ارزیابی وضعیت پایداری در بوم‌نظام‌های زراعی کلزا (Brassica napus L.) با استفاده از تحلیل امرژی (مطالعه موردی: شهرستان کلاله، استان گلستان)

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه زراعت، دانشکده تولید گیاهی، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی گرگان، ایران

2 گروه اگروتکنولوژی، دانشکده کشاورزی،دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران

3 گروه زراعت، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه زابل، زابل، ایران.

چکیده

بهره­‌برداری بیش از حد از منابع محیطی و مصرف بی­‌رویه مواد شیمیایی سبب بروز مشکلات زیست‌محیطی و کاهش پایداری بوم­نظام­های کشاورزی شده است. بنابراین، بررسی الگوهای مصرف انرژی و استفاده کارآمد از انرژی در کشاورزی که از اصول اساسی در کشاورزی پایدار محسوب می‌شود، مفید است. تحلیل امرژی، به‌عنوان ابزار مناسبی برای این منظور، در بوم‌نظام­های مختلف استفاده می­شود. این مطالعه با هدف ارزیابی پایداری کشت­بوم­های کلزا (Brassica napus L.) با استفاده از ارزیابی امرژی در شهرستان کلاله در سال زراعی 98-1397 انجام شد. به این منظور، تعداد 50 پرسشنامه برای کلزا­کاران در نظر گرفته شد. پس از تعیین مرز­های مکانی و زمانی و تقسیم­بندی منابع به چهار گروه محیطی تجدید­پذیر، محیطی تجدید­ناپذیر، خریداری شده تجدید­پذیر و خریداری شده تجدید­ناپذیر، شاخص­های امرژی در بوم‌نظام زراعی کلزا، محاسبه شد. نتایج نشان داد، ورودی امرژی کل برای بوم‌نظام زراعی کلزا 1016×64/1 امژول خورشیدی در هکتار در سال بود. در بوم‌نظام زراعی کلزا وابستگی به ورودی­های محیطی و تجدید­ناپذیر، بیشتر از ورودی­های خریداری شده و تجدید­پذیر بود. بیشترین سهم از ورودی امرژی کل در بوم‌نظام کلزا مربوط به فرسایش خاک با 31/47 درصد بود. همچنین در بین ورودی­های خریداری شده، بیشترین سهم مربوط به سوخت فسیلی با 41/38 درصد بود. در بوم‌نظام کلزا به‌ترتیب، شاخص­های ضریب تبدیل 105×59/2 امژول خورشیدی بر ژول، امرژی ویژه 109×33/7 امژول خورشیدی بر گرم، تجدید­پذیری امرژی 16/8 درصد، نسبت عملکرد امرژی 17/2، نسبت سرمایه‌گذاری امرژی 85/0، نسبت خودحمایتی امرژی 54/0، نسبت بارگذاری محیطی استاندارد 81/13، نسبت بارگذاری محیطی اصلاح شده 27/11، شاخص پایداری امرژی استاندارد 16/0 و شاخص پایداری امرژی اصلاح­شده 19/0 بود. علی‌رغم سهم بالاتر ورودی­های محیطی نسبت به خریداری شده در بوم‌نظام کلزا، فرسایش بالا، به‌عنوان یک ورودی تجدید­ناپذیر، در کنار مصرف نامعقول برخی ورودی­های اقتصادی تجدید­ناپذیر، مانند سوخت­های فسیلی، موجب تجدید­پذیری پایین و فشار محیطی زیاد در این بوم‌نظام شد. بر اساس ارزیابی شاخص‌های امرژی، بوم‌نظام زراعی کلزا از کارآیی تولید محصول و کارآیی مصرف منابع بالایی برخوردار است و پتانسیل زیادی برای افزایش بهره­وری اقتصادی دارد. با این وجود، تولید کلزا در شهرستان کلاله پایداری محیطی و اقتصادی کمی دارد. به‌کارگیری روش­های خاک­ورزی حفاظتی و نوسازی ماشین­آلات، موجب کاهش مصرف ورودی­های تجدید­ناپذیر و اقتصادی و در نتیجه، کاهش فشار محیطی و افزایش پایداری در بوم‌نظام زراعی کلزا خواهد شد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluating the Sustainability Indices for Rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) Production Systems Using Emergy Analysis (Case Study: Kalaleh County, Golestan province)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Samaneh Lotfi 1
  • Hossein Kazemi 1
  • Behnam Kamkar 2
  • Hamidreza Shahhoseini 3
1 Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Plant Production, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Iran
2 Department of Agrotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.
3 Deptment of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran
چکیده [English]

Introduction
Sustainability in agriculture at regional scale is about balancing food security with maintaining environmental health. Therefore, agricultural operations are sustainable when they maintain the health of the environment, the interaction between plant and animal production, social acceptance and economic benefits (Kumaraswamy, 2012). Excessive use of environmental resources and excessive consumption of chemicals in agriculture have caused environmental problems and reduced sustainability (Quintero-Angel & Gonzales-Acevedo, 2018). Therefore, it is necessary to study the patterns of energy consumption and efficient use of energy in agriculture, which is one of the basic principles in sustainable agriculture. Emergy analysis, as suitable tool for this purpose, is used in the various ecosystems (Odum, 2000; Brown & Ulgiati, 2004). Emergy analysis is able to determine the degree of sustainability of connected ecological and economic systems. Emergy indices are effective tools for integrating ecological-economic systems and make it possible to measure and compare all aspects of these ecosystems (Patterson et al., 2017). The purpose of this study was to evaluate sustainability indices for rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) production systems using emergy indices and provide suggestions for sustainable product of the crop in Kalaleh county.
 
Materials and Methods
In this study, production systems of rapeseed were evaluated using emergy sustainability indices in Kalaleh County (Golestan province), during the period of 2018-2019. For this purpose, 50 rapeseed fields were selected as Cochran equation. First, the spatial and temporal boundaries of the system were defined (Odum, 1996; Odum, 2000) and resources were divided into four categories: renewable environmental resources, nonrenewable environmental resources, purchased renewable resources and purchased nonrenewable resources (Amiri et al., 2019). Emergy flow for each input was multiplied by their transformities in joules and grammes (Odum, 2000). Finally, emergy indices such as renewability, emergy yield ratio, emergy self-support ratio, environmental loading ratio and emergy sustainability index were calculated and evaluated in rapeseed production systems.
 
Results and Discussion
Total emergy input for the rapeseed production was estimated as 1.64E+16 sej ha-1 year-1. In rapeseed production, dependence on environmental and nonrenewable inputs was higher than purchased and renewable inputs. Soil erosion emergy was the largest emergy inputs of the total in rapeseed production system with share of 47.31%. Also, fossil fuel emergy was the largest emergy inputs of the purchased with share of 38.41%. In this research, we calculated the transformity equal to 2.59E+05 sej j-1, specific emergy equal to 7.33E+09 sej g-1, emergy renewability equal to 8.16%, emergy yield ratio equal to 2.17 and emergy investment ratio equal to 0.85. Also, emergy self-support ratio, standard environmental loading ratio, modified environmental loading ratio, standard emergy sustainability index, and modified emergy sustainability index were estimated 0.54, 13.81, 11.27, 0.16 and 0.19, respectively. Despite the higher contribution of environmental resources in the rapeseed production system, the high share of soil erosion as a non-renewable input along with the unreasonable consumption of some nonrenewable purchased inputs, such as fossil fuels, led to a decrease in renewability and an increase in environmental load. Based on evaluation of emergy indices, rapeseed ecosystem had the high production efficiency and resource consumption efficiency and it had the great potential to increase economic productivity. However, rapeseed production in Kalaleh county had low environmental and economic sustainability. The implementation of conservation tillage methods and the modernization of machinery can contribute to a reduction in the consumption of nonrenewable and economic inputs in rapeseed production ecosystems. This reduction in input consumption not only alleviates environmental pressure but also enhances sustainability. By prioritizing the use of renewable environmental inputs and minimizing the utilization of nonrenewable and economic inputs, the emergy sustainability index can be improved.
Conclusion
The rapeseed ecosystems exhibited high production efficiency and resource consumption efficiency, along with significant potential for increasing economic productivity. However, despite the substantial contribution of environmental resources in these systems, the prevalence of soil erosion as a significant portion of the total emergy input resulted in a decline in renewability, an escalation in environmental burden, and ultimately a decrease in sustainability. It appears that enhancing management methods to minimize the consumption of nonrenewable and economic resources would be effective in bolstering the environmental and economic sustainability of rapeseed farming ecosystems in Kalaleh county.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Emergy indices
  • Environmental load
  • Fossil fuel
  • Renewability
  • Soil erosion

مراجع

  1. Amiri, Z., Asgharipour, M.R., Campbell, D.E., & Armin, M. )2019(. A sustainability analysis of two rapeseed farming ecosystems in Khorramabad, Iran, based on emergy and economic analyses. Journal of Cleaner Production, 226, 1051-1066. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.091
  2. Asgharipour, M.R., Amiri, Z., & Campbell, D.E. (2020). Evaluation of the sustainability of four greenhouse vegetable production ecosystems based on an analysis of emergy and social characteristics. Ecological Modelling, 424, 109021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2020.109021
  3. Asgharipour, M.R., Shahgholi, H., Campbell, D.E., Khamari, I., & Ghadiri, A. (2019). Comparison of the sustainability of bean production systems based on emergy and economic analyses. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 191(2), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-018-7123-3
  4. Bastianoni, S., Marchettini, N., Panzieri, M., & Tiezzi, E. (2001). Sustainability assessment of a farm in the Chianti area (Italy). Journal of Cleaner Production, 9, 365-373. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2008.09.003
  5. Brandt-Williams, S.L. (2002). Handbook of Emergy Evaluation: Folio #4 Emergy of Florida Agriculture. Center for Environmental Policy, Univercity of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
  6. Brown, M.T., Campbell, D.E., De Vilbiss, C., & Ulgiati, S. (2016). The geobiosphere emergy baseline: A synthesis. Ecological Modelling, 339, 92-95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2016.03.018
  7. Brown, M.T., & Ulgiati, S. (2004). Energy quality, emergy, and transformity: H.T. Odum’s contributions to quantifying and understanding systems. Ecological Modelling, 178, 201-213. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2004.03.002
  8. Campbell, D.E., Brandt-Williams, S.L., & Meisch, M.E.A. (2005). Environmental accounting using Emergy: Evaluation of the state of West Virginia. EPA/600/R-02/011. USEPA, Office of research and Development, Washigton, DC, P. 116.
  9. Campbell, D.E., & Laherrere, J. (1998). The end of cheap oil. American Journal of Science, 278(3), 78-83.
  10. Cochran, J. (2003). Patterns of sustainable agriculture adoption/non-adoption in Panama a thesis submitted to McGill University. McGill University, Montreal, Canad: 1-114.
  11. Ghaley, B.B., Kehli, N., & Mentler, A. (2018). Emergy synthesis of conventional fodder maize (Zea mays) production in Denmark. Ecological Indicators, 87, 144-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.12.027
  12. Ghisellini, P., Zucaro, A., Viglia, S., & Ulgiati, S. (2014). Monitoring and evaluating the sustainability of Italian agricultural system. An emergy decomposition analysis. Ecological Modelling, 271, 132-148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2013.02.014
  13. Houshyar, E., Wu, X.F., & Chen, G.Q. (2018). Sustainability of wheat and maize production in the warm climate of southwestern Iran: An emergy analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 2246-2255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.187
  14. Jafari, M., Asgharipour, M.R., Ramroudi, M., Galavi, M., & Hadarbadi, G. (2018). Sustainability assessment of date and pistachio agricultural systems using energy, emergy and economic approaches. Journal of Cleaner Production, 193, 642-651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.089
  15. Kazemi, H., Hassanpour Bourkheili, S., Kamkar, B., Soltani, A., Gharanjic, K., & Nazari, N.M. (2016). Estimation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission and energy use efficiency (EUE) analysis in rainfed canola production (Case study: Golestan province, Iran). Energy, 116, 694-700. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.10.010
  16. Kumaraswamy, S. (2012). Sustainability issues in agro-ecology: Socio-ecological perspective. Agricultural Sciences, 3(2), 153-169. DOI:10.4236/as.2012.32018
  17. Lu, H., Yuan, Y., Campbell, D.E., Qin, P., & Cui, L. (2014). Integated water quality, emergy and economic evaluation of three bioremediation treatment systems for eutrophic water. Ecological Engineering, 69, 244-254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2014.04.024
  18. Lu, H., Bai, Y., Ren, H., & Campbell, D.E. (2010). Integrated emergy, energy and economic evaluation of rice and vegetable production systems in alluvial paddy fields: Implications for agricultural policy in China. Journal of Environmental Management, 91, 2727-2735. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.07.025
  19. Lu, H.F., Kang, W.L., Campbell, D.E., Ren, H., Tand, Y.W., Fengd, R.X., Luo, J.T., & Chen, F.P. (2009). Emergy and economic evaluations of four fruit production systems on reclaimed wetlands surrounding the Pearl River Estuary, China. Ecological Engineering, 35, 1743-1757. doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2009.08.001
  20. Martin, J.F., Diemont, S.A.W., Powell, E., Stanton, M., & Levy-Tacher, S. (2006). Emergy evaluation of the performance and sustainability of three agricultural systems with different scales and management. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 115, 128-140. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2005.12.016
  21. Odum, H.T. (1996). Environmental accounting: Emergy and Environmental Decision Making. John Wiley and Sons, New York. USA. 384 pp.
  22. Odum, H.T. (2000). Handbook of Emergy Evaluation. A Compendium of Data for Emergy Computation Folio #2 Emergy global processes. Center of Environmental Policy, University of Florida, Gainesville. 28 pp.
  23. Patterson, M., McDonald, G., & Hardy, D. (2017). Is there more in common than we think? Convergence of ecological footprinting, emergy analysis, life cycle assessment and other methods of environmental accounting. Ecological Modelling, 362, 19-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2017.07.022
  24. Quintero-Angel, M., & Gonzalez-Acevedo, A. (2018). Tendencies and challenges for the assessment of agricultural sustainability. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 254, 273-281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.11.030
  25. Rajabi Hamedani, S., Shahabi, Z., & Rafiee, S. (2011). Energy inputs and crop yield relationship in potato production in Hamadan province of Iran. Energy, 36, 2367-2371. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.01.013
  26. Shahhoseini, H.R., Ramroudi, M., & Kazemi, H. (2020). Evaluating the resources use efficiency and sustainability indices for two potato production systems using emergy analysis (Case study: Gorgan county). Journal of Agroecology, 12(1), 127-142. (In Persian with English Summary) Doi:10.22067/jag.81189
  27. Ulgiati, S., & Brown, M.T. (1998). Monitoring patterns of sustainability in natural and man-made ecosystems. Ecological Modelling, 108, 23-36.
  28. Ulgiati, S., & Brown, M.T. (2002). Quantifying the environmental support for dilution and abatement of process emissions. The case of electricity production. Journal of Cleaner Production, 10, 335-348.
  29. Wang, X., Dadouma, A., Chen, Y., Sui, P., Gao, W., Qin, F., Zhang, J., & Xia, W. (2014). Emergy analysis of grain production systems on large-scale farms in the North China Plain based on LCA. Agricultural Systems, 128, 66–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2014.03.005
  30. Xi, Y.G., & Qin, P. (2009). Emergy evaluation of organic rice-duck mutualism system. Ecological Engineering, 35, 1677-1683. doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2007.11.006
  31. Yasini, H., Ghanbari, S.A., Asgharipour, M.R., & Seyedabadi, E. (2020). Evaluation of sustainability in wheat, onion and garlic cropping systems by joint use of emergy and economic accounting. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 30(2), 269-288. (In Persian with English Summary)
  32. Zhai, X., Huang, D., Tang, S., Li, S., Guo, J., Yang, Y., Liu, H., Li, J., & Wang, K. (2017). The emergy of metabolism in different ecosystems under the same environmental conditions in the agro-pastoral ecotone of Northern China. Ecological Indicators, 74, 198-204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.11.028
  33. Zhang, L.X., Song, B., & Chen, B. (2012). Emergy-based analysis of four farming systems: insight into agricultural diversification in rural China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 28, 33–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.10.042
ارسال نظر در مورد این مقاله
CAPTCHA Image

فایل ها

سابقه مقاله

  • تاریخ دریافت: 08 شهریور 1400
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 17 بهمن 1400
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 25 اردیبهشت 1401
  • تاریخ اولین انتشار: 25 اردیبهشت 1401

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار