Management of Soil Fertility Based on Improvement Methodological Approach to Evaluation of Arable Land: Case of Ukraine
Abstract
The article deals with the issues of the management of soil fertility based on the application of two methodological approaches to arable land normative monetary evaluation (NME). These researches have been conducted on the results of economic activity of the Poltava region agrarian enterprises of Ukraine. The differences between the two methodological approaches to the calculation of the NME of arable land in the Poltava region are shown. These approaches, namely, on cereals and on five agricultural crops, presuppose the calculation of the NME of arable land on the basis of capitalized rent income. The approaches are similar to the Ricardian model of land pricing, which is being widely used with its various modifications in different countries of the world. Our own methodology for analyzing the approaches to the NME of arable land, based on the developed stochastic harmonic models (SHM), is represented in the article.
The application of the two methodological approaches to the calculation of the NME of arable land in the Poltava region of Ukraine, which presupposes its consideration on the data concerning cereals and five agricultural crops, revealed essential differences between them in the course of the conducted economic-mathematical analysis. It has been found that the methodological approach on cereals has a lower level of the explanatory attribute variation (of humus content in soils) compared to five agricultural crops. That finally leads to the essential difference in the optimum values of the arable land NME at increasing humus content in soils. Thus, the optimum value of the arable land NME within the second methodological approach is twice as much as within the first one. The measures to improve the arable land NME, based on the data of the Poltava region and can be successfully used all over Ukraine, as well as in many countries of the world. The advantages of applying the methodological approach based on five agricultural crops were studied and grounded in the current research. This approach proves the dependence of arable land NME on the humus content and enables higher objectivity for effective and rational management of soil fertility.
References
[2] Ackerberg, D. et al. 2007. Econometric tools for analyzing market outcomes. In J. J. Heckman and E. E. Leamer (Ed.). Handbook of Econometrics. Volume 6A, Amsterdam: Elsevier/NorthHolland, 4171–4276. Available at: https://econpapers.repec.org/bookchap/eeeecochp/6a-63.htm
[3] Agriculture of region in 2010 years. Statistical yearbook. 2011. Main department of statistics of the Poltava region. 270. Available at: www.ukrstat.gov.ua
[4] Agriculture of region in 2013. Statistical yearbook. 2014. Main department of statistics of the Poltava region. 254. Available at: www.ukrstat.gov.ua
[5] Artyushok, K.A. 2014. Main categories and forms of the social environmental and economic relations manifestation. Balanced nature using, 1: 44–48. Available at: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Zp_2014_1_9
[6] Ay, J.-S. and Latruffe, L. 2013. The empirical content of the present value model: A survey of the instrumental uses of farmland prices. Working paper Factor market, 53: 17. Available at: https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpaper/hal-01208917.html
[7] Ay, J.-S. and Latruffe, L. 2017. The Information Content of Land Price and its Relevance for Environmental Issues. International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, 10 (3-4): 183–226. Available at: DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/101.00000086
[8] Baritz, R. 2018. Voluntary Guidelines for Sustainable Soil Management: Global Action for Healthy Soils. In: Ginzky H., Dooley E., Heuser I., Kasimbazi E., Markus T., Qin T. (eds) International Yearbook of Soil Law and Policy 2017. International Yearbook of Soil Law and Policy, vol 2017. Springer, Cham. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68885-5_3.
[9] Bationo, A., Fening, J.O. and Kwaw, A. 2018. Assessment of Soil Fertility Status and Integrated Soil Fertility Management in Ghana. In: Bationo, A., Ngaradoum, D., Youl, S., Lompo, F., Fening, J. (eds) Improving the Profitability, Sustainability and Efficiency of Nutrients Through Site Specific Fertilizer Recommendations in West Africa Agro-Ecosystems. Springer, Cham. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58789-9_7
[10] Bond, S. and Söderbom, M. 2005. Adjustment Costs and the Identification of Cobb Douglas Production Functions. Oxford: Oxford University. Available at: https://ideas.repec.org/p/ifs/ifsewp/05-04.html
[11] Bradáčová, K. 2007. Official agricultural land price in the Slovak Republic. Agricultural Economics – Czech, 53, 4: 184–188. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17221/865-AGRICECON
[12] Fedorov, M.M. 2009. Normative monetary evaluation of land as a component of the regulatory policy’s mechanism of the state. The Economy AIC, 11: 3–10. Available at: http://eapk.org.ua/sites/default/files/eapk/2009/2009_11/09_11_00.pdf
[13] Feichtinger, P. and Salhofer, K. 2013. Influence of the Common Agricultural Policy and Heterogeneous Land Quality on Land Rent and Land Allocation. Factor Markets Working Paper, 38: 1–11. Available at: https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/famawp/146963.html
[14] Griliches, Z. and Mairesse, J. 1998. Production Functions: The Search for Identification. In S. Strom (Ed.). Econometrics and economic theory in the 20th century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 169–203. Available at: https://ideas.repec.org/p/ifs/ifsewp/05-04.html
[15] Gutorov, O.I. 2014. Issues over the formation of a balanced system of environmental management in agriculture. Balanced nature using, 3: 5–9. Available at: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Zp_2014_3_3
[16] Helming, K., Daedlow, K., Hansjürgens, B. and Koellner, T. 2018. Assessment and Governance of Sustainable Soil Management. Sustainability, 10(12): 4432. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124432.
[17] Ibatullin, S. and Stepenko, O. 2014. Methodical approaches to the land mass valuation. Economic Annals – XXI, 3-4(1): 93–96. Available at: http://soskin.info/ea/2014/3-4/201429.html
[18] Just, R. and Miranowski, J. 1993. Understanding farmland price changes. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 75(1): 156–168. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1242964
[19] Kirwan, B. 2009. The incidence of US agricultural subsidies on farmland rental rates. Journal of Political Economy, 117(1): 138–164. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/598688
[20] Land Code of Ukraine. The law of Ukraine. (2001, October). Statement Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 3–4: 27. Available at: http://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2768-14
[21] Latruffe, L., Minviel, J.J. and Salanie, J. 2013. The role of environmental and land transaction regulations on agricultural land price: The example of Brittany. Factor Markets Working Paper, 52: 1–19. Available at: http://aei.pitt.edu/58586
[22] Lichtenberg, E. 1989. Land Quality, Irrigation Development, and Cropping Patterns in the Northern High Plains. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 71(1): 187–194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1241787
[23] Martin, A.G. 2013. Updating methodical principles of normative monetary valuation of agricultural land. Land Management and Cadaster, 3: 30–51. Available at: https://zsu.org.ua/andrij-martin/9220-onovlennya
[24] Nuppenau, E.-A. 2018. Soil Fertility Management by Transition Matrices and Crop Rotation: On Spatial and Dynamic Aspects in Programming of Ecosystem Services. Sustainability, 10(7): 2213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072213
[25] On Land Evaluation. The law of Ukraine. (2003, December). Statement Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 15: 229. Available at: http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1378-15
[26] On Land Lease. The law of Ukraine. (1998, October). Statement Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 46–47: 280. Available at: zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/161-14
[27] Palenichak, O.V. 2013. Economic mechanism to promote the rational agricultural land use. Balanced nature using, 1: 69–72. Available at: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Zp_2013_1_15
[28] Petrick, M. and Kloss, M. 2013. Identifying factor productivity by dynamic panel data and control function approaches: a comparative evaluation for EU agriculture. Berlin: German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA). Available at: https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/gewi13/156104.html
[29] Petrick, M. and Kloss, M. 2013. Synthesis Report on the Impact of Capital Use. Factor Markets Working Paper, 57: 1–20. Available at: https://ideas.repec.org/p/eps/fmwppr/169.html
[30] Petty, W. 1940. Ekonomicheskiye I statisticheskiye raboty. Vol. I & II. Moscow: Sotsekgiz. 324.
[31] Ricardo, D. 1955. Nachala politicheskoy ekonomii I nalogovogo oblozheniya. Trancleted by Smith, M.N., Vol.1. Moscow: Gosudarstvennoye izdatelstvo politicheskoy literatury. 360.
[32] Smith, A. 1962. Issledovanye o prirode y prichinakh bohatstva narodov. Moscow: Sotsekgiz. 684.
[33] Towhid, O. K. 2018. Management of Soil Problems, Springer International Publishing, XX, 474. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75527-4.
[34] Ulko, Ye. M. 2018. Methodical foundations of improvement of normative monetary evaluation of arable on marketing approaches. Scientific notes Taurida national university named after V. I. Vernadsky. Series economics and management, 29(68), 3: 34–43. Available at: http://www.econ.vernadskyjournals.in.ua/journals/2018/29_68_3/10.pdf
[35] Valras, L. 2000. Elementy chistoy politicheskoy ekonomii. Moscow: Izograf. 448.
[36] Vargas, R. et al. eds 2018. Handbook for Saline soil management. Eurasian Soil Partnership implementation plan. Rome, FAO. 132.
[37] Weersink, A., Clark, S., Turvey, C. and Sarker, R. 1999. The effect of agricultural policy on farmland values. Land Economics, 75(3): 425–439. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3147188
Copyright© 2024 The Author(s). Published by ASERS Publishing 2024. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of CC-BY 4.0 license.