Optimization of Machinery Use on Farms with Emphasis on Timeliness Costs

Authors
B. Najafi 1
S. Torabi Dastgerduei 2
1 Islamic Azad University, Marvdasht Branch, Islamic Republic of Iran.
2 Natural Resources Research Institute, Ministry of Agriculture, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran.
Abstract
This study was conducted to determine timeliness costs in using machinery and their effects on farmers’ revenues. In addition, optimum cropping pattern was compared with the existing one assuming removal of timeliness cost. For the purpose of the study, mixed integer and linear programming methods were used. The study was conduced in Marvdasht region in southern Iran. The data were collected through interviews with a sample of 80 farm managers. Selected farmers were divided into six groups in terms of farm size and farm machinery use, and in each group a representative farm was selected. Findings of the study showed that 19 percent of farmers owned and 81 percent rented tractor and, as a result, timeliness cost was considerable for the latter group. The results also showed that for the farmers whose farm size was more than 10 hectares, it was justified to buy tractor and rent a combine. The results revealed that there was a gap between the optimum and existing cropping patterns with respect to timeliness cost and gross margin increased mostly in the groups that owned tractor and more than five hectares of land. Finally, in order to minimize timeliness cost, joint ownership of machinery by neighboring farms was recommended.

Keywords

1. Amjadi, A. and Chizari, A. H. 2006. Agricultural Mechanization in Iran. Agric. Econ. Devel., 55: 125-139.
2. ASABE. 2006a. Agricultural Machinery Management. American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers. ST Josef, Michigan, USA.
3. ASABE. 2006b. Agricultural Machinery Management Data. American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers. ST Josef, Michigan, USA.
4. Bagheri, N. and Bordar, M. 2014. Factor Analysis of Agricultural Mechanization Challenges in Iran. Agr. Eng. Int. CIGR J., 16:167-172.
5. Baker, T. G. and B. A. Mc Carl, 1982, Representing Farm Resource Availability Over Time in Linear Programs: A Case Study, J. Agric. Econ. 4:59-68.
6. Bernes, G., Hetta, M. and Martinsson, K. 2008. Effects of Harvest Date of Timothy on its Nutritive Value, and on the Voluntary Silage Intake and Live Weight Gain of Lambs. Gra. Fora. Sci., 63: 212-220.
7. Brown, W. J. and Schoney, R. A. 2008. Calculating Least–cost Machinery Size for Grain Farms using Electronic Spreadsheets and Microcomputers. Can. J. Agric. Econ., 56: 105-116.
8. Chapman, D. F., Kenny, S. N., Beca, D. and Johnston, I. R. 2008. Pasture and Forage Crop Systems for Non-irrigated Dairy Farms in Southern Australia. Agric. Syst., 97: 108- 125.
9. De Toro, A. 2004. Assessment of Field Machinery Performance in Variable Weather Conditions using Discrete Event Simulation. Doctoral Thesis, Swedish University of Agricultural Science, Uppsala, Sweden.
10. De Toro, A. 2005. Influences on Timeliness costs and their Variability on Arable Farms, Biosyst. Eng., 92: 1-13.
11. De Toro, A. and Hansson, P. A. 2004. Analysis of Field Machinery Performance Based on Daily Soil Workability Status using Discrete Event Simulation. Agric. Syst., 79:109-129.
12. Edwards, W. and Boehlije, M. 1980. Machinery Selection Considering Timeliness Losses. Trans. ASAE, 23: 810-815.
13. Ekman, S. 2000. Tillage System Selection: A Mathematical Programming Model Incorporating Weather Variability. J. Agric. Eng. Res., 77:267-276.
14. Fazlolahi, A., Sadat Hosseini S. M., Bahoor R. and Surani, Z. 2012. Investigation of Agricultural Mechanization and Environment Challenges in Marand Township. International Conference on Chemical, Environmental and Biological Sciences, 29-30Dec. 2012, Penang, Malaysia.
15. Gunnarsson, C. 2008. Timeliness Costs in Grain and Forage Production Systems. Doctoral Thesis, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.
16. Gunnarsson, C. and Hansson, P. A. 2004. Optimization of Field Machinery for an Arable Farm Converting to Organic Farming. Agric. Syst., 80: 85-103.
17. Michael, E. W., Wesley, N. M., Ronald, W. M. and David, M. E. 1990. A Case Study of Timelines in the Selection of Risk-efficient Machinery Complements. South. J. Agric. Econ., 22: 165-176.
18. Pishbin, S. Mohamadi, H. and Ejraei A. 2007. Problems of Agricultural Mechanization in Jahrom Region. Prod. Devel., 5: 17-29.
19. Rasouli, F., Sadighi, H. and Minaei, S. 2009. Factors Affecting Agricultural Mechanization: A Case Study on Sunflower Seed Farms in Iran, J. Agric. Sci. Tech., 11: 39-48.
20. Srivastava, A. K., Goering, C. E., Rohrbach, R. P. and Buckmaster, D. R. 2006. Engineering Principles of Agricultural Machines. 2nd Edition, American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers. ST Josef, Michigan, USA.
21. Simalenga, T. E. 2000. Entrepreneurship in Mechanized Agriculture Technology-oriented Operations. Agric. Mech. Asia. Africa Lat. Ame., 31: 61-68.
22. Sorensen, C. G. 2003. Workability and Machinery Sizing for Combine Harvesting. J. Soc. Res. Deve. 5: 28-36.
23. Tabatabaeifar, A. and Omid M. 2005. Current Status of Iranian Agricultural Mechanization. J. Agric. Soc. 2: 196-201.
24. Wetzstein, M. E., Musser, W. N., McClendon R. W. and Edwards, D. M. 1990. South. J. Agric. Econ. 22:165-177.
Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology
Volume 17, Issue 3
May and June 2015
Pages 533-541