Ecological and economic aspects of the efficiency of Polissia organic plant models
Purpose. The objective of the article is to investigate theoretically the possibility of harmonization of ecological and economic aspects of functioning of organic agricultural products production models under natural and climatic conditions of crop enterprises of Polissia zone in the Region of Chernihiv.
Methodology / approach. The study was conducted at the Institute of Agricultural Microbiology and Agro-Industrial Manufacture of the National Academy of Agrarian Sciences of Ukraine during 2011–2020. The analysis of ecological and economic efficiency of organic crop rotations was made based on the results of the proprietary research on the example of generalization of predicted results of the developed standard models of organic crop rotations at crop enterprises of Polissia zone. Main methods: modelling (development, in particular, of standard models of crop rotations, modelling of the size of fertilizer potential over time by years); predicting (prediction of receipt and expenditure of nutrients, organic matter), balance (calculation of balances of humus and key nutrients), calculation and design (calculation of the basic parameters of economic efficiency); abstract and logical (formulation of the provisions of the article based on the analysis of studies of other authors, drawing conclusions based on the results of studies conducted).
Results. Developed typical crop rotation models are characterized by positive predictive humus balances and acceptable key nutrient balances (NPK). With the implementation of ‘organic’ prices for agricultural products, most crops achieve an acceptable level of profitability. However, in order to achieve a competitive level of profitability of organic production, it must be provided with an appropriate economic mechanism of its functioning, in particular higher prices compared to traditional agricultural products, etc. Harmonization of economic and ecological aspects in simulated crop rotations is achieved primarily by selecting crops with high yields, which are mainly characterized by insufficient or low level of ecological efficiency, and crops with high or medium ecological efficiency, which having insufficient or low economic efficiency, compensate mostly negative ecological consequences of growing crops with high economic efficiency. This is accompanied by achievement of the ecological balance of agrocenoses and an acceptable level of economic efficiency of organic models. The practical aspect of the activities of specific farms in relation to the choice of the appropriate model of organic management should take into account not only considerations of ecological and economic efficiency, but also the level of resource provision within these limits.
Originality / scientific novelty. The possibility of harmonization of economic and ecological aspects and achievement of their acceptable level in crop rotations of organic agriculture for crop enterprises has been theoretically substantiated. For the first time, the methodological approach developed by the authors on the distribution of costs for the production and application of organic fertilizers between crops during crop rotation in proportion to the duration and amount of fertilization was implemented.
Practical value / implications. Typical models of crop rotations of organic farming for crop enterprises in Polissia were developed. Methods of choosing a certain model were proposed both according to the criteria of ecological and economic efficiency, and taking into account the organizational and economic capabilities and resource provision of a particular business entity.
2. Khalep, Yu. M., Мoskalenko, А. М., Volkohon, V. V., Yemets, Yu. H. and Khalep, А. Yu. (2015), Otsinka ekoloho-ekonomichnoi efektyvnosti modelei orhanichnoho vyrobnytstva silskohospodarskoi produktsii [Evaluation of ecological and economic efficiency of the models of organic production of agricultural products], Chernihiv, Ukraine.
3. Khalep, Yu. M., Volkohon, V. V. and Moskalenko, A M. (2015), Predicting fertilizing ability in the organic production models. Bulletin of Agricultural Science, no. 8, pp. 45–49. https://doi.org/10.31073/agrovisnyk201508-09.
4. Moskalenko, A. M. (2015), Teoretychni ta metodolohichni zasady efektyvnoho vykorystannia silskohospodarskykh zemel Polissia Ukrainy [Theoretic and methodological basis of the efficient use of agricultural lands of Ukrainian Polissia], Publisher Lysenko М. М, Nizhyn, Ukraine.
5. Kucher, A. and Kucher, L. (2017), State and problems of transfer of innovations in land use of agricultural enterprises. Marketing and Management of Innovations, no. 3, pp. 43–52. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2017.3-04.
6. Kucher, A. (2019), Influence of organic carbon balance in the soil on the formation of sustainable competitiveness of the agrarian enterprises. Agricultural and Resource Economics, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 11–136. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.300035.
7. Kucher, A. (2020), Soil fertility, financial support, and sustainable competitiveness: evidence from Ukraine. Agricultural and Resource Economics, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 5–23. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.303854.
8. Voronkova, O., Zadimidcenko, A., Goloshchapova, L., Polyakova, A., Kamolov, S. and Akhmetshin, E. (2018), Economic and mathematical modeling of regional industrial processes. European Research Studies Journal, vol. XXI, is. 4, pp. 268–279. https://doi.org/10.35808/ersj/1119.
9. Beltrán-Esteve, M., Reig-Martínez, E. and Estruch-Guitart, V. (2017), Assessing eco-efficiency: a metafrontier directional distance function approach using life cycle analysis. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, vol. 63, pp. 116–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EIAR.2017.01.001.
10. Galnaitytė, A., Kriščiukaitienė, I., Baležentis, T. and Namiotko, V. (2017), Evaluation of technological, economic and social indicators of different farming practices in Lithuania. Economics & Sociology, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 189–202. https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789X.2017/10-4/15.
11. Ivanyshyn, V. V. and Tarhoian, V. S. (2008), Ecological and economic aspects of the use of production agrarian ecotechnologies for competitive ecologically safe products. Ekonomika APK, no. 3, pp. 46–49.
12. Moskalenko, A. M. (2015), Ecological and economic justification of crop rotations for Ukrainian Polissia. Actual problems of economics, no. 10, pp. 235–243.
13. Bazylevych, V., Kupalova, G., Goncharenko, N., Murovana, T. and Grynchuk, Y. (2017), Improvement of the effectiveness of organic farming in Ukraine. Problems and perspectives in management, vol. 15, is. 3, pp. 64–75. https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.15(3).2017.06.
14. Karimi, F., Sultana, S., Shirzadi Babakan, A. and Royall, D. (2018), Land suitability evaluation for organic agriculture of wheat using GIS and multicriteria analysis. Papers in Applied Geography, vol. 4, is. 3, pp. 326–342. https://doi.org/10.1080/23754931.2018.1448715.
15. Ostapenko, R., Herasymenko, Y., Nitsenko, V., Koliadenko, S., Balezentis, T. and Streimikiene, D. (2020), Analysis of production and sales of organic products in Ukrainian agricultural enterprises. Sustainability, vol. 12(8), 3416. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12083416.
16. Tanchyk, S. P., Tsiuk, O. A. and Vialyi, S. O. (2009), Development of organic farming in Ukraine. Bulletin of Agricultural Science, no. 1, pp. 11–15.
17. Adamtey, N., Musyoka, M. W., Zundel, C., Cobo, J. G., Karanja, E., Fiaboe, K. K., Messmer, M. M. and other (2016), Productivity, profitability and partial nutrient balance in maize-based conventional and organic farming systems in Kenya. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, vol. 235, pp. 61–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2016.10.001.
18. De Leijster, V., Verburg, R. W., Santos, M. J., Wassen, M. J., Martínez-Mena, M., de Vente, J. and Verweij, P. A. (2020), Almond farm profitability under agroecological management in south-eastern Spain: accounting for externalities and opportunity costs. Agricultural Systems, vol. 183, 102878. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2020.102878.
19. Patyka,V. P., Harmashov, V. V., Buriachkivskyi, V. H. and Pylypenko, V. M. (2003), Comparative efficiency of the conventional and biological technology of winter wheat cultivation in the settings of the south of Ukraine. Ekonomika APK, no. 7, pp. 51–55.
20. Antonets, L. S., Pysarenko, V. V., Lukianenko, T. V. and Pysarenko, Yu. H. (2010), Formation of the market of ecologically safe products upon organic farming. Ekonomika APK, no. 12, pp. 75–79.
21. Krause, J. and Machek, O. (2018), A comparative analysis of organic and conventional farmers in the Czech Republic. Agricultural Economics – Czech, vol. 64, is. 1, pp. 1–8. https://doi.org/10.17221/161/2016-AGRICECON.
22. Bondar, V. (2016), Organic grain production market of Ukraine: prospects and trends. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 17–22. https://doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2016-2-3-17-22.
23. Baliuk, S. A., Hrekov, V. O., Lisovyi, M. V. and Komarysta, A. V. (2011), Rozrakhunok balansu humusu i pozhyvnykh rechovyn u zemlerobstvi Ukrainy na riznykh rivniakh upravlinnia [Calculation of humus and nutrients balance in the farming of Ukraine at different management levels], Municipal Enterprise “Miska Drukarnia”, Kharkiv, Ukraine.
24. Sabluk, P. T., Melnyk, Yu. F., Zubets, M. V. and Mesel–Veseliak, V. Ya. eds (2008), Tsinoutvorennia ta normatyvni vytraty v silskomu hospodarstvi teoriia, metodolohiia, praktyka. T.1 Teoriia tsinoutvorennia ta tekhnolohichni karty vyroshchuvannia silskohospodarskykh kultur [Pricing and standard costs in the agriculture: theory, methodology, practice. Vol. 1 Theory of pricing and technological charts for growing crops], NSC «IAE», Kyiv, Ukraine.
25. Manko, Yu. P., Tsiuk, O. A., Krotinov, O. P., Vdovychenko, V. K. and Tarasenko, O. O. (2008), Model systemy ekolohichnoho zemlerobstva v Lisostepu Ukrainy: metodychni rekomendatsii dlia vprovadzhennia u vyrobnytstvo [Ecological farming system model in Ukrainian Forest Steppe: guidelines for implementation in the production], Ahrarna osvita, Kyiv, Ukraine.
26. Sabluk, P. T., Melnyk, Yu. F., Zubets, M. V. and Mesel–Veseliak, V. Ya. eds (2008), Tsinoutvorennia ta normatyvni vytraty v silskomu hospodarstvi teoriia, metodolohiia, praktyka. T.2 Normatyvna sobivartist i tsiny na silskohospodarsku produktsiiu [Pricing and standard costs in the agriculture: theory, methodology, practice. Vol. 2 Standard cost and prices for agricultural products], NSC «IAE», Kyiv, Ukraine.
27. Ministry of Agrarian Policy of Ukraine (2001), Guidelines for planning, accounting and calculating product (works, services) cost at the agricultural enterprises, available at: http://www.uazakon.com/big/text1528/pg1.htm.
28. Tarariko, Yu. O. ed (2005), Bioenerhetychna otsinka silskohospodarskoho vyrobnytstva: naukovo-metodychne zabezpechennia [Bioenergetic assessment of agricultural production: scientific and methodological], Ahrarna nauka, Kyiv, Ukraine.
29. Prianishnikov, D. N. (1963), Izbrannye sochinenija. T. 1: Agrohimija [Selected works. Vol. 1: Agrochemistry], Publishing house for agricultural literature, Мoscow, Russia.
30. Karunakaran, N. and Sadiq, M. S. (2019), Socio economic aspect of organic farming practices for improving farmer’s income in some locations of Kerala, India. Bangladesh Journal of Agricultural Research, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 401–408. https://doi.org/10.3329/bjar.v44i3.43474.
31. Blasi, E., Passeri, N., Franco, S. and Galli, A. (2016), An ecological footprint approach to environmental–economic evaluation of farm results. Agricultural Systems, vol. 145, pp. 76–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2016.02.013.
32. Rosa-Schleich, J., Loos, J., Mußhoff, O. and Tscharntke, T. (2019), Ecological-economic trade-offs of diversified farming systems–a review. Ecological Economics, vol. 160, pp. 251–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.03.002.