IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ijsaem/v13y2022i5d10.1007_s13198-022-01622-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainability-assessment for farm-machinery

Author

Listed:
  • Debesh Mishra

    (Sage University)

  • Suchismita Satapathy

    (KIIT Deemed to be University)

Abstract

Most of the commercially existing harvesters used in present day agricultural applications are costly that the small-scale farmers cannot afford because of financial-constraints. Moreover, due to the non-availability of these harvesters in most of the rural-areas, the farmers find difficulties in accessing or utilizing these machines in their farming purposes. The aim of this study was to fabricate and evaluate a modified smaller, economic, more accessible and effective crop harvester. This research was carried out by an in-depth review of literature followed by discussion with the local-farmers, manufacturers of agricultural tools and machines, which was further followed by consultation with experts from various areas of expertise in order to get information regarding the availability as well as features of existing equipment, and finally a modified harvester was fabricated based on these data. Then, the cutting-efficiency for existing and modified harvester in agricultural field was calculated followed by ergonomic postural analysis of farmers while operating that equipment. The “strength, weaknesses, opportunities as well as threats” analysis was done by considering the existing as well as the modified harvester, which was further followed with the sustainability evaluation of modified harvester by using a designed “Sustainability-Assessment Questionnaire for Farm-Machinery” in view of its environmental, economical and social implications in agriculture in addition to the ergonomic-aspects. The average cutting-efficiency of ‘99.24% and 99.81%’ were obtained by considering three consecutive operations with the existing and modified harvester, respectively.The modified harvester was further found to be suitable with ergonomic aspects and also, more sustainable based on the farmers’ responses. The sustainability of any agriculture related tools and equipment can be achieved through adequate attention on the ergonomic aspects of comfortable-working.

Suggested Citation

  • Debesh Mishra & Suchismita Satapathy, 2022. "Sustainability-assessment for farm-machinery," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 13(5), pages 2165-2174, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ijsaem:v:13:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s13198-022-01622-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s13198-022-01622-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13198-022-01622-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13198-022-01622-4?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. Aysin Sev, 2009. "How can the construction industry contribute to sustainable development? A conceptual framework," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(3), pages 161-173.
    2. Debesh Mishra & Suchismita Satapathy, 2019. "Ergonomic risk assessment of farmers in Odisha (India)," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 10(5), pages 1121-1132, October.
    3. Hondo, Hiroki, 2005. "Life cycle GHG emission analysis of power generation systems: Japanese case," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 30(11), pages 2042-2056.
    4. Gulati, Ashok & Juneja, Ritika, 2020. "Farm Mechanization in Indian Agriculture with Focus on Tractors," Discussion Papers 305188, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
    5. Debesh Mishra & Hullash Chauhan & Ashok Kumar Sahoo, 2021. "An Analysis of Safety Practices of Farmers in Odisha (India) for Sustainable Agriculture," International Journal of System Dynamics Applications (IJSDA), IGI Global, vol. 10(1), pages 48-64, January.
    6. Chiuhsiang Joe Lin & Tariku Tamiru Belis & Tsai Chi Kuo, 2019. "Ergonomics-Based Factors or Criteria for the Evaluation of Sustainable Product Manufacturing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-20, September.
    7. Muhammad Irfan & Mazlan Hassan & Nasruddin Hassan, 2018. "Unravelling the Fuzzy Effect of Economic, Social and Environmental Sustainability on the Corporate Reputation of Public-Sector Organizations: A Case Study of Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-16, March.
    8. Brian Sims & Josef Kienzle, 2017. "Sustainable Agricultural Mechanization for Smallholders: What Is It and How Can We Implement It?," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-21, June.
    9. Satyasai, KJS & Balanarayana, M, 2018. "Can mechanization in agriculture help achieving sustainable development goals?," Agricultural Economics Research Review, Agricultural Economics Research Association (India), vol. 31(2).
    10. Bull, J.W. & Jobstvogt, N. & Böhnke-Henrichs, A. & Mascarenhas, A. & Sitas, N. & Baulcomb, C. & Lambini, C.K. & Rawlins, M. & Baral, H. & Zähringer, J. & Carter-Silk, E. & Balzan, M.V. & Kenter, J.O. , 2016. "Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats: A SWOT analysis of the ecosystem services framework," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 99-111.
    11. Andriantiatsaholiniaina, Luc A. & Kouikoglou, Vassilis S. & Phillis, Yannis A., 2004. "Evaluating strategies for sustainable development: fuzzy logic reasoning and sensitivity analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 149-172, February.
    12. Debesh Mishra & Suchismita Satapathy, 2019. "An assessment and analysis of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) of Odisha farmers in India," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 10(4), pages 644-660, August.
    13. Anna Gaviglio & Mattia Bertocchi & Eugenio Demartini, 2017. "A Tool for the Sustainability Assessment of Farms: Selection, Adaptation and Use of Indicators for an Italian Case Study," Resources, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-21, October.
    14. Aare, Ane Kirstine & Lund, Søren & Hauggaard-Nielsen, Henrik, 2021. "Exploring transitions towards sustainable farming practices through participatory research – The case of Danish farmers' use of species mixtures," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Muhammad Altaf & Wesam Salah Alaloul & Muhammad Ali Musarat & Abdul Hannan Qureshi, 2023. "Life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) of construction projects: sustainability perspective," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(11), pages 12071-12118, November.
    2. Fangyi Li & Zhaoyang Ye & Xilin Xiao & Dawei Ma, 2019. "Environmental Benefits of Stock Evolution of Coal-Fired Power Generators in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-17, October.
    3. Giacomo Falchetta & Nicolò Stevanato & Magda Moner-Girona & Davide Mazzoni & Emanuela Colombo & Manfred Hafner, 2020. "M-LED: Multi-sectoral Latent Electricity Demand Assessment for Energy Access Planning," Working Papers 2020.09, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    4. Jānis Krūmiņš & Māris Kļaviņš, 2023. "Investigating the Potential of Nuclear Energy in Achieving a Carbon-Free Energy Future," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-31, April.
    5. Bolaños-Valencia, Ingrid & Villegas-Palacio, Clara & López-Gómez, Connie Paola & Berrouet, Lina & Ruiz, Aura, 2019. "Social perception of risk in socio-ecological systems. A qualitative and quantitative analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    6. Odeh, Naser A. & Cockerill, Timothy T., 2008. "Life cycle GHG assessment of fossil fuel power plants with carbon capture and storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 367-380, January.
    7. Selorm Yaotse Dorvlo & Elizabeth Mkandawire & Katy Roelich & Charles Blessings Jumbe, 2023. "Pathways and Interactions for Integrating Mechanisation into Sustainable Agricultural Production: The Case of Rice Production in Asutsuare, Ghana," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-17, November.
    8. Shuhao Chang & Qiancheng Wang & Haihua Hu & Zijian Ding & Hansen Guo, 2018. "An NNwC MPPT-Based Energy Supply Solution for Sensor Nodes in Buildings and Its Feasibility Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, December.
    9. Joshua M. Pearce, 2012. "Limitations of Nuclear Power as a Sustainable Energy Source," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(6), pages 1-15, June.
    10. L. Hay & A. H. B. Duffy & R. I. Whitfield, 2017. "The S‐Cycle Performance Matrix: Supporting Comprehensive Sustainability Performance Evaluation of Technical Systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 45-70, January.
    11. Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Ros & Church, Andrew, 2016. "Deliberative Democratic Monetary Valuation to implement the Ecosystem Approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 308-318.
    12. Cha, Kyounghoon & Lim, Songtak & Hur, Tak, 2008. "Eco-efficiency approach for global warming in the context of Kyoto Mechanism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 274-280, September.
    13. Chen, Liming & Zhao, Yuanyuan & Xie, Rui & Su, Bin & Liu, Yue & Renfei, Xv, 2023. "Embodied energy intensity of global high energy consumption industries: A case study of the construction industry," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 277(C).
    14. Wu, X.D. & Guo, J.L. & Chen, G.Q., 2018. "The striking amount of carbon emissions by the construction stage of coal-fired power generation system in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 358-369.
    15. Yu, Shiwei & Wei, Yi-Ming & Guo, Haixiang & Ding, Liping, 2014. "Carbon emission coefficient measurement of the coal-to-power energy chain in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 290-300.
    16. Varun & Prakash, Ravi & Bhat, I.K., 2010. "A figure of merit for evaluating sustainability of renewable energy systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(6), pages 1640-1643, August.
    17. Li, Jinying & Li, Sisi & Wu, Fan, 2020. "Research on carbon emission reduction benefit of wind power project based on life cycle assessment theory," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 456-468.
    18. Kjell Mårtensson & Karin Westerberg, 2016. "Corporate Environmental Strategies Towards Sustainable Development," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 1-9, January.
    19. Marimuthu, C. & Kirubakaran, V., 2013. "Carbon pay back period for solar and wind energy project installed in India: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 80-90.
    20. Graus, Wina & Worrell, Ernst, 2011. "Methods for calculating CO2 intensity of power generation and consumption: A global perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 613-627, February.

    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:spr:ijsaem:v:13:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s13198-022-01622-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.