بررسی عوامل موثر بر کارآیی فنی تولید گندم آبی در شهر کشم، کشور افغانستان

فصلنامه علمی -پژوهشی تحقیقات اقتصاد کشاورزی

دوره 15، شماره 3، آبان 1402، صفحه 44-55   

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30495/jae.2023.28871.2286

نویسندگان

میرویس شریفی¹؛ فرشید اشراقی^{* 2}؛ اعظم رضایی²؛ علی کرامت زاده³

¹دانش آموخته گروه اقتصاد کشاورزی، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی گرگان، گرگان، ایران.

²استادیار گروه اقتصاد کشاورزی، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی گرگان، گرگان، ایران.

³استادیار گروه اقتصاد کشاورزی، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی گرگان، گرگان، ایران

تاریخ دریافت: 12 شهریور 1400،  تاریخ بازنگری: 20 آذر 1400،  تاریخ پذیرش: 25 مرداد 1402 

چکیده

مقدمه و هدف: گندم آبی تقریبا 75 درصد از تولید داخلی کشور افغانستان را تشکیل می‌دهد. این محصول در امنیت غذایی، افزایش درآمد و اشتغال کشاورزان این کشور اهمیت زیادی دارد. به همین منظور میزان کارایی گندم آبی و عوامل موثر بر آن در این پژوهش مورد بررسی قرار گرفت.
مواد و روش­ها: داده­های این پژوهش به روش نمونه­گیری تصادفی طبقه­ای با تکمیل پرسشنامه از 104 کشاورز گندم کار آبی شهرستان کشم کشور افغانستان به­دست آمد. به­منظور تجزیه و تحلیل کارآیی از روش تحلیل پوششی داده­ها استفاده شد. همچنین، برای بررسی عوامل موثر بر کارآیی گندم آبی، مدل رگرسیونی توبیت مورد استفاده قرار گرفت.
یافته­ ها: بر اساس نتایج مدل تحلیل پوششی داده­ها، میانگین کارآیی فنی، تخصیصی و اقتصادی کشاورزان، به‌ترتیب 820/0، 650/0 و 519/0 است. می­توان نتیجه گرفت که اکثر زارعین این شهرستان دارای کارآیی فنی بالا می­باشند، اما از کارآیی اقتصادی خوبی برخوردار نیستند. به­علاوه، نتایج رگرسیون توبیت نشان می­دهدکه متغیر تعاونی­های کشاورزی اثر مثبت و معنی‌دار، متغیر سن کشاورز اثر منفی و معنی­ دار و متغیرهای میزان تحصیلات و تجربه کشاورز اثر منفی و اندازه مزرعه اثر مثبت بر کارآیی فنی دارد.
بحث و نتیجه ­گیری: طبق نتایج تخقیق، تشویق زارعان به عضویت در تعاونی­های کشاورزی و یکپارچه­سازی اراضی باعث بهبود کارآیی فنی تولید گندم آبی این شهرستان می­شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

کارآیی؛ گندم آبی؛ تحلیل پوششی داده‌ها؛ کشم؛ افغانستان

عنوان مقاله [English]

Investigating the factors affecting the technical efficiency of irrigated wheat production in Kashm, Afghanistan

نویسندگان [English]

Mirveys Sharifi¹؛ Farshid Eshraghi²؛ azam rezaee²؛ ali keramatzadeh³

¹-MSc in Agricultural Economics

²-Assistant professor of Agricultural Economics, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences & Natural Resources

³Assistant professor of Agricultural Economics, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences & Natural Resources

چکیده [English]

In this study, production efficiency of irrigated wheat were studied. The data of this study were obtained by completing a questionnaire from 104 irrigated wheat farmers in Kesham county, in Afghanistan. In order to analyze the efficiency, DEA method was used. Also, Tobit regression model was used to investigate the factors affecting the yield of irrigated wheat. Based on the results of data envelopment analysis model, the average technical, allocative and economic efficiency of farmers are 0.820, 0.650 and 0.519, respectively. It can be concluded that most of the farmers in this city have high technical efficiency but do not have good economic efficiency. In addition, the results of Tobit regression show that the variable of agricultural cooperatives has a positive and significant effect, the variable of farmer age has a negative and significant effect and the variables of education and farmer experience have a negative effect and farm size has a positive effect on technical efficiency. Therefore, encouraging farmers in agricultural cooperatives will improve the technical efficiency of irrigated wheat production in this city.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

Efficiency, irrigated wheat, data envelopment analysis, Kesham, Afganistan

مراجع

1. Akbari N, and Rabiei, M. Analysis of wheat production efficiency under conditions of uncertainty using IDEA method, a case study of Isfahan province (1384-1387). Iran, Islamic Azad University, Khomeini Shahr Branch, Second National Economics Conference.
2. Hosseini A. Economic study of production, marketing and determination of optimal strategies for saffron development in Afghanistan. Master’s thesis, Shiraz University, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Agricultural Economics.
3. Khodavardizadeh M, Mohammadi M, Miri D. (). Determining the technical efficiency of wheat production with emphasis on sustainable agriculture in Urmia city. Journal of agricultural science and sustainable production, 2018, 29(4), 233-245.
4. Adanguidi J. Factors affecting the technical efficiency of oil palm fruit processing units in South-East Benin. Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics. 2019, 11(10), 247-255.
5. Adesina A A, Baidu-Forson, J. Farmers perceptions and adoption of new agricultural technology: Evidence form analysis in Burkina Faso and Guinea, West Africa. Agricultural Economics, 1995, 13, 1-9.
6. Agricultural Research Institute of Afghanistan, 2018. http://aria.gov.af/
7. Habtamu A. A Metafrontier Analysis on the Performance of Grain-Producing Regions in Norway. Economies, 2021, 9, 1-10.
8. Alene A D, Manyong V M. Farmer-to-farmer technology diffusion and yield variation among adopters: The case of improved cowpea in northern Nigiria. Agricultural Economics, 2006, 35, 2003-2011.
9. Ambetsa F L, Mwangi S C, Ndirangu S N. Technical efficiency and its determinants in sugarcane production among smallholder sugarcane farmers in production among smallholder sugarcane farmers in Malva sub-county, Kenya. African Jounal of Agricultural Research, 2020, 15(3), 351-360.
10. Bravo-Ureta B E, Solis D, Lopez V M, Maripani J, Thiam A. Technical efficiency in farming: A meta-regression analysis. Journal of production Analysis, 2007, 27, 57-72.
11. Chavas J P, Aliber M. An analysis of economic efficiency in agriculture: A nonparametric approach. Journal of Agricultural Resource Economics, 1993, 18, 1-16.
12. Chebil A, Frija A, Thabet C. Economic efficiency measures and its determinants for irrigated wheat farms in Tunisia: a DEA approach. New Medit, 2015, 14(2), 32-38.
13. Chirwa E W. Adoption of fertilizer and hybrid seeds by smallholder maize farmers in southern Malawi. Development Southern Africa, 2005, 22(1), 1-12.
14. Chong A Y L. Predicting m-commerce adoption determinants: A neural network approach. Expert System with Applications, 2013, 40, 523-530.
15. Coelli T. A Guide to DEAP version 2.1, A Data Envelop Analysis (Compute program). 1998, CEPA Working paper, No. 8, Department of Economic, University of New England.
16. Coelli T, Fleming E. Diversification economies and specialization efficiencies in a mixed food and coffee smallholder farming system in Papua New Guinea. Agricultural Economics, 2004, 31, 229-239.
17. Farid H O, Schmidt S S, Yaisawarng S. Incorporating the operating environment into a nonparametric measure of technical efficiency. Journal of Production Analysis, 1999, 12, 249-267.
18. Farrel M J. Measurement of Productive Efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A. General, 1957, 120(3), 253-81.
19. Featherstone A M, Langemeier M, Ismet M. (). A nonparametric analysis of efficiency for a sample of Kansas beef cow farms. Journal of Agricultural Applied Economics, 1997, 29, 175-184.
20. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Country Profile-Afghanistan. 2012, 18-20.
21. Helfand S M. Farm size and the determinants of productive efficiency in the Brazilian Center-West. Agricultural Economics. 2003, 31(2-3), 241-249.
22. Khoshroo A, Singh S. Measuring Economic Efficiency of Kidney Bean Production using Non-Discretionary Data Envelopment Analysis. Advances in Mathematical Finance and Applications, 2021, 6(2), 233-244.
23. Kilic O, Ceyhan V, Alkan I. Determinants of economic efficiency: A case study of hazelnut (Corylus avellana) farms in Samsun Province, Turkey. New Zealand Journal of Corp and Horticultural Science, 2009, 37(3), 263-270.
24. Maletta H, Favre R. Agriculture and Food Production in Post-War Afghanistan, a report on the winter agricultural survey 2002-2003. 2003, available at: https://www.fao.org/3/ae407e/ae407e00.htm.
25. Idris M, Siwar N D, Talib C B. Determinants of technical efficiency on pineapple farming. American Journal of Applied Sciences, 2013, 10(4), 426-432.
26. Nuama N. Mesure de l efficacite technique des agricultrices de cultures vivrieres en Cote d lvoire. Economie rurale, 2006, 6(296), 39-53.
27. Onyenweaku C E, Igwe K C, Mbanor J A. Application of stochastic frontier production functions to the measurement of technical efficiency in yams production on Nasarawa State, Nigeria. Journal of Sustainable Tropical Agricultural Research, 2004, 13: 20-25.
28. Pishgar-Komleh S H, Zylowski T, Rozakis S, Kozyra J. Efficiency under different methods for incorporating undesirable outputs in an LCA+DEA framework: A case study of winter wheat production in Poland, Journal of Environmental Management, 2020, 260, 110-138.
29. Rowland W W, Langemeier M R, Schurle B W, Featherston A M. A nonparametric efficiency analysis for a sample of Kansas swine operations. Journal of Agricultural Applied Economics, 1998, 30: 189-199.
30. Totakhiel N. Determinants to technical efficiency of wheat production in Afghanistan: the case of wheat farmers in Paktia Province. Afghan Economic Society, 2016.
31. World Bank. Revitalizing agriculture for economic growth, job creation and food security. Report No: AUS9779. 2014.
32. Banker R D, Charnes A, Cooper W W. Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis, Management Science, 1984, 30(9), 1078-1092.