IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ssefpa/v9y2017i1d10.1007_s12571-016-0632-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of the modeled potential yield versus the actual yield of maize in Northeast China and the implications for national food security

Author

Listed:
  • Hongdan Li

    (Shenyang Agricultural University)

  • Wenjiao Shi

    (Chinese Academy of Sciences
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences
    Beijing Normal University)

  • Bing Wang

    (Shenyang Agricultural University)

  • Tingting An

    (Shenyang Agricultural University)

  • Shuang Li

    (Shenyang Urban Planning Design & Research Institute)

  • Shuangyi Li

    (Shenyang Agricultural University)

  • Jingkuan Wang

    (Shenyang Agricultural University)

Abstract

A precise spatial knowledge of potential yield and actual yield is crucial to assessing an increase in grain yield and is relevant to national food security. In this paper, the potential maize yields at the county level in 2013 in Northeast China were estimated using a Miami model in combination with an integrated fertility index and the effect of chemical fertilizers on yield increase. Then, the spatial characteristics of the climate, farmland and grain production potential were presented, and the potential yield increase and food security implications were analyzed. The estimated production potentials of the climate, farmland and grain in 2013 were approximately 4.65 × 103–13.06 × 103 kg/ha, 2.77 × 103–9.38 × 103 kg/ha, and 2.97 × 103–12.1 × 103 kg/ha, respectively, whereas the actual maize yield in 2013 was 1.50 × 103–8.60 × 103 kg/ha, accounting for 41.86–95.84 % of the grain production potential. The total average potential maize increase in Northeast China was 3.32 × 103 kg/ha, measured from the difference between the climate production potential and the actual yield. Furthermore, the main regions with lower surplus production but a higher potential for increase were located in the eastern Liaoning, Jilin and Heilongjiang Provinces. In addition, the surplus production, which was 136.56 million tons, could feed 341.4 million people in other areas of China. In conclusion, we suggest that improving access to agronomic practices (such as fertilizer and high-yielding seed) and developing agricultural policies and strategies could increase the maize yield and further narrow the yield gap.

Suggested Citation

  • Hongdan Li & Wenjiao Shi & Bing Wang & Tingting An & Shuang Li & Shuangyi Li & Jingkuan Wang, 2017. "Comparison of the modeled potential yield versus the actual yield of maize in Northeast China and the implications for national food security," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(1), pages 99-114, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:ssefpa:v:9:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s12571-016-0632-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s12571-016-0632-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12571-016-0632-4
    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/s12571-016-0632-4?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. Jonathan A. Foley & Navin Ramankutty & Kate A. Brauman & Emily S. Cassidy & James S. Gerber & Matt Johnston & Nathaniel D. Mueller & Christine O’Connell & Deepak K. Ray & Paul C. West & Christian Balz, 2011. "Solutions for a cultivated planet," Nature, Nature, vol. 478(7369), pages 337-342, October.
    2. Wang, Xiaolong & Chen, Yuanquan & Sui, Peng & Gao, Wangsheng & Qin, Feng & Zhang, Jiansheng & Wu, Xia, 2014. "Emergy analysis of grain production systems on large-scale farms in the North China Plain based on LCA," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 66-78.
    3. Zhijuan Liu & Xiaoguang Yang & Fu Chen & Enli Wang, 2013. "The effects of past climate change on the northern limits of maize planting in Northeast China," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 117(4), pages 891-902, April.
    4. Zhao Zhang & Yi Chen & Pin Wang & Shuai Zhang & Fulu Tao & Xiaofei Liu, 2014. "Spatial and temporal changes of agro-meteorological disasters affecting maize production in China since 1990," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 71(3), pages 2087-2100, April.
    5. Stehfest, Elke & Heistermann, Maik & Priess, Joerg A. & Ojima, Dennis S. & Alcamo, Joseph, 2007. "Simulation of global crop production with the ecosystem model DayCent," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 209(2), pages 203-219.
    6. Bottomley, Paul A. & Doyle, John R., 2013. "Comparing the validity of numerical judgements elicited by direct rating and point allocation: Insights from objectively verifiable perceptual tasks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(1), pages 148-157.
    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. Haidi Zhu & Qun Wu, 2023. "Artificial-Intelligence-Enhanced Study on the Optimization of the Responsibility and Compensation Mechanism for Provincial Cultivated Land Retention from a Fairness Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-21, November.
    2. Xinyan Wang & Qingyu Feng & Boyong Li & Yinlin Fan & Huihui Fan & Nengliang Yang & Yuan Quan & Huanru Ding & Yunlu Zhang, 2024. "Trends and Factors Influencing the Evolution of Spatial Patterns of Cropland toward Large-Scale Agricultural Production in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-20, April.
    3. Fábio de Araújo Visses & Paulo Cesar Sentelhas & André Belmont Pereira, 2018. "Yield gap of cassava crop as a measure of food security - an example for the main Brazilian producing regions," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 10(5), pages 1191-1202, October.

    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. Luoman Pu & Shuwen Zhang & Jiuchun Yang & Liping Chang & Shuting Bai, 2019. "Spatio-Temporal Dynamics of Maize Potential Yield and Yield Gaps in Northeast China from 1990 to 2015," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-18, April.
    2. Wang, Xiaolong & Li, Zhejin & Long, Pan & Yan, Lingling & Gao, Wangsheng & Chen, Yuanquan & Sui, Peng, 2017. "Sustainability evaluation of recycling in agricultural systems by emergy accounting," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 117(PB), pages 114-124.
    3. Eugene P. Law & Sandra Wayman & Christopher J. Pelzer & Steven W. Culman & Miguel I. Gómez & Antonio DiTommaso & Matthew R. Ryan, 2022. "Multi-Criteria Assessment of the Economic and Environmental Sustainability Characteristics of Intermediate Wheatgrass Grown as a Dual-Purpose Grain and Forage Crop," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-24, March.
    4. Lichao Zhai & Lihua Zhang & Haipo Yao & Mengjing Zheng & Bo Ming & Ruizhi Xie & Jingting Zhang & Xiuling Jia & Junjie Ji, 2021. "The Optimal Cultivar × Sowing Date × Plant Density for Grain Yield and Resource Use Efficiency of Summer Maize in the Northern Huang–Huai–Hai Plain of China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-15, December.
    5. Rommel, Jens & Anggraini, Eva, 2018. "Spatially explicit framed field experiments on ecosystem services governance," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 201-205.
    6. Ascui, Francisco & Ball, Alex & Kahn, Lewis & Rowe, James, 2021. "Is operationalising natural capital risk assessment practicable?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    7. Eyni-Nargeseh, Hamed & Asgharipour, Mohammad Reza & Rahimi-Moghaddam, Sajjad & Gilani, Abdolali & Damghani, Abdolmajid Mahdavi & Azizi, Khosro, 2023. "Which rice farming system is more environmentally friendly in Khuzestan province, Iran? A study based on emergy analysis," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 481(C).
    8. Meike Weltin & Silke Hüttel, 2023. "Sustainable Intensification Farming as an Enabler for Farm Eco-Efficiency?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(1), pages 315-342, January.
    9. Law, Elizabeth A. & Macchi, Leandro & Baumann, Matthias & Decarre, Julieta & Gavier-Pizarro, Gregorio & Levers, Christian & Mastrangelo, Matías E. & Murray, Francisco & Müller, Daniel & Piquer-Rodrígu, 2021. "Fading opportunities for mitigating agriculture-environment trade-offs in a south American deforestation hotspot," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 262.
    10. Gong, Ziqian & Baker, Justin S. & Wade, Christopher M. & Havlík, Petr, 2024. "Irrigation intensification in U.S. agriculture under climate change – an adaptation mechanism or trade-induced response?," 2024 Annual Meeting, July 28-30, New Orleans, LA 343581, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Ongolo, Symphorien & Giessen, Lukas & Karsenty, Alain & Tchamba, Martin & Krott, Max, 2021. "Forestland policies and politics in Africa: Recent evidence and new challenges," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    12. Marcela Prokopová & Luca Salvati & Gianluca Egidi & Ondřej Cudlín & Renata Včeláková & Radek Plch & Pavel Cudlín, 2019. "Envisioning Present and Future Land-Use Change under Varying Ecological Regimes and Their Influence on Landscape Stability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-24, August.
    13. James J Elser & Timothy J Elser & Stephen R Carpenter & William A Brock, 2014. "Regime Shift in Fertilizer Commodities Indicates More Turbulence Ahead for Food Security," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(5), pages 1-7, May.
    14. Vogel, Everton & Martinelli, Gabrielli & Artuzo, Felipe Dalzotto, 2021. "Environmental and economic performance of paddy field-based crop-livestock systems in Southern Brazil," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    15. Abdulai, Issaka & Hoffmann, Munir P. & Jassogne, Laurence & Asare, Richard & Graefe, Sophie & Tao, Hsiao-Hang & Muilerman, Sander & Vaast, Philippe & Van Asten, Piet & Läderach, Peter & Rötter, Reimun, 2020. "Variations in yield gaps of smallholder cocoa systems and the main determining factors along a climate gradient in Ghana," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    16. Qian Sun & Mingjie Wu & Peiyu Du & Wei Qi & Xinyang Yu, 2022. "Spatial Layout Optimization and Simulation of Cultivated Land Based on the Life Community Theory in a Mountainous and Hilly Area of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-15, March.
    17. Heider, Katharina & Quaranta, Emanuele & García Avilés, José María & Rodriguez Lopez, Juan Miguel & Balbo, Andrea L. & Scheffran, Jürgen, 2022. "Reinventing the wheel – The preservation and potential of traditional water wheels in the terraced irrigated landscapes of the Ricote Valley, southeast Spain," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 259(C).
    18. Bazoche, Pascale & Guinet, Nicolas & Poret, Sylvaine & Teyssier, Sabrina, 2023. "Does the provision of information increase the substitution of animal proteins with plant-based proteins? An experimental investigation into consumer choices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    19. Tiziano Gomiero, 2016. "Soil Degradation, Land Scarcity and Food Security: Reviewing a Complex Challenge," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-41, March.
    20. Jeong, Hanseok & Kim, Hakkwan & Jang, Taeil & Park, Seungwoo, 2016. "Assessing the effects of indirect wastewater reuse on paddy irrigation in the Osan River watershed in Korea using the SWAT model," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 393-402.

    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:ssefpa:v:9:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s12571-016-0632-4. 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.