W.G. 1942. Sampling theory when the sampling-units are of unequal sizes. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 37, pp.199-212.
Cuadra, M. and Rydberg, T., 2006. Emergy evaluation on the production, processing and export of coffee in Nicaragua. Ecological Modelling, 196(3-4), pp.421-433. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.02.010
Dorado, M.P., Cruz, F., Palomar, J.M. and Lopez, F.J., 2006. An approach to the economics of two vegetable oil-based in Spain. Renewable Energy, 31(8), pp.1231-1237. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2005.06.010
Fallahinejad, S., Armin, M. and Asgharipour, M.R., 2021. A survey on the ecological sustainability of introducing new crops in the cropping pattern using emergy approach. Current Research in Environmental Sustainability, 3, p.100083. doi: 10.1016/j.crsust.2021.100083
Fallahinejad, S., Armin, M. and Asgharipour, M.R., 2022. The effect of farm size on the sustainability of wheat production using emergy approach. Current Research in Environmental Sustainability, 4, p.100161. doi: 10.1016/j.crsust.2022.100161
Fluck, R.C., 1992. Energy in farm production. In: Stout, B.A. (Ed.), Energy in World Agriculture, vol. 6. Elsevier Science Publishers BV, Amsterdam.
Hau, J.L. and Bakshi, B.R., 2004. Promise and problems of emergy analysis. Ecological Modelling, 178 (1-2), pp.215-225. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2003.12.016
Iran Statistics Center, population and housing census results., 2014. Sistan and Baluchistan province.
Jaklic, T., Juvancic, L., Kavcic, S. and Debeljak, M., 2014. Complementarity of socio-economic and emergy evaluation of agricultural production systems: The case of Slovenian dairy sector. Ecological Economics, 107, pp.469-481. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.09.024
Lu, H., Bai, Y., Ren, H. and Campbell, D.E., 2010. Integrated emergy, energy and economic evaluation of rice and vegetable production systems in alluvial paddy fields: Implications for agricultural policy in China. Journal of Environmental Management, 91, pp.2727-2735. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.07.025
Lu, H.F., Tan, Y.W., Zhang, W.Sh., Qiao, Y.Ch., Campbell, D.E., Zhou, L. and Ren, H., 2017. Integrated emergy and economic evaluation of lotus-root production systems on reclaimed wetlands surrounding the Pearl River Estuary, China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 158, pp.367-379. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.05.016
Lu, H., Kang, W.L., Campbell, D.E., Ren, H., Tan, Y.W., Feng, R.X., Luo, J.T. and Chen, F. P., 2009. Emergy and economic evaluations of four fruit production systems on reclaimed wetlands surrounding the Pearl River Estuary, China. Ecological Engineering, 35, pp.1743-1757. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2009.08.001
Odum, H.T., 1996. Environmental accounting: emergy and environmental decision making. Wiley, New York, 379p.
Odum, H.T. and Peterson, N., 1996. Simulation and evaluation with energy systems blocks. Ecological Modelling, 93, pp.155-173. doi: 10.1016/0304-3800(95)00221-9
Ridolfi, R., Pulselli, F.M., Morandi, F., Oliveira, M. and Bastianoni, S., 2019. Emergy and sustainability. Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences, 4, pp.294-306. 10.1016/B978-0-12-409548-9.00590-X
Rydberg, R. and Haden, A.C., 2006. Emergy evaluations of Denmark and Danish agriculture: Assessing the influence of changing resource availability on the organization of agriculture and society. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 117, pp.145-158. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2006.03.025
Volume 6, Issue 3 - Serial Number 14
Autumn 2024
Pages 157-170

  • Receive Date 07 October 2022
  • Revise Date 11 January 2023
  • Accept Date 13 January 2023