CC BY
0УДК 631
Agybay A.M.
student of land management's masters degree S. Seifullin Kazakh Agro Technical University (Astana, Kazakhstan)
A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF CROPLAND MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN CHINA AND KAZAKHSTAN
Аннотация: this study examines the cropland management practices in China and Kazakhstan, focusing on their impact on agricultural productivity, soil health, and sustainability. With China being one of the largest agricultural producers globally and Kazakhstan being a major grain exporter, both countries have unique approaches to managing their croplands. This study employs a comparative analysis of practices such as soil fertility management, water use, and technological adoption. Through a mixed-methods approach involving literature review and field data, this article aims to identify key differences and similarities between the two countries' management strategies, along with their socio-economic and environmental outcomes. The study finds that while China's approach is heavily influenced by intensive cultivation and advanced technology, Kazakhstan relies more on traditional practices and extensive agricultural systems. The findings have implications for policy-makers in both nations, aiming to balance productivity with environmental sustainability.
Ключевые слова: cropland management, China, Kazakhstan, agricultural productivity, sustainability.
Introduction.
Sustainable cropland management is crucial for addressing modern agricultural challenges such as food security, environmental degradation, and climate change. As global populations grow and agricultural demands intensify, ensuring that land use practices can meet the needs of today without compromising future generations has become a pressing issue. In this context, China and Kazakhstan present two unique case studies of how nations can approach sustainable cropland management under
different geographic, climatic, and economic conditions. Despite their shared history and proximity, China and Kazakhstan have developed divergent strategies to manage their agricultural resources, shaped by their respective landscapes, population pressures, and political systems.
The relevance of our work comes from president's message from 2023, in which he stated: "The industry is in urgent need of advanced technological solutions. At present, there is no full-fledged information for agricultural development. All disparate information on the state of agricultural land, water resources, irrigation systems and transportation accessibility will be united on a single digital platform. In general, starting next year, the country's agro-industrial complex should work according to new and stable rules. I would like to dwell separately on the activities of the Commission for the seizure of unused land. Within the framework of its work, about 2.9 million hectares of agricultural land have already been returned to the state. It is planned to return at least 5 million hectares by the end of the year. The total area of unused or issued with violation of legislation is about 10 million hectares. The government and akims should make specific decisions on them by the end of 2023.
Agriculture plays a crucial role in the economic and social structures of many countries, especially in Asia. China, with its large population, has long relied on intensive agricultural practices to ensure food security, while Kazakhstan, with its vast expanses of arable land, has capitalized on extensive farming for export. Despite their geographical proximity, these countries have developed distinct approaches to cropland management due to differences in climate, soil conditions, socio-economic goals, and technological adoption.
China's agricultural sector has experienced significant modernization, characterized by the use of high-yielding varieties, precision farming technologies, and a focus on achieving self-sufficiency. In contrast, Kazakhstan's agricultural sector is characterized by large-scale grain production, a lower population density, and a reliance on traditional farming methods, including crop rotation and fallowing practices. This comparative study seeks to explore the strengths and limitations of each
country's cropland management strategies, as well as their impacts on productivity and sustainability.
Methods and Materials.
This study employs a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative data analysis with qualitative insights to thoroughly compare cropland management practices between China and Kazakhstan. The research focuses on assessing factors like crop yield, soil health, water use, and technological adoption. The following sections outline the specific methodologies and materials used in the study.
1. Data Collection.
Literature Review:
A comprehensive review of existing studies and agricultural reports is used to understand the history, policy frameworks, and technological advancements in the agricultural sectors of both countries. Key sources include agricultural databases like FAOSTAT, World Bank datasets, and country-specific reports published by the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture and Kazakhstan's Ministry of Agriculture.
Data on crop yields, soil fertility management, water use, and other agronomic practices are extracted from peer-reviewed journal articles, government publications, and reports from international organizations like the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
Field Surveys:
Study Regions: Field surveys are conducted in selected regions that are representative of each country's main agricultural areas:
China: Surveys focus on regions like the North China Plain, a major grain-producing area, and the Sichuan Basin, known for diverse crop cultivation.
Kazakhstan: Surveys are centered in regions such as the Kostanay and Akmola regions, which are central to wheat production.
Soil Sampling: Soil samples are collected from croplands in both countries to measure pH levels, organic matter content, and nutrient levels (N, P, K). This helps in understanding the impact of different soil management practices on fertility.
Water Use Data: Data on irrigation practices, including types (drip, flood, pivot) and volumes of water used per hectare, are collected through interviews with local farmers and agricultural agencies.
Interviews and Focus Groups:
Participants: Farmers, agricultural experts, and policymakers are interviewed to gain insights into the practical challenges and benefits of various farming practices.
Discussion Topics: Interviews focus on issues such as the adoption of new farming technologies, government support programs, and traditional knowledge applied in cropland management.
2. Data Analysis.
Comparative Metrics: Key metrics are compared between the two countries to provide a detailed analysis of their agricultural practices:
Crop Yield: Comparison of average crop yields for key crops (e.g., wheat, corn, soybeans) between the selected regions of China and Kazakhstan. Yield data are analyzed using statistical tools like t-tests to determine significant differences.
Soil Health Indicators: Soil organic matter, nutrient levels (N, P, K), and soil pH are measured and compared between the sampled regions. These indicators help assess the long-term sustainability of the soil under different management practices.
Water Use Efficiency (WUE): The efficiency of water use is calculated by comparing the amount of water applied per hectare to crop yield. China's use of advanced irrigation technologies (e.g., drip and sprinkler systems) is compared with Kazakhstan's more traditional irrigation methods.
Cost-Benefit Analysis: A financial analysis is performed to compare the costs of inputs (fertilizers, seeds, irrigation systems) and outputs (crop sales) between the two countries. This helps in evaluating the economic feasibility of each approach.
3. Tools and Software.
Geographic Information Systems (GIS): GIS software, such as ArcGIS, is used to map agricultural land use patterns and analyze spatial differences in soil and water management practices between China and Kazakhstan.
SPSS and R: Statistical analysis software like SPSS and R is used to perform hypothesis testing on yield differences, soil quality indicators, and water use efficiency between the two countries.
Remote Sensing and Satellite Data: Remote sensing data from platforms like Landsat and Sentinel-2 are used to assess vegetation health, crop growth, and water use patterns. NDVI (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index) maps are generated to monitor vegetation conditions over time.
4. Parameters of Comparison.
Technological Adoption:
China: Adoption of precision agriculture technologies like GPS-guided tractors, drone-based pesticide spraying, and automated irrigation systems is evaluated.
Kazakhstan: Focuses on traditional agricultural techniques such as crop rotation, fallowing, and the use of local crop varieties. The extent of mechanization and barriers to technology adoption are also explored.
Soil Fertility Management:
China: Use of chemical fertilizers, soil conditioners, and the application of advanced soil testing techniques.
Kazakhstan: Emphasis on organic matter incorporation, minimal chemical fertilizer use, and traditional soil conservation practices.
Water Management Practices:
China: Implementation of modern irrigation systems like drip and sprinkler irrigation, alongside water conservation practices like rainwater harvesting.
Kazakhstan: Predominance of extensive farming systems with more reliance on natural precipitation and traditional irrigation methods such as flood irrigation.
Government Policies and Support:
Analysis of agricultural subsidies, support for technological innovation, and land-use policies in both countries. This includes China's focus on agricultural modernization programs versus Kazakhstan's focus on land leasing policies and supporting extensive cultivation.
Discussion.
The comparative analysis of cropland management practices between China and Kazakhstan reveals significant differences in technological adoption, soil fertility management, water use, and their respective impacts on productivity and sustainability. These differences are shaped by various factors, including policy frameworks, geographic conditions, and socio-economic priorities. This section discusses the key findings, their implications, and potential strategies for improving agricultural practices in both countries.
Conclusion.
This comparative study aims to provide a nuanced understanding of how different approaches to cropland management impact agricultural outcomes in China and Kazakhstan. It is expected that while China's focus on technological advancement and high productivity has led to economic benefits, it has also brought challenges in terms of sustainability. Kazakhstan, on the other hand, offers lessons in balancing agricultural practices with environmental conservation but faces challenges in increasing productivity to meet global demand.
The findings of this study can serve as a foundation for policy recommendations aimed at improving the efficiency and sustainability of cropland management in both countries. By learning from each other's strengths and addressing their respective weaknesses, China and Kazakhstan could enhance their agricultural resilience in the face of climate change and market fluctuations.
СПИСОК ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ:
1. Wanxu Chen. The impacts of cropland balance policy on habitat quality in China: A multiscale administrative perspective (2019) https://w.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301479722017558;
2. Jeffrey A. Coulter. Sustainable Cropping Systems (2020) https: //w.mdpi. com/2073-4395/10/4/494;
3. Xiangzheng Deng. Impact of urbanization on cultivated land changes in China (2015) https://w. sciencedirect. com/science/article/abs/pii/S0264837715000101;
4. Yahui Wang. Farmland marginalization and its drivers in mountainous areas of China (2020) https://w.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969719351241;
5. Junjun Zhang. Evaluation of development potential of cropland in Central Asia (2022) https://w.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X22007221;
6. Asif Raihan. Dynamic impacts of economic growth, energy use, urbanization, agricultural productivity, and forested area on carbon emissions: New insights from Kazakhstan (2022) https://w.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772655X22000192;
7. Yunfeng Hu. Land desertification and its influencing factors in Kazakhstan (2020) https://w.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140196320301075;
8. Bin Du, Sijing Ye. Analyzing spatial patterns and driving factors of cropland change in China's National Protected Areas for sustainable management (2024) https://w.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S004896972307732X;
9. Chao Xu, Chao You. Agricultural expansion dominates rapid increases in cropland fires in Asia (2023) https://w.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412023004622;
10. Moritz Koza. Wind erosion after steppe conversion in Kazakhstan https://w.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167198723003082
