动物牵引,两轮拖拉机,还是四轮拖拉机?最适合指导非洲农业机械化的方法

IF 1.6 4区 农林科学 Q1 Agricultural and Biological Sciences Experimental Agriculture Pub Date : 2023-07-26 DOI:10.1017/S0014479723000091
T. Daum, Anna Seidel, Bisrat Getnet Awoke, R. Birner
{"title":"动物牵引,两轮拖拉机,还是四轮拖拉机?最适合指导非洲农业机械化的方法","authors":"T. Daum, Anna Seidel, Bisrat Getnet Awoke, R. Birner","doi":"10.1017/S0014479723000091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Summary Farm mechanization promises to help raise labor productivity and reduce the heavy toil of farming on the world’s millions of smallholder farms, hence contributing to socioeconomic development in the Global South, in particular in Africa. While mechanization is therefore high on the African development agenda, there are heavy – at times dogmatic – debates on which technological pathway toward farm mechanization – animal traction, two-wheel tractors, and four-wheel tractors – should be supported by African governments and development partners. One discussion area relates to the future of animal traction. Proponents see a continued scope for the use of draught animals, whereas opponents see animal traction as old-fashioned and see a potential to leapfrog this mechanization stage. There are also debates on the potential of two-wheel tractors, with proponents arguing that such walk-behind tractors are more affordable and suitable for smallholder farmers, and opponents believing that such tractors lack efficiency and power and still come with a high drudgery. This paper argues that there are no blueprint answers on which technological pathway is ‘best’ but only answers on which one ‘best fits’ the respective conditions. Based on this premise, this paper introduces a ‘best-fit’ framework that allows for assessing the comparative advantages and disadvantages of the three technological pathways in different agroecological and socioeconomic conditions. The results suggest that all three forms of mechanization are associated with areas where they ‘best fit’. All three farm mechanization pathways hinge on public policies and investments to create an enabling environment for private markets, as, ultimately, innovation processes should be market driven. The ‘best-fit’ framework enables governments and development partners to focus efforts to support farm mechanization on solutions that ‘best fit’ their country’s farming systems and not on those that are politically most attractive, thereby contributing to sustainable agricultural mechanization and development.","PeriodicalId":12245,"journal":{"name":"Experimental Agriculture","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Animal traction, two-wheel tractors, or four-wheel tractors? A best-fit approach to guide farm mechanization in Africa\",\"authors\":\"T. Daum, Anna Seidel, Bisrat Getnet Awoke, R. Birner\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0014479723000091\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Summary Farm mechanization promises to help raise labor productivity and reduce the heavy toil of farming on the world’s millions of smallholder farms, hence contributing to socioeconomic development in the Global South, in particular in Africa. While mechanization is therefore high on the African development agenda, there are heavy – at times dogmatic – debates on which technological pathway toward farm mechanization – animal traction, two-wheel tractors, and four-wheel tractors – should be supported by African governments and development partners. One discussion area relates to the future of animal traction. Proponents see a continued scope for the use of draught animals, whereas opponents see animal traction as old-fashioned and see a potential to leapfrog this mechanization stage. There are also debates on the potential of two-wheel tractors, with proponents arguing that such walk-behind tractors are more affordable and suitable for smallholder farmers, and opponents believing that such tractors lack efficiency and power and still come with a high drudgery. This paper argues that there are no blueprint answers on which technological pathway is ‘best’ but only answers on which one ‘best fits’ the respective conditions. Based on this premise, this paper introduces a ‘best-fit’ framework that allows for assessing the comparative advantages and disadvantages of the three technological pathways in different agroecological and socioeconomic conditions. The results suggest that all three forms of mechanization are associated with areas where they ‘best fit’. All three farm mechanization pathways hinge on public policies and investments to create an enabling environment for private markets, as, ultimately, innovation processes should be market driven. The ‘best-fit’ framework enables governments and development partners to focus efforts to support farm mechanization on solutions that ‘best fit’ their country’s farming systems and not on those that are politically most attractive, thereby contributing to sustainable agricultural mechanization and development.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12245,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Experimental Agriculture\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Experimental Agriculture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0014479723000091\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Agricultural and Biological Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Experimental Agriculture","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0014479723000091","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

农业机械化有望帮助提高世界上数百万小农户的劳动生产率,减少繁重的农业劳动,从而为全球南方,特别是非洲的社会经济发展做出贡献。因此,尽管机械化是非洲发展议程上的重要内容,但关于哪种农业机械化的技术途径——动物牵引、两轮拖拉机和四轮拖拉机——应该得到非洲政府和发展伙伴的支持,仍存在着激烈的争论,有时甚至是教条式的争论。一个讨论领域涉及动物牵引的未来。支持者认为,吃水动物的使用范围仍在继续,而反对者则认为动物牵引是老式的,并认为有可能跨越这一机械化阶段。关于两轮拖拉机的潜力也存在争议,支持者认为这种无人驾驶拖拉机更实惠,更适合小农户,而反对者则认为这种拖拉机缺乏效率和动力,仍然很吃力。本文认为,对于哪种技术途径是“最好的”,没有蓝图上的答案,只有关于哪种技术路径“最适合”各自条件的答案。基于这一前提,本文引入了一个“最佳匹配”框架,用于评估三种技术途径在不同农业生态和社会经济条件下的比较优势和劣势。研究结果表明,所有三种形式的机械化都与它们“最适合”的地区有关。所有三条农业机械化道路都取决于公共政策和投资,为私人市场创造有利的环境,因为创新过程最终应该由市场驱动。“最适合”的框架使政府和发展伙伴能够将支持农业机械化的努力集中在“最符合”本国农业系统的解决方案上,而不是那些在政治上最具吸引力的解决方案,从而有助于可持续的农业机械化和发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Animal traction, two-wheel tractors, or four-wheel tractors? A best-fit approach to guide farm mechanization in Africa
Summary Farm mechanization promises to help raise labor productivity and reduce the heavy toil of farming on the world’s millions of smallholder farms, hence contributing to socioeconomic development in the Global South, in particular in Africa. While mechanization is therefore high on the African development agenda, there are heavy – at times dogmatic – debates on which technological pathway toward farm mechanization – animal traction, two-wheel tractors, and four-wheel tractors – should be supported by African governments and development partners. One discussion area relates to the future of animal traction. Proponents see a continued scope for the use of draught animals, whereas opponents see animal traction as old-fashioned and see a potential to leapfrog this mechanization stage. There are also debates on the potential of two-wheel tractors, with proponents arguing that such walk-behind tractors are more affordable and suitable for smallholder farmers, and opponents believing that such tractors lack efficiency and power and still come with a high drudgery. This paper argues that there are no blueprint answers on which technological pathway is ‘best’ but only answers on which one ‘best fits’ the respective conditions. Based on this premise, this paper introduces a ‘best-fit’ framework that allows for assessing the comparative advantages and disadvantages of the three technological pathways in different agroecological and socioeconomic conditions. The results suggest that all three forms of mechanization are associated with areas where they ‘best fit’. All three farm mechanization pathways hinge on public policies and investments to create an enabling environment for private markets, as, ultimately, innovation processes should be market driven. The ‘best-fit’ framework enables governments and development partners to focus efforts to support farm mechanization on solutions that ‘best fit’ their country’s farming systems and not on those that are politically most attractive, thereby contributing to sustainable agricultural mechanization and development.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Experimental Agriculture
Experimental Agriculture 农林科学-农艺学
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
6.20%
发文量
29
审稿时长
24 months
期刊介绍: With a focus on the tropical and sub-tropical regions of the world, Experimental Agriculture publishes the results of original research on field, plantation and herbage crops grown for food or feed, or for industrial purposes, and on farming systems, including livestock and people. It reports experimental work designed to explain how crops respond to the environment in biological and physical terms, and on the social and economic issues that may influence the uptake of the results of research by policy makers and farmers, including the role of institutions and partnerships in delivering impact. The journal also publishes accounts and critical discussions of new quantitative and qualitative methods in agricultural and ecosystems research, and of contemporary issues arising in countries where agricultural production needs to develop rapidly. There is a regular book review section and occasional, often invited, reviews of research.
期刊最新文献
Drought responses in Coffea arabica as affected by genotype and phenophase. II – photosynthesis at leaf and plant scales Exchangeable molybdenum concentration in lowland paddy fields of Sri Lanka as affected by the differences in agro-climatic zones, soil orders, and water sources Optimizing soil and plant functions: combinatory design of fertilizing resources assemblage for rainfed rice in Madagascar Characterisation of bitter vetch (Vicia ervilia (L.) Willd) ecotypes: An ancient and promising legume Achieving super high yield in rice by simultaneously increasing panicle number and grain weight via improving pre-heading biomass production
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1