The Impact Of Small Farm Mechanization On Rice Growing Farm Households

This research was undertaken to better assess the role of mechanization in the future of smallholder farmers in Nepal. It addresses the knowledge gap about whether promoting mechanization that is often complementary to land can effectively support smallholders, particularly in the face of a growing nonfarm sector. Rising rural wages in Nepal have increasingly put pressures on smallholder farmers, who tend to operate labor-intensive farming. Agricultural mechanization through custom hiring of tractor services has recently been considered as an option to mitigate the impact of rising labor costs for smallholders. However, the benefit of agricultural mechanization may still be better captured by exploiting the economies of scale of medium to large farmers rather than smallholders. In the meantime, the Nepal agricultural sector still employs a disproportionate share of workers given its share in the economy, potentially depressing agricultural labor productivity. It is therefore an important policy question whether to (1) continue supporting smallholders through custom-hired tractor services or (2) encourage smallholders to rent their farms out to medium-size or larger farmers, while helping smallholders specialize in the nonfarm sector, where their labor productivity may be higher. Using samples from the Terai zone—one of the agroecological belts in Nepal, largely consisting of lowland plains— from the Nepal Living Standards Survey, we assess whether the benefits of hiring in tractor services are greater among medium to large farmers than among smallholders, and how these benefits may depend on smallholders’ decision to remain in or leave farming. This study also contributes to the impact evaluation literature by showing that jointly assessing the effects of two treatments (whether to adopt custom-hired tractor services and continue farming, or to search for better options and specialize in off-farm activities) can lead to different implications than assessing them separately. Our analyses suggest that the government should continue to promote custom-hired tractor services not only for medium to large farmers but also for smallholders. If, over time, barriers to specializing in nonfarm activities are lowered and more smallholders start leaving farming, mechanization may no longer benefit the remaining smallholders. Support for mechanization can then be focused more on medium to large farmers, while types of support other than mechanization can be devised for the remaining smallholders.

Agricultural mechanization has often been characterized by scale-effects and increased specialization. Such characterizations, however, fail to explain how mechanization may grow in Africa where production environments are more heterogeneous and diversification of production may help in mitigating risks from increasingly uncertain climatic conditions. Using panel data from farm households and crop-specific production costs in Nigeria, we estimate how the adoption of animal traction or tractors affects the economies of scope (EOS) between rice, non-rice grains, legume/seed crops, and other crops, which are the crop groups that are most widely grown with animal traction or tractors in Nigeria. The results indicate that the adoption of these mechanization technologies is associated with lower EOS between non-rice grains, legume/seed crops, and other crops, but greater EOS between rice and other crops. An increase in EOS for rice is indicated in both primal and dual analytical approaches. Mechanical technologies may raise EOS between crops that are grown in more heterogeneous environments, even though it may lower EOS between crops that are grown in relatively similar environments. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first paper that shows the effects of mechanical technologies on EOS in agriculture in developing countries.

This study was conducted to understand the evolution of agricultural mechanization in Nepal, specifically its determinants on both the demand and supply sides, as well as impacts on agricultural production and associations with broader economic transformation processes, in order to draw lessons that can be conveyed to other less mechanized countries. Mechanization levels in Nepal, a largely agricultural country, were relatively low until a few decades ago. However, significant mechanization growth, including the adoption of tractors, has occurred since the 1990s, against a backdrop of rising rural wages, particularly for plowing, combined with growing emigration and growth in key staple crop yields and overall broad agricultural production growth, as well as improved market access and participation. This growth in mechanization has taken place despite the general absence of direct government support or promotion. The growth of tractor use in the plains of the Terai zone has transformed agricultural production rather than inducing labor movement out of agriculture, raising overall returns to scale in intensification and enabling the cultivation of greater areas by medium smallholders than by resource-poor smallholders. Tractors have also facilitated the intensification of crop production per unit of land among very small farmers, enabling mechanization growth despite the continued decline in farm size, although these farmers may not have benefited as much as medium smallholders. Potential future research areas with policy relevance include mitigating accessibility constraints to tractor custom hiring services, identifying appropriate regulatory policies for mechanization, and providing complementary support to some smallholders who may not fully benefit from tractor adoption alone.

This framework presents ten interrelated principles/elements to guide Sustainable Agricultural Mechanization in Africa (SAMA). Further, it presents the technical issues to be considered under SAMA and the options to be analysed at the country and sub regional levels. The ten key elements required in a framework for SAMA are as follows: The analysis in the framework calls for a specific approach, involving learning from other parts of the world where significant transformation of the agricultural mechanization sector has already occurred within a three-to-four decade time frame, and developing policies and programmes to realize Africa’s aspirations of Zero Hunger by 2025. This approach entails the identification and prioritization of relevant and interrelated elements to help countries develop strategies and practical development plans that create synergies in line with their agricultural transformation plans. Given the unique characteristics of each country and the diverse needs of Africa due to the ecological heterogeneity and the wide range of farm sizes, the framework avoids being prescriptive.