ارزیابی تاثیر آلاینده‌های زیست‌محیطی بر کارایی فنی گاوداری‌های شیری شهرستان سراب به روش تحلیل مرزتصادفی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 هیئت علمی گروه اقتصاد کشاورزی، دانشگاه ارومیه

2 فارغ التحصل کارشناسی ارشد اقتصاد کشاورزی از دانشگاه ارومیه

چکیده

صنعت دامداری به عنوان یکی از مهم­ترین زیربخش‌های کشاورزی است­، به­طوری که نقش مهمی در تولید مواد­غذایی پایه مانند شیر و گوشت دارد. بنابراین، هر ساله بایستی به‌منظور تامین تقاضای داخلی و صادرات مازاد تقاضا بر میزان تولید آن افزوده شود. با توجه به شبه رقابتی بودن بازار نهاده و ستاده محصولات دامی، یکی از راه‌های افزایش تولید و سود دامداری‌ها، افزایش کارایی واحدهای تولیدی است. لذا، هدف از این مطالعه، محاسبه کارایی فنی و کارایی زیست‌محیطی به روش تحلیل مرز تصادفی در گاوداری‌های شیری شهرستان سراب با استفاده از روش نمونه‌گیری تصادفی ساده و تکمیل پرسشنامه از 51 گاوداری شیری در سال 1394 است. یافته­های تحلیل مرز تصادفی نشان داد که میانگین کارایی فنی، 95 درصد و میانگین کارایی زیست‌محیطی (با لحاظ کردن آلاینده­­های نیتروژن و فسفر)، 72 درصد است. جهت مقایسه‌ی آماری اختلاف بین متوسط کارایی فنی و زیست‌محیطی از آزمون کروسکال-والیس استفاده شده است که نتیجه، معنی‌دار بودن اختلاف بین میانگین کارایی‌ها را تایید می‌کند. از آنجایی که مقدار انتشار آلاینده­های فسفر و نیتروژن به نوع جیره مصرفی بستگی داشت، پیشنهاد می­شود واحدهای تولیدی با مدیریت و بهبود کیفیت جیره گاوها، تولید آلایندهای زیست­محیطی به ازای هر تن تولید شیر را کاهش داده که از این طریق می­توان کارایی واحدهای تولیدی را افزایش داد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluating the Impact of Environmental Pollutants on Technical Efficiencies of Dairy Farms Using Stochastic Frontier Analysis

نویسندگان [English]

  • Morteza Molaei 1
  • Fatemeh Sani 2
1
2
چکیده [English]

Livestock industry, one of the most important sub-sectors of agricultural sector, produces the basic foods including milk and meat that must be increase to meet the demand and exporting excess demand. Due to the semi-competitive nature of input and output markets of livestock products, one of the ways to increasing production and profit is increasing the efficiency of production units. The aim of this study is evaluating the technical and environmental efficiencies of dairy farms using Stochastic Frontier Analysis in Sarab County. Required data collected using simple random sampling and completing 51 questionnaires at year 1394. According to the results of Stochastic Frontier Analysis, average technical and environmental efficiencies averaging 95% and 72%, respectively. For comparing the difference between the average technical and environmental efficiency, Kruskal-Wallis test used that the result confirms the significant difference between the average efficiencies. Given the significant differences between the technical and environmental efficiencies, it is suggesting that environmental issues to be considered in the estimation of the efficiency of production units.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Livestock
  • Phosphorus pollutants
  • Nitrogen pollutants
  • Environmental Efficiency

مراجع

  1. Agricultural Jihad Ministry. (2013). Agricultural Statistics of Iran, 2012- 2013. (In Farsi).
  2.  Akbare, N.A., Zahedi Keyvan, M & Monfarediyan, M. (2008). Determine Efficiency Performance Animal Husbandry Industry in Country (Approach: Interval Data Envelopment Analysis). The Economic Research, 3: 141-160. (In Farsi).
  3. Amadeh, H. & Rezaei, A. (2011). Measurement of environmental efficiency through use of the non-separable desirable and non-desirable output model in the electric utilities. Quarterly Energy Economics, 30: 125-154. (In Farsi).
  4. Ball, V.E., Lovell, C.A.K., Luu, H. & Nehring, R. (2004). Incorporating environmental impacts in the measurement of agricultural productivity growth. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 29: 436-460.
  5. Battese, G.E. and Coelli, T. (1992). Frontier production functions, technical efficiency and panel data with application to paddy farmers in India. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 3, 153-169.
  6. Chandler, P.T., (1996). Environmental challenges as related to animal agriculture  – dairy, Nutrient Management of Food Animals to Enhance and protect the Environment, KornegayETed, CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, Fl: 7-19.
  7. Coelli, T. & Perelman, S. (1996). Efficiency Measurement multiple-output technologies and distance functions: with application to European railways. Crepp Working Papers 96/05, University De Liege.
  8. Coggins, J.S. & Swinton, J.R. (1996). The price of pollution: a dual approach to valuing so2 allowances. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 30: 58-72.
  9. Cuesta, R.A., Knox Lovell, C.A. & Zofio, J.L. (2009). Environmental efficiency measurement with translog distance functions: a parametric approach. Ecological Economics, 68: 2232-2242.
  10. Darijani, A. (2005). Evaluation of environmental and technical efficiencies for Iranian livestock slaughterhouses. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Tehran, Iran. (In Farsi).
  11. Dashti, Gh. (2008(. Evaluation of factor productivity growth of the dairy industry. Third Congress of Animal Science, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. (In Farsi).
  12. Emami Meibodi, A. & Jaydary, F. (2015). Eco-efficiency evaluation of Iran's oil refineries: using data envelopment analysis (DEA). The Economic Research, 4:79-96. (In Farsi)
  13. Färe, R. & Primont, D. (1995). Multi-output Production and duality: theory and applications. Kluwer Academic Publisher, Boston.
  14. Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., Lovell, K. & Pasurka, C. (1989). Multilateral productivity comparison when some products are undesirable: a non-parametric approach. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 71: 90-98.
  15. Fuentes, H.J., Grifell-Tatje, E. & Perelman, S. (2001). A parametric distance function approach for Mulmquist productivity index estimation. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 15: 79-94.
  16. Grosskopf, S., Hayes, K.J., Taylor, L.L. & Weber, W.L. (1997). Budget-Constrained frontier measures of fiscal equality and efficiency in schooling. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 75: 116-124.
  17. Hailu, A. & Veeman, T.S. (2000). Environmentally sensitive productivity analysis of Canadian pulp and paper industry, 1959–1994: An input distance function approach. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 40: 251-274.Environmentally Sensitive Productivity Analysis of the Canadian Pulp and Paper Industry, 1959-1994: An Input Distance Function Approach Environmentally Sensitive Productivity Analysis of the Canadian Pulp and Paper Industry, 1959-1994: An Input Distance Function Approach
  18. Hetemäki, L. (1996). Essays on the impact of pollution control on a firm: a distance function approach. Research Papers vol, 609.
  19. Hollmann, M., Knowlton, K.F. & Hanigan, M.D. (2008). Evaluation of solids, nitrogen, and phosphorus excretion models for lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 91: 1245–1257.
  20. Iribarren, D., Hospido, A., Moreira, M.T. & Feijoo, G. (2011). Benchmarking environmental and operational parameters through eco-efficiency criteria for dairy farms. Science Total Environ, 409: 1786–1798.
  21. Jafarnia, M. & Esmaeili, A. (2013). Application of environmental impact analysis of technical efficiency: A case study of Shiraz fattening units of beef cattle. Journal of Agricultural Economics Researches, 2: 151-164. (In Farsi).
  22. Kumar, S. & Khanna, M. (2003). The impact of co2 abatement on productivity growth and GDP: a cross-country analysis using the distance function approach. www.ace.uiuc.edu/pERE/papers/pERE_WP29.pdf
  23. Mamardashvili, P., Emvalomatis, G. & Jan, P. (2016). Environmental performance and shadow value of polluting on Swiss dairy farms. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 41:225–246.
  24. Molaei, M. & Sani, F. (2015). Estimating environmental efficiency of the agricultural sector. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture and Production Science, 2:91-101. (In Farsi).
  25. Morrison, C.J. & Johnston, W.E. (1996). Efficiency in New Zealand sheep and farming: pre- and post-reform, paper presented at Georgia productivity workshop ii, Athens GA.
  26. Moshref, Sh. (2003). Final report of research project, investigation management of feed in industrial dairy farm in Esfahan. Esfahan Research Center of Agricultural and Natural Resource. (In Farsi).
  27. Nafisi, M. (2004). Final report of research project, investigation management of feed in industrial dairy farm under record making in Tehran. Animal Sciences Research Institute of Iran, Karaj. (In Farsi).
  28. Nennich, T.D., Harrison, J.H., VanWieringen, L.M., Meyer, D., Heinrichs, A.J., Weiss, W.P., St-Pierre, N.R., Kincaid, R.L., Davidson, D.L & Block, E. (2005). Prediction of manure and nutrient excretion from dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science, 88: 3721-3733.
  29. Njuki, E., Bravo B.E & Mukherjee, D. (2016). The good and the bad: environmental effciency in northeastern U.S. dairy farming. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 45: 22-43.
  30. NRC, (2001). Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle, seventh revised edition. National Academies Press, Washington, DC. USA. (Online) Available at: http: //www.nap.edu/catalog/9825.html.
  31. Pittman, R.W. (1983). Multilateral productivity comparisons with undesirable outputs. The Economic Journal, 93: 883–891.
  32. Ramilan, T., Scrimgeour, F. & Marsh, D. (2011). Analysis of economic and environmental efficiency using a farm population micro-simulation model. Math. Comput. Simulat, 81: 1344–1352.
  33. Raushan, B. & Kumbhakar, S.C. (2014). A distance function model with good and bad outputs. International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
  34. Reinhard, S. (1999). Econometric analysis of economic and environmental efficiency in Dutch dairy farms. Ph.D. Thesis, Wageningen Agricultural University.
  35. Rezaei, A., Amadeh, H. & Mohammadi, T. (2011). Policy analysis of natural gas export to India-Pakistan countries, a game theoretic approach. Journal of Iranian Energy Economics, 2: 93-126. . (In Farsi).
  36. Seifi, A., Salimifar, M. & Fanodi, H. (2013). Measuring environmental efficiency: a case study of thermal power generation in Jonoobi, Razavi and Shomali Khorasan provinces. Quarterly Energy Economics Review, 7:17-41. (In Farsi).
  37. Shahiki tash, M., Khajeh Hasani, M. & Jafari, S. (2015). Assessment of the environmental performance in energy intensive industries of Iran by using directional distance function approach. Journal of Applied Theories of Economics, 1:99-120. (In Farsi).
  38. Shortall, O.K. & Barnes, A.P. (2013). Greenhouse gas emissions and the technical efficiency of farmers. Journal of Ecological Indicators, 29: 478-488.
  39. Zhang, B. & Xue, B.D. (2005). Environmental efficiency analysis of china vegetable production. Biomedical and Environmental Sciences, 18: 21-30.

 

تحقیقات اقتصاد و توسعه کشاورزی ایران
دوره 48، شماره 1
خرداد 1396
صفحه 35-42

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار