IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i7p2213-d154972.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Soil Fertility Management by Transition Matrices and Crop Rotation: On Spatial and Dynamic Aspects in Programming of Ecosystem Services

Author

Listed:
  • Ernst-August Nuppenau

    (Institute of Agricultural Policy and Market Research, Justus Liebig University Giessen, Senckenbergstrasse 3, D-35394 Giessen, Germany)

Abstract

This paper deals with crop rotation as a method to improve soil fertility and control pests from an economic point of view. It outlines a new framework for modelling of more sustainable decision-making of farmers under the auspices of ecosystem services. It is intended for practical application in extension and farmer communication to show values of rotations referring to natural capital. In the past farmers created complex rotations to benefit from ecological processes which enabled them to control natural pests (at least partly), to build soil fertility on recycling of organics (humus formation), and to promote pollination (including wild bees and other insects) and water retention (diverse water requests of different crops). Farmers which were accommodating cropping orders in small parcels of fields used long lists of crop sequences and offered mixed farming systems: this was a major feature of agriculture. Cropping orders evolved from necessity and were followed as rules. Today we are faced with large fields and monoculture, instead, and ecosystem services are diminished. Usually, attempts to recognize economic pay-offs from rotation through modelling are meagre because of complexity. We address the issue of complexity by suggesting a new flexible type of modelling crop rotations (dynamic optimization) which condenses ecological information into matrices. A newly-hosted transfer matrix shall delineate the impacts of cropping patterns in period t to fertility of land in t + 1. Categorizing different states of nature (which have to be brought in line with farmers’ knowledge of externalities), it can be implemented in models on rotation decision.

Suggested Citation

  • Ernst-August Nuppenau, 2018. "Soil Fertility Management by Transition Matrices and Crop Rotation: On Spatial and Dynamic Aspects in Programming of Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-20, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:7:p:2213-:d:154972
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/7/2213/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/7/2213/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Talaat El-Nazer & Bruce A. McCarl, 1986. "The Choice of Crop Rotation: A Modeling Approach and Case Study," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 68(1), pages 127-136.
    2. Rong-Gang Cong & Mette Termansen & Mark V. Brady, 2017. "Managing soil natural capital: a prudent strategy for adapting to future risks," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 255(1), pages 439-463, August.
    3. Karantininis, Kostas, 2002. "Information-based estimators for the non-stationary transition probability matrix: an application to the Danish pork industry," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 107(1-2), pages 275-290, March.
    4. Jitka Janová, 2011. "The dynamic programming approach to long term production planning in agriculture," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 59(2), pages 129-136.
    5. Uri Regev & Andrew P. Gutierrez & Gershon Feder, 1976. "Pests as a Common Property Resource: A Case Study of Alfalfa Weevil Control," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 58(2), pages 186-197.
    6. Pemsl, Diemuth E. & Gutierrez, Andrew P. & Waibel, Hermann, 2008. "The economics of biotechnology under ecosystem disruption," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 177-183, May.
    7. Gallai, Nicola & Salles, Jean-Michel & Settele, Josef & Vaissière, Bernard E., 2009. "Economic valuation of the vulnerability of world agriculture confronted with pollinator decline," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 810-821, January.
    8. Alfandari, Laurent & Plateau, Agnès & Schepler, Xavier, 2015. "A branch-and-price-and-cut approach for sustainable crop rotation planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 241(3), pages 872-879.
    9. Sandhu, Harpinder S. & Wratten, Stephen D. & Cullen, Ross & Case, Brad, 2008. "The future of farming: The value of ecosystem services in conventional and organic arable land. An experimental approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 835-848, February.
    10. Babiker, Mustafa & Gurgel, Angelo & Paltsev, Sergey & Reilly, John, 2009. "Forward-looking versus recursive-dynamic modeling in climate policy analysis: A comparison," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 1341-1354, November.
    11. Haneveld, W. K. Klein & Stegeman, A. W., 2005. "Crop succession requirements in agricultural production planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 166(2), pages 406-429, October.
    12. Cong, Rong-Gang & Ekroos, Johan & Smith, Henrik G. & Brady, Mark V., 2016. "Optimizing intermediate ecosystem services in agriculture using rules based on landscape composition and configuration indices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 214-223.
    13. Cong, Rong-Gang & Hedlund, Katarina & Andersson, Hans & Brady, Mark, 2014. "Managing soil natural capital: An effective strategy for mitigating future agricultural risks," MPRA Paper 112155, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Ahumada, Omar & Villalobos, J. Rene, 2009. "Application of planning models in the agri-food supply chain: A review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 196(1), pages 1-20, July.
    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. Zhihong Liao & Kai Su & Xuebing Jiang & Xiangbei Zhou & Zhu Yu & Zhongchao Chen & Changwen Wei & Yiming Zhang & Luying Wang, 2022. "Ecosystem and Driving Force Evaluation of Northeast Forest Belt," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-25, August.
    2. Katharina Helming & Katrin Daedlow & Bernd Hansjürgens & Thomas Koellner, 2018. "Assessment and Governance of Sustainable Soil Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-13, November.

    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. Nuppenau, Ernst-August, 2011. "Linking Crop Rotation and Fertility Management by a Transition Matrix: Spatial and Dynamic Aspects in Programming of Ecosystem Service," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114600, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Alysson Costa & Lana Santos & Douglas Alem & Ricardo Santos, 2014. "Sustainable vegetable crop supply problem with perishable stocks," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 219(1), pages 265-283, August.
    3. Nuppenau, Ernst-August, 2015. "Mitigation of Large-Scale Biofuel Expansion with Smallholder Conflict: Modelling of Land Use Dynamics using Control Theory for Policy Design to Sustain Food Security and Improve Productivity," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 225669, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. L. Alfandari & J. Lemalade & A. Nagih & G. Plateau, 2011. "A MIP flow model for crop-rotation planning in a context of forest sustainable development," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 190(1), pages 149-164, October.
    5. Víctor M. Albornoz & Gabriel E. Zamora, 2021. "Decomposition-based heuristic for the zoning and crop planning problem with adjacency constraints," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 29(1), pages 248-265, April.
    6. Jitka JANOVÁ, 2014. "Crop plan optimization under risk on a farm level in the Czech Republic," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 60(3), pages 123-132.
    7. Mark V. Brady & Jordan Hristov & Fredrik Wilhelmsson & Katarina Hedlund, 2019. "Roadmap for Valuing Soil Ecosystem Services to Inform Multi-Level Decision-Making in Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-20, September.
    8. Kontogianni, Areti & Luck, Gary W. & Skourtos, Michalis, 2010. "Valuing ecosystem services on the basis of service-providing units: A potential approach to address the 'endpoint problem' and improve stated preference methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1479-1487, May.
    9. Theodoros Skevas & Spiro E. Stefanou & Alfons Oude Lansink, 2013. "Do Farmers Internalise Environmental Spillovers of Pesticides in Production?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(3), pages 624-640, September.
    10. Carpentier, Alain & Gohin, Alexandre, 2015. "On the economic theory of crop rotations: value of the crop rotation effects and implications on acreage choice modeling," Working Papers 205299, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    11. Alfandari, Laurent & Plateau, Agnès & Scheplerc, Xavier, 2014. "A Branch-and-Price-and-Cut Approach for Sustainable Crop Rotation Planning," ESSEC Working Papers WP1408, ESSEC Research Center, ESSEC Business School.
    12. Alfandari, Laurent & Plateau, Agnès & Schepler, Xavier, 2015. "A branch-and-price-and-cut approach for sustainable crop rotation planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 241(3), pages 872-879.
    13. Lana dos Santos & Philippe Michelon & Marcos Arenales & Ricardo Santos, 2011. "Crop rotation scheduling with adjacency constraints," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 190(1), pages 165-180, October.
    14. Marianne Thomsen & Daina Romeo & Dario Caro & Michele Seghetta & Rong-Gang Cong, 2018. "Environmental-Economic Analysis of Integrated Organic Waste and Wastewater Management Systems: A Case Study from Aarhus City (Denmark)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-20, October.
    15. Mariana Escallón-Barrios & Daniel Castillo-Gomez & Jorge Leal & Carlos Montenegro & Andrés L. Medaglia, 2022. "Improving harvesting operations in an oil palm plantation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 314(2), pages 411-449, July.
    16. Laurent Alfandari & Agnès Plateau & Xavier Schepler, 2014. "A Branch-and-Price-and-Cut approach for Sustainable Crop Rotation Planning," Working Papers hal-00987708, HAL.
    17. Jahantab, Mahboubeh & Abbasi, Babak & Le Bodic, Pierre, 2023. "Farmland allocation in the conversion from conventional to organic farming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 311(3), pages 1103-1119.
    18. Kontogianni, A. & Tourkolias, C. & Machleras, A. & Skourtos, M., 2012. "Service providing units, existence values and the valuation of endangered species: A methodological test," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 97-104.
    19. Santos, Lana M.R. & Munari, Pedro & Costa, Alysson M. & Santos, Ricardo H.S., 2015. "A branch-price-and-cut method for the vegetable crop rotation scheduling problem with minimal plot sizes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(2), pages 581-590.
    20. Sahrbacher, Christoph & Brady, Mark & Dong, Changxing & Sahrbacher, Amanda, 2015. "Potential impact of CAP’s Ecological Focus Areas on soil fertility," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212284, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:7:p:2213-:d:154972. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.