Preliminary analysis on economic and environmental consequences of grain production on different farm sizes in North China Plain

被引:59
作者
Wang, Xiaolong [1 ,2 ]
Chen, Yuanquan [1 ]
Sui, Peng [1 ]
Yan, Peng [1 ]
Yang, Xiaolei [1 ]
Gao, Wangsheng [1 ]
机构
[1] China Agr Univ, Coll Agron & Biotechnol, Beijing 100193, Peoples R China
[2] South China Agr Univ, Coll Agron, Guangzhou 510642, Guangdong, Peoples R China
关键词
Grain production; Farm size; Life cycle assessment; Economic analysis; North China Plain; LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT; MAIZE ROTATION SYSTEM; IMPACT ASSESSMENT; WATER FOOTPRINT; CROP PRODUCTION; USE EFFICIENCY; METHODOLOGY; UNCERTAINTY; MANAGEMENT; FOOD;
D O I
10.1016/j.agsy.2017.02.005
中图分类号
S [农业科学];
学科分类号
09 ;
摘要
Due to rapid economic growth and dramatic urbanization in China in the recent 30 years, the traditional model for grain production dominated by small-size household farms is gradually being broken, while large-scale farming is becoming increasingly common. However, the information on relationships of environmental and economic consequences of grain production on different farm size has been lacking. In this study, life cycle assessment and economic analysis are used to compare environmental and economic performance of wheat-maize double -cropping system on small, medium and large farm size in North China Plain (NCP). The life cycle assessment indicates that, compared to the small-farm, area-based environmental impact index (EIA) is decreased by 2.4% and 3.4% for the medium-farm and large-farm, yield-based environmental impact index (EIy) is increased by 143% for the medium-farm while decreased by 3.4% for the large-farm. The economic analysis shows that the yield-based profits (EPy) for the medium-farm and large-farm are 83.4% and 71.7% lower than that for the small-size farms but the expansion of farm size contributes to the improvement of incomes of workers and owners of the farms together. Generally, the potential environmental impacts of grain production on the same area farmland will possibly change due to the difference of farm size, but expanding farm size will not directly and obviously improve the potential environmental consequences of grain production in the NCP. The larger size farm earns the more net income annually, but the conventional small-farm has the better revenue at the point of yield-based profit. Moreover, a scenario analysis represented that the EIy and EPy for the medium farm and large-farm would be improved by 1.1%-47.1% and by 11.1-267.3%, respectively, by improved fertilization, irrigation and machines practices. Clearly, the advanced agricultural practice is the key point to improve the environmental and economic consequences for grain production in the NCP. Therefore, it is not scientific to only emphasize the expansion of farm size but, meanwhile, not to promote the implementation of advanced agricultural practices for the environmental and economic consequences of grain production in the NCP. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:181 / 189
页数:9
相关论文
共 56 条
  • [11] Duan Y., 2014, Promoting Development of New Management Model for Grain Production
  • [12] Can the Life Cycle Assessment methodology be adopted to support a single farm on its environmental impacts forecast evaluation between conventional and organic production? An Italian case study
    Fedele, Andrea
    Mazzi, Anna
    Niero, Monia
    Zuliani, Filippo
    Scipioni, Antonio
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2014, 69 : 49 - 59
  • [13] Climate- and crop-responsive emission factors significantly alter estimates of current and future nitrous oxide emissions from fertilizer use
    Flynn, HC
    Smith, J
    Smith, KA
    Wright, J
    Smith, P
    Massheder, J
    [J]. GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY, 2005, 11 (09) : 1522 - 1536
  • [14] Solutions for a cultivated planet
    Foley, Jonathan A.
    Ramankutty, Navin
    Brauman, Kate A.
    Cassidy, Emily S.
    Gerber, James S.
    Johnston, Matt
    Mueller, Nathaniel D.
    O'Connell, Christine
    Ray, Deepak K.
    West, Paul C.
    Balzer, Christian
    Bennett, Elena M.
    Carpenter, Stephen R.
    Hill, Jason
    Monfreda, Chad
    Polasky, Stephen
    Rockstrom, Johan
    Sheehan, John
    Siebert, Stefan
    Tilman, David
    Zaks, David P. M.
    [J]. NATURE, 2011, 478 (7369) : 337 - 342
  • [15] A Methodology for Robust Comparative Life Cycle Assessments Incorporating Uncertainty
    Gregory, Jeremy R.
    Noshadravan, Arash
    Olivetti, Elsa A.
    Kirchain, Randolph E.
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2016, 50 (12) : 6397 - 6405
  • [16] GUINEE J. B, 2001, HDB LIFE CYCLE ASSES
  • [17] Guo, 2013, SOC SCI RES, V3, P14
  • [18] Hu YanXia Hu YanXia, 2009, Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, V25, P200
  • [19] Economics, environment, and energy life cycle assessment of automobiles fueled by bio-ethanol blends in China
    Hu, ZY
    Pu, GQ
    Fang, F
    Wang, CT
    [J]. RENEWABLE ENERGY, 2004, 29 (14) : 2183 - 2192
  • [20] Framework for modelling data uncertainty in life cycle inventories
    Huijbregts, MAJ
    Norris, G
    Bretz, R
    Ciroth, A
    Maurice, B
    von Bahr, B
    Weidema, B
    de Beaufort, ASH
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2001, 6 (03) : 127 - 132