IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v95y2020ics0264837718305726.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Maize production and environmental costs: Resource evaluation and strategic land use planning for food security in northern Ghana by means of coupled emergy and data envelopment analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Mwambo, Francis Molua
  • Fürst, Christine
  • Nyarko, Benjamin K.
  • Borgemeister, Christian
  • Martius, Christopher

Abstract

This paper applies an integrated methodology which is constituted of the following: (i) the Emergy-Data Envelopment Analysis (EM-DEA), (ii) environmental Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA), (iii) Value Chain Analysis (VCA), and (iv) Sustainability Balanced Scorecard (SBSC) approaches, -to support multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) for strategic agricultural land use planning, which could contribute to improve food security in northern Ghana. Five scenarios of land use and resource management practices for maize production were modelled. The business-as-usual scenario was based on primary data, which were collected using semi-structured questionnaires administered to 56 small-scale maize farmers through personal interviews. The dominant land use was characterised by an external input ≤12 kg/ha/yr inorganic fertilizer with/without the addition of manure in rainfed maize systems. The project scenarios were based on APSIM simulations of maize yield response to 0, 20, 50 and 100 kg/ha/yr urea dosages, with/without supplemental irrigation. The scenarios were dubbed as follows: (1) no/low input systems were denoted by Extensive0, Extensive12, and Intercrop20, and (2) moderate/high input systems were denoted by Intensive50, and Intensive100. The EM-DEA approach was used to assess the resource use efficiency (RUE) and sustainability in maize production systems, Ghana. The measured RUE and sustainability were used as a proxy for further analyses by applying the environmental CBA and VCA approaches to calculate: (a) the environmental costs of producing maize, i.e. resource use measured as total emergy (U), and (b) benefits from the yielded maize, i.e. (b i) food provision from grain measured in kcal/yr, and (b ii) potential electricity (bioenergy) which could be generated from residue measured in MWh/yr. The information which was derived from the applications of the EM-DEA, CBA and VCA approaches was aggregated by applying the SBSC approach to do a sustainability appraisal of the scenarios. The results show that, when labour and services are included in the assessment of RUE and sustainability, Intercrop20 and Intensive50 achieved greater marginal yield, better RUE, sustainability and appraisal score. The same scenarios caused lesser impacts in terms of expansion of area cultivated compared to Extensive0 and Extensive12. Meanwhile the impacts of Intercrop20 and Intensive50 in terms of ecotoxicity, emissions, and demand for resources (energy, materials, labour and services) were lesser compared to Intensive100. The implications of the various scenarios are discussed. The environmental performance of the scenarios are compared to maize production systems in other developing regions in order to put this study within a broader context. We conclude that, the EM-DEA approach is useful for assessing RUE and sustainability of agricultural production systems at farm and regional scales, as well as in connecting the management planning level and regional development considerations.

Suggested Citation

  • Mwambo, Francis Molua & Fürst, Christine & Nyarko, Benjamin K. & Borgemeister, Christian & Martius, Christopher, 2020. "Maize production and environmental costs: Resource evaluation and strategic land use planning for food security in northern Ghana by means of coupled emergy and data envelopment analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:95:y:2020:i:c:s0264837718305726
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104490
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837718305726
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104490?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brown, Mark T. & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2016. "Emergy assessment of global renewable sources," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 339(C), pages 148-156.
    2. Robin Boadway, 2006. "Principles of Cost-Benefit Analysis," Public Policy Review, Policy Research Institute, Ministry of Finance Japan, vol. 2(1), pages 1-44, January.
    3. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    4. Houssou, Nazaire & Kolavalli, Shashidhara & Bobobee, Emmanuel & Owusu, Victor, 2013. "Animal traction in Ghana:," GSSP working papers 34, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Smith, Lisa C. & El Obeid, Amani E. & Jensen, Helen H., 2000. "The geography and causes of food insecurity in developing countries," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 22(2), pages 199-215, March.
    6. Ellen Mangnus & A.C.M. (Guus) Van Westen, 2018. "Roaming through the Maze of Maize in Northern Ghana. A Systems Approach to Explore the Long-Term Effects of a Food Security Intervention," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-19, October.
    7. Dong, X.B. & Yu, B.H. & Brown, M.T. & Zhang, Y.S. & Kang, M.Y. & Jin, Y. & Zhang, X.S. & Ulgiati, S., 2014. "Environmental and economic consequences of the overexploitation of natural capital and ecosystem services in Xilinguole League, China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 767-780.
    8. Serra, Luis M. & Lozano, Miguel-Angel & Ramos, Jose & Ensinas, Adriano V. & Nebra, Silvia A., 2009. "Polygeneration and efficient use of natural resources," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 575-586.
    9. Kao, Chiang, 2014. "Network data envelopment analysis: A review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(1), pages 1-16.
    10. Hertel, Thomas W., 2010. "The Global Supply and Demand for Agricultural Land in 2050: A Perfect Storm in the Making?," 2010 Annual Meeting, July 25-27, 2010, Denver, Colorado 92639, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. David Tilman & Kenneth G. Cassman & Pamela A. Matson & Rosamond Naylor & Stephen Polasky, 2002. "Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices," Nature, Nature, vol. 418(6898), pages 671-677, August.
    12. Barrett, Christopher B, 2001. "Does Food Aid Stabilize Food Availability?," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 49(2), pages 335-349, January.
    13. Nin-Pratt, Alejandro & McBride, Linden, 2014. "Agricultural intensification in Ghana: Evaluating the optimist’s case for a Green Revolution," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 153-167.
    14. Adu-Gyamfi Poku & Regina Birner & Saurabh Gupta, 2018. "Why do maize farmers in Ghana have a limited choice of improved seed varieties? An assessment of the governance challenges in seed supply," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 10(1), pages 27-46, February.
    15. Ulgiati, Sergio & Zucaro, Amalia & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2011. "Shared wealth or nobody's land? The worth of natural capital and ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 778-787, February.
    16. Campbell, Elliott T. & Tilley, David R., 2014. "The eco-price: How environmental emergy equates to currency," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 128-140.
    17. Brown, Mark T. & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2016. "Assessing the global environmental sources driving the geobiosphere: A revised emergy baseline," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 339(C), pages 126-132.
    18. Fare, Rolf & Knox Lovell, C. A., 1978. "Measuring the technical efficiency of production," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 150-162, October.
    19. Thomas W. Hertel, 2011. "The Global Supply and Demand for Agricultural Land in 2050: A Perfect Storm in the Making?-super- 1," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(2), pages 259-275.
    20. Kuemmerle, Tobias & Erb, Karlheinz & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Müller, Daniel & Verburg, Peter H & Estel, Stephan & Haberl, Helmut & Hostert, Patrick & Jepsen, Martin R. & Kastner, Thomas & Levers, Christi, 2013. "Challenges and opportunities in mapping land use intensity globally," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 5(5), pages 484-493.
    21. Phosiso Sola & Caroline Ochieng & Jummai Yila & Miyuki Iiyama, 2016. "Links between energy access and food security in sub Saharan Africa: an exploratory review," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 8(3), pages 635-642, June.
    22. Biola K. Badmos & Sampson K. Agodzo & Grace B. Villamor & Samuel N. Odai, 2015. "An Approach for Simulating Soil Loss from an Agro-Ecosystem Using Multi-Agent Simulation: A Case Study for Semi-Arid Ghana," Land, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-20, July.
    23. Suaad Jassem & Anna Azmi & Zarina Zakaria, 2018. "Impact of Sustainability Balanced Scorecard Types on Environmental Investment Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-18, February.
    24. Andreas Möller & Stefan Schaltegger, 2005. "The Sustainability Balanced Scorecard as a Framework for Eco‐efficiency Analysis," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 9(4), pages 73-83, October.
    25. Eliane Gomes & João Soares de Mello & Geraldo Souza & Lidia Angulo Meza & João Mangabeira, 2009. "Efficiency and sustainability assessment for a group of farmers in the Brazilian Amazon," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 167-181, July.
    26. Brown, Mark T. & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2011. "Understanding the global economic crisis: A biophysical perspective," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 4-13.
    27. Mika Kortelainen & Timo Kuosmanen, 2004. "Measuring Eco-efficiency of Production: A Frontier Approach," Econometrics 0411006, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yuling Wu & Pei Zhang & Jia Li & Jiao Hou, 2022. "Spatial Distribution Evolution and Optimization Path of Eco-Efficiency of Cultivated Land Use: A Case Study of Hubei Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-18, September.
    2. Peng Cheng & Houtian Tang & Yue Dong & Ke Liu & Ping Jiang & Yaolin Liu, 2021. "Knowledge Mapping of Research on Land Use Change and Food Security: A Visual Analysis Using CiteSpace and VOSviewer," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-22, December.
    3. Leonidas Sotirios Kyrgiakos & Georgios Kleftodimos & George Vlontzos & Panos M. Pardalos, 2023. "A systematic literature review of data envelopment analysis implementation in agriculture under the prism of sustainability," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 1-38, March.
    4. Jawad Ghafoor & Marie Anne Eurie Forio & Peter L. M. Goethals, 2022. "Spatially Explicit River Basin Models for Cost-Benefit Analyses to Optimize Land Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-16, July.
    5. Sun, Xueqing & Xiang, Pengcheng & Cong, Kexin, 2023. "Research on early warning and control measures for arable land resource security," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sickles, Robin C. & Song, Wonho & Zelenyuk, Valentin, 2018. "Econometric Analysis of Productivity: Theory and Implementation in R," Working Papers 18-008, Rice University, Department of Economics.
    2. Kao, Chiang, 2017. "Efficiency measurement and frontier projection identification for general two-stage systems in data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 261(2), pages 679-689.
    3. Yi Qu & Xiao Lyu & Wenlong Peng & Zongfei Xin, 2021. "How to Evaluate the Green Utilization Efficiency of Cultivated Land in a Farming Household? A Case Study of Shandong Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-18, July.
    4. Ana Carolina V. Nadalini & Ricardo de Araujo Kalid & Ednildo Andrade Torres, 2021. "Emergy as a Tool to Evaluate Ecosystem Services: A Systematic Review of the Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-14, June.
    5. Meng, Fanyi & Su, Bin & Thomson, Elspeth & Zhou, Dequn & Zhou, P., 2016. "Measuring China’s regional energy and carbon emission efficiency with DEA models: A survey," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 1-21.
    6. Picazo-Tadeo, Andrés J. & Beltrán-Esteve, Mercedes & Gómez-Limón, José A., 2012. "Assessing eco-efficiency with directional distance functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 220(3), pages 798-809.
    7. Mirdehghan, S. Morteza & Fukuyama, Hirofumi, 2016. "Pareto–Koopmans efficiency and network DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 78-88.
    8. Mehdiloo, Mahmood & Podinovski, Victor V., 2021. "Strong, weak and Farrell efficient frontiers of technologies satisfying different production assumptions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(1), pages 295-311.
    9. Mutyasira, Vine & Hoag, Dana & Pendell, Dustin & Manning, Dale T. & Berhe, Melaku, 2018. "Assessing the relative sustainability of smallholder farming systems in Ethiopian highlands," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 83-91.
    10. Franzese, Pier Paolo & Buonocore, Elvira & Donnarumma, Luigia & Russo, Giovanni F., 2017. "Natural capital accounting in marine protected areas: The case of the Islands of Ventotene and S. Stefano (Central Italy)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 360(C), pages 290-299.
    11. Calum Brown & Dave Murray-Rust & Jasper van Vliet & Shah Jamal Alam & Peter H Verburg & Mark D Rounsevell, 2014. "Experiments in Globalisation, Food Security and Land Use Decision Making," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-24, December.
    12. Fenfen Li & Bo Dai & Qifan Wu, 2021. "Dynamic Green Growth Assessment of China’s Industrial System with an Improved SBM Model and Global Malmquist Index," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(20), pages 1-26, October.
    13. Almeida, C.M.V.B. & Mariano, M.V. & Agostinho, F. & Liu, G.Y. & Yang, Z.F. & Coscieme, L. & Giannetti, B.F., 2018. "Comparing costs and supply of supporting and regulating services provided by urban parks at different spatial scales," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 236-247.
    14. Gonella Francesco & Elia Christian & Cristiano Silvio & Spagnolo Sofia & Vignarca Francesco, 2017. "From Head to Head: An Emergy Analysis of a War Rifle Bullet," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 23(2), pages 1-10, April.
    15. Ravelojaona, Paola, 2019. "On constant elasticity of substitution – Constant elasticity of transformation Directional Distance Functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(2), pages 780-791.
    16. Biorn, Erik & Hagen, Terje P. & Iversen, Tor & Magnussen, Jon, 2006. "Heterogeneity in Hospitals' Responses to a Financial Reform: A Random Coefficient Analysis of The Impact of Activity-Based Financing on Efficiency," MPRA Paper 8169, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Ruiz, Jose L. & Sirvent, Inmaculada, 2001. "Techniques for the assessment of influence in DEA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(2), pages 390-399, July.
    18. Phung, Manh-Trung & Cheng, Cheng-Ping & Guo, Chuanyin & Kao, Chen-Yu, 2020. "Mixed Network DEA with Shared Resources: A Case of Measuring Performance for Banking Industry," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 7(C).
    19. Suriyan Jomthanachai & Wai Peng Wong & Khai Wah Khaw, 2024. "An Application of Machine Learning to Logistics Performance Prediction: An Economics Attribute-Based of Collective Instance," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 63(2), pages 741-792, February.
    20. Macedo, Pedro & Scotto, Manuel, 2014. "Cross-entropy estimation in technical efficiency analysis," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 124-130.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:95:y:2020:i:c:s0264837718305726. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.