Modifying the yield factor based on more efficient use of fertilizer — The environmental impacts of intensive and extensive agricultural practices

The aim of this article is to draw attention to calculations on the environmental effects of agriculture and to the definition of marginal agricultural yield. When calculating the environmental impacts of agricultural activities, the real environmental load generated by agriculture is not revealed properly through ecological footprint indicators, as the type of agricultural farming (thus the nature of the pollution it creates) is not incorporated in the calculation. It is commonly known that extensive farming uses relatively small amounts of labor and capital. It produces a lower yield per unit of land and thus requires more land than intensive farming practices to produce similar yields, so it has a larger crop and grazing footprint. However, intensive farms, to achieve higher yields, apply fertilizers, insecticides, herbicides, etc., and cultivation and harvesting are often mechanized. In this study, the focus is on highlighting the differences in the environmental impacts of extensive and intensive farming practices through a statistical analysis of the factors determining agricultural yield. A marginal function is constructed for the relation between chemical fertilizer use and yield per unit fertilizer input. Furthermore, a proposal is presented for how calculation of the yield factor could possibly be improved. The yield factor used in the calculation of biocapacity is not the marginal yield for a given area, but is calculated from the real and actual yields, and this way biocapacity and the ecological footprint for cropland are equivalent. Calculations for cropland biocapacity do not show the area needed for sustainable production, but rather the actual land area used for agricultural production. The proposal the authors present is a modification of the yield factor and also the changed biocapacity is calculated. The results of statistical analyses reveal the need for a clarification of the methodology for calculating marginal yield, which could clearly contribute to assessing the real environmental impacts of agriculture.

Modifying the yield factor based on more efficient use of fertilizer — The environmental impacts of intensive and extensive agricultural practices

The aim of this article is to draw attention to calculations on the environmental effects of agriculture and to the definition of marginal agricultural yield. When calculating the environmental impacts of agricultural activities, the real environmental load generated by agriculture is not revealed properly through ecological footprint indicators, as the type of agricultural farming (thus the nature of the pollution it creates) is not incorporated in the calculation. It is commonly known that extensive farming uses relatively small amounts of labor and capital. It produces a lower yield per unit of land and thus requires more land than intensive farming practices to produce similar yields, so it has a larger crop and grazing footprint. However, intensive farms, to achieve higher yields, apply fertilizers, insecticides, herbicides, etc., and cultivation and harvesting are often mechanized. In this study, the focus is on highlighting the differences in the environmental impacts of extensive and intensive farming practices through a statistical analysis of the factors determining agricultural yield. A marginal function is constructed for the relation between chemical fertilizer use and yield per unit fertilizer input. Furthermore, a proposal is presented for how calculation of the yield factor could possibly be improved. The yield factor used in the calculation of biocapacity is not the marginal yield for a given area, but is calculated from the real and actual yields, and this way biocapacity and the ecological footprint for cropland are equivalent. Calculations for cropland biocapacity do not show the area needed for sustainable production, but rather the actual land area used for agricultural production. The proposal the authors present is a modification of the yield factor and also the changed biocapacity is calculated. The results of statistical analyses reveal the need for a clarification of the methodology for calculating marginal yield, which could clearly contribute to assessing the real environmental impacts of agriculture.

The impact of external market factors on operational practices and performance of companies

The links between operational practices and performance are well studied in the literature, both theoretically and empirically. However, mostly internal factors are inspected more closely as the basis of operational performance, even if the impact of external, environmental factors is often emphasized. Our research fills a part of this existing gap in the literature. We examine how two environmental factors, market dynamism and competition impact the use of some operational practices (such as quality improvement, product development, automation, etc.) and the resulting operations and business performance. The method of path analysis is used. Data were acquired through an international survey (IMSS – International Manufacturing Strategy Survey), which was executed in 2005, in 23 participating countries in so called "innovative" industries (ISIC 28-35) with a sample of 711 firms. Results show that both market dynamism and competition have large impact on business performance, but the indirect effects, through operations practices are rather weak compared to direct ones. The most influential practices are from the area of process and control, and quality management.

The impact of perceived corporate environmental performance on the behavior of capital market decision makers : analysis of food industry companies

Environmental protectionism and sustainable development has been gaining increased attention among governments, investors and consumers alike. As a result, firms are facing growing pressure from the various stakeholders to improve their environmental performance. This study is focusing on the food industry, which in recent years has been a subject of increased scrutiny due to their role in resource consumption, waste generation and unsustainable production practices. Our research is aiming to examine how the financial community evaluates the environmental stewardship of food industry companies as proxied by market reactions in response to environmental news. Are all company related environmental news items evaluated equally, and which financial and non-financial firm-specific attributes can influence market responses? Have there been changes in reactions on the stock exchange in the past two decades?