سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی دانشگاه شهید بهشتی

ویسی, هادی, ولی الهی بیشه, آناهیتا, مهدوی دامغانی, عبدالمجید, خرم دل, سرور. (1398). ارزیابی مقایسه ای انتشارگازهای گلخانه ای از مزارع تحت سرپرستی مردان و زنان در شهر بابل استان مازندران ایران. , 17(1), 211-238. doi: 10.29252/envs.17.1.211
هادی ویسی; آناهیتا ولی الهی بیشه; عبدالمجید مهدوی دامغانی; سرور خرم دل. "ارزیابی مقایسه ای انتشارگازهای گلخانه ای از مزارع تحت سرپرستی مردان و زنان در شهر بابل استان مازندران ایران". , 17, 1, 1398, 211-238. doi: 10.29252/envs.17.1.211
ویسی, هادی, ولی الهی بیشه, آناهیتا, مهدوی دامغانی, عبدالمجید, خرم دل, سرور. (1398). 'ارزیابی مقایسه ای انتشارگازهای گلخانه ای از مزارع تحت سرپرستی مردان و زنان در شهر بابل استان مازندران ایران', , 17(1), pp. 211-238. doi: 10.29252/envs.17.1.211
ویسی, هادی, ولی الهی بیشه, آناهیتا, مهدوی دامغانی, عبدالمجید, خرم دل, سرور. ارزیابی مقایسه ای انتشارگازهای گلخانه ای از مزارع تحت سرپرستی مردان و زنان در شهر بابل استان مازندران ایران. , 1398; 17(1): 211-238. doi: 10.29252/envs.17.1.211

ارزیابی مقایسه ای انتشارگازهای گلخانه ای از مزارع تحت سرپرستی مردان و زنان در شهر بابل استان مازندران ایران

فصلنامه علوم محیطی
مقاله 13، دوره 17، شماره 1، فروردین 1398، صفحه 211-238    اصل مقاله (659.28 K)
نوع مقاله: Original Articles
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.29252/envs.17.1.211
نویسندگان
هادی ویسی* 1؛ آناهیتا ولی الهی بیشه2؛ عبدالمجید مهدوی دامغانی1؛ سرور خرم دل2
1گروه اگرواکولوژی، پژوهشکده علوم محیطی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران
2گروه زارعت، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران
چکیده
سابقه و هدف:
با توجه به تغییرات گسترده در ترکیب شیمیایی اتمسفر به علت انتشار گازهای گلخانه ای، اجماع جهانی بر این قرار است که اثرات تجمعی عامل انسانی بر انتشار گازهای گلخانه ای اساسی است. زنان نقش کلیدی در کشاورزی دارند، اما شکاف و خلایی در رابطه با مطالعات با محوریت جنسیت بر روی اثرات معنی دار کشاورزی بر انتشار کربن طی فرایند تولید وجود دارد. لذا تحلیل موشکافانه تر نحوه تاثیر عامل جنسیت بر انتشار گازهای گلخانه ای ضرورت دارد. در این رابطه، مطالعه حاضر اثرات  جنسیت کشاورزان را بر پتانسیل انتشار گازهای گلخانه ای در نظام های تولید برنج طی سال های 2014-2015 در شهر بابل در استان مازندران- ایران بررسی کرده است.  بدین منظور میزان انتشار از مزارع برنج تحت سرپرستی زنان و مردان با استفاده از شاخص درونداد (kg.C.equivalent.ha−1)  و برونداد (kg.C.equivalent.ha−1)، پایداری و کارایی برآورد گردید. 
مواد و روش ­ها:
داده ها با استفاده از پرسشنامه و از طریق مصاحبه رو در رو با 120 نفر از کشاورزان مرد (60 نفر) و زن (60) جمع آوری شد. از نظر روش شناسی، روش پانل بین دولتی تغیرات اقلیمی  برای محاسبه انتشار گازهای گلخانه ای از هر مزرعه به گار گرفته شد.  هر گاز گلخانه ای مانند دی اکسید کربن، متان، و اکسید نیترو یک پتانسیل انتشار دارد که بر دی اکسید کربن اثر گرمایشی نسبی دارد.  میران انتشارها بر اساس یک گاز مرجع مانند دی اکسید کربن یا معادل آن گزارش می شود. روش به حد و مرز مزرعه محدود بود و داده ها در یک صفحات جداگانه وارد گردید که و مقادیر مرجع CH4  و N2O برای هر مزرعه محاسبه گردید. شاخص پایداری از طریق ارزیابی تغییرات موقتی در نسبت درونداد به برونداد کربن برای تعیین سهم اثرات عامل انسانی بر روی انتشار گازهای گلخانه ای در مزارع تحت سرپرستی زنان و مردان برآورد گردید.
  نتایج و بحث:
نتایج بیانگر تفاوت قابل ملاحظه بین مزارع مردان و زنان از لحاظ انتشار گازهای گلخانه­ ای می­ باشد (به ترتیب 2930.31 و  kg.CO2.equivalent.ha-3291.135  به ترتیب برای مزارع زنان و مردان).  علت اصلی استفاده بیشتر نهاده ها در مزارع مردان بود.  سهم غالب پتانسیل انتشار گازهای گلخانه ای برای مزارع مردان و زنان ناشی از استفاده از سوخت های فسیلی، ماشین آلات و کودهای نیتروژنه بود.  برای مزارع زنان شاخص کارایی کربن و پایداری کربن به ترتیب 3.88 و 2.88 و برای مزارع مردان 3.55 و 2.55 بود.
نتیجه ­گیری:
بالاترین سهم در انتشار گازهای گلخانه ای به انتشار ناشی از سوخت های فسیلی در هر دوی مزارع مردان و زنان اختصاص داشت.  که این موضوع به علت استفاده از پمپ­ های دیزلی قدیمی آب، تردد بیش از حد ماشین آلات در بوم نظام­ های کشاورزی و عدم انطباق بین میزان برق مصرفی با عملکرد آبزارالات و همچنین نیازمندی ­های مزارع زنان و قیمت نسبتا پایین سوخت فسیلی بود. در رابطه با این نتایج، می توان نتیجه گیری کرد که الگوهای استفاده از منابع برای استقرار،تولید، فرآوری و حمل و نقل در مزارع برنج با ویژگی های مردان انطباق دارد. زنان مانند مردان از ماشین آلات و ابزارهایی استفاده می کنند که از سوخت های فسیلی زیاد را مصرف می ­نمایند، هر چند مزارع زنان کوچک تر بود و انرژی بیشتر تلف می ­شد که به نوبه خود سبب افزایش سطح انتشار می گردد.  این یافته ­ها نشان می ­دهد که در مزارع زنان گازهای گلخانه ­ای کمتری تولید می شود و با روش ­هایی که بیشتر دوست دار محیط زیست هستند از نهاده ها استفاده می ­گردد. سرانجام بر اساس نتایج، چند بسته سیاستی نرم مانند طراحی برنامه توسعه ظرفیت حساس به جنسیت با هدف نشان دادن سهم کشاورزان در انتشار گازهای گلخانه ای از سیستم های کشاورزی بر اساس جنسیت، پیشنهاد گردید.   
کلیدواژه‌ها
جنسیت؛ گازهای کلخانه؛ تولید برنج؛ پتانسیل گرمایش جهانی
عنوان مقاله [English]
Comparative assessment of on-farm greenhouse gases emission from male-headed and female-headed rice farms in Babol county (Mazandaran province, Iran)
نویسندگان [English]
Hadi Veisi1؛ Anahita Valiollahi2؛ Abdol Majid Mahdavi Damghani1؛ Surror Khoramdel2
1Department of Agroecology, Environmental Sciences Research Institute, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
2Department of Agronomy, College of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
چکیده [English]
 Introduction:
Since the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) has changed the chemical composition of the atmosphere, a wide global consensus has emerged on the anthropogenic accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere. Women have a vital role in agriculture, but the gap in gender-based studies on the significant effects of agriculture on carbon emissions through production has not yet been filled. Therefore, a detailed analysis of how the gender factor affects GHGs emission is essential. In this sense, the present study investigated the effect of farmers' gender on global warming potential (GWP) in rice production systems during 2014-2015 in Babol County in Mazandaran Province, Iran. To this end, GHG emissions from male- and female-head rice farms were compared using the carbon input (kg.C.equivalent.ha−1) and output (kg.C.equivalent.ha−1), sustainability indices, and carbon efficiency.
Material and methods:
The data was gathered from 120 rice farmers (60 males and 60 females) through questionnaires and face-to-face interviews. The methodology of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was used to calculate the GHGs emission of each farm. Each GHG such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O) has GWP, which is the warming influence relative to that of carbon dioxide. Emissions were measured in terms of a reference gas, CO2 and reported based on CO2 equivalent. The method was restricted to a farm boundary and extracted into spreadsheets, which compute the baseline CH4 and N2O emissions for each farm. The indices of sustainability were estimated by assessing the temporary changes in output/input or (output-input)/input ratios of C to determine the share of anthropogenic GHGs emission in the atmosphere to determine the intensity of energy flow, carbon savings, and GHG emissions from women-headed and men-headed rice farms.
Results and discussion:
The results demonstrated considerable differences between farms headed by women and headed by men in terms of GWP (2930.31 and 3291.35 kg.CO2.equivalent.ha-1 for female-headed and male-headed farms, respectively) since more agricultural inputs were employed in farms headed by men. The dominant share of GWP for farms headed by men and women from the highest to the lowest was due to fossil fuels, machinery, and N fertilizers. The indices of carbon efficiency and carbon sustainability were respectively 3.88 and 2.88 in farms headed by women, and 3.55 and 2.55 in farms headed by men.
Conclusion:
The largest proportion of GHGs emission was due to fossil fuels in both female-headed and male-headed farms. This was attributed to outdated diesel pumps, excessive machinery traffic in agroecosystems, incompatibility between the power and performance of the equipment with the requirements of female-headed farms, and the relatively low price of fossil fuels. In line with these results, it can be concluded that resource-use patterns for the establishment, production, harvesting, and transportation in the rice fields are compatible with landscapes and masculine norms. Females, like males, used machinery and tools that consumed large amounts of fossil fuels; however, female-headed farms were smaller and wasted more energy, which in turn increased the level of mitigation. The findings suggested that farms by women produced fewer GHGs because the carbon input was used in a more environment-friendly manner than in the male-headed farms. Finally, several “soft” policies, such as gender-sensitive capacity development programs, are proposed to address the share of farmers in the emission of GHGs from subsistence farming systems on a gender basis.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
Gender, Greenhouse gases emission, Rice production, Global warming potential
مراجع
  1. Agha Alikhani, M., Kazemi-Poshtmasari, H. and Habibzadeh, F., 2013. Energy use pattern in rice production: A case study from Mazandaran province, Iran. Energy Conversion and Management. 69, 157-162.
  2. Alston, M., 2014. Gender mainstreaming and climate change. In "Women's Studies International Forum"., Elsevier. 47, 287-294..
  3. Bailey, B.K., 1994. Methods of Social Research. The Free Press Cllier-MacMilan Publishers, New York.
  4. Banaeian, N. and Zangeneh, M., 2011. Study on energy efficiency in corn production of Iran. Energy. 36, 5394-5402.
  5. Bautista, E.G. and Minowa, T., ……… Analysis of the energy for different rice production systems in the Philippines. Philippine Agricultural Scientist. 93, 346-357.
  6. Birah, A., Srivastava, R., Chand, S., and Ahmed, S. Z., 2016. Role of Women in Pest Management in Andaman. Indian Research Journal of Extension Education. 11, 79-82.
  7. Bisheh, A.V., Veisi, H., Liaghati, H., Mahdavi Damghani, A.M. and Kambouzia, J., 2017. Embedding gender factor in energy input–output analysis of paddy production systems in Mazandaran province, Iran. Energy, Ecology and Environment. 2, 214-224.
  8. Bockari-Gevao, S. M., Bin Wan Ismail, W.I., Yahya, A. and Wan, C.C., 2005. Analysis of energy consumption in lowland rice-based cropping system of Malaysia. Energy. 27, 820.
  9. BRIDGE, 2014. Gender and Food Security: Towards gender-just food and nutrition security (Overview Report). Brighton, UK: Institute of Development Studies.
  10. Carr, M. and Hartl, M., 2010. "Lightening the load: Labour-saving technologies and practices for rural women," International Fund for Agricultural Development.
  11. Chauhan, N.S., Mohapatra, P.K. and Pandey, K.P., 2006. Improving energy productivity in paddy production through benchmarking—an application of data envelopment analysis. Energy Conversion and Management. 47, 1063-1085.
  12. Chen, X.-P., Cui, Z.-L., Vitousek, P.M., Cassman, K.G., Matson, P.A., Bai, J. S., Meng, Q. F., Hou, P., Yue, S. C. and Römheld, V., 2011. Integrated soil–crop system management for food security. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 108, 6399-6404.
  13. Chen, X., Cui, Z., Fan, M., Vitousek, P., Zhao, M., Ma, W., Wang, Z., Zhang, W., Yan, X. and Yang, J., 2014. Producing more grain with lower environmental costs. Nature. 514, 486-489.
  14. Cheng, K., Pan, G., Smith, P., Luo, T., Li, L., Zheng, J., Zhang, X., Han, X. and Yan, M., 2011. Carbon footprint of China's crop production—An estimation using agro-statistics data over 1993–2007. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 142, 231-237.
  15. Clark, M. S., Horwath, W. R., Shennan, C. and Scow, K. M., 1998. Changes in soil chemical properties resulting from organic and low-input farming practices. Agronomy Journal. 90, 662-671.
  16. Clark, M. S., Horwath, W. R., Shennan, C., Scow, K. M., Lantni, W. T. and Ferris, H., 1999. Nitrogen, weeds and water as yield-limiting factors in conventional, low-input, and organic tomato systems. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 73, 257-270.
  17. Dadzie, S. K. and Dasmani, I., 2010. Gender difference and farm level efficiency: Metafrontier production function approach. Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics. 2, 441-451.
  18. Dankelman, I., 2002. Climate change: Learning from gender analysis and women's experiences of organising for sustainable development. Gender and Development. 10, 21-29.
  19. Davidson, E.A., 2009. The contribution of manure and fertilizer nitrogen to atmospheric nitrous oxide since 1860. Nature Geoscience. 2, 659-662.
  20. Denton, F., 2002. Climate change vulnerability, impacts, and adaptation: why does gender matter? Gender and Development. 10, 10-20.
  21. Denton, F., 2004. Gender and climate change: Giving the “latecomer” a head start. IDS Bulletin. 35, 42-49.
  22. Doss, C. R., Kovarik, C., Peterman, A., Quisumbing, A. R., and van den Bold, M. (2013). Gender inequalities in ownership and control of land in Africa: myths versus reality.
  23. Doss, C. R., and Morris, M.L., 2000. How does gender affect the adoption of agricultural innovations? Agricultural Economics. 25, 27-39.
  24. Drinkwater, L. E., Wagoner, P. and Sarrantonio, M., 1998. Legume-based cropping systems have reduced carbon and nitrogen losses. Nature. 396, 262-265.
  25. Dubey, A. and Lal, R., 2009. Carbon footprint and sustainability of agricultural production systems in Punjab, India, and Ohio, USA. Journal of Crop Improvement. 23, 332-350.
  26. Dyer, J. and Desjardins, R., 2005. Analysis of trends in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel use for farm fieldwork related to harvesting annual crops and hay, changing tillage practices and reduced summer fallow in Canada. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture. 25, 141-155.
  27. Eckard, R., 2002. Public concerns, Environmental Standards and Agricultural Trade. Australian Veterinary Journal. 80, 710-710.
  28. Ergas, C. and York, R., 2012. Women’s status and carbon dioxide emissions: A quantitative cross-national analysis. Social Science Research. 41, 965-976.
  29. Esk, F., Bahrami, H. and Asakereh, A., 2011. Energy survey of mechanized and traditional rice production system in Mazandaran Province of Iran. African Journal of Agricultural Research. 6, 2565-2570.
  30. FAO, 2010. Gender and Food Security - Agriculture – Statistics. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rom.
  31. FAO, 2011. Women in Agriculture: Closing the gender gap for development. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rom.
  32. Foley, J., 2014. A five-step plan to feed the world. Natl Geogr. 225, 27-60.
  33. Galloway, J. N., Townsend, A.R., Erisman, J.W., Bekunda, M., Cai, Z., Freney, J. R., Martinelli, L. A., Seitzinger, S.P. and Sutton, M.A., 2008. Transformation of the nitrogen cycle: recent trends, questions, and potential solutions. Science. 320, 889-892.
  34. Ghorbani, R., Mondani, F., Amirmoradi, S., Feizi, H., Khorramdel, S., Teimouri, M., Sanjani, S., Anvarkhah, S. and Aghel, H., 2011. A case study of energy use and economical analysis of irrigated and dryland wheat production systems. Applied Energy. 88, 283-288.
  35. Gilbert, R.A., Sakala, W.D. and Benson, T.D., 2013. Gender analysis of a nationwide cropping system trial survey in Malawi.
  36. Grin, J., Rotmans, J. and Schot, J., 2010. "Transitions to sustainable development: new directions in the study of long term transformative change," Routledge.
  37. Guinee, J. B., Heijungs, R., Huppes, G., Zamagni, A., Masoni, P., Buonamici, R., Ekvall, T. and Rydberg, T., 2010. Life cycle assessment: past, present, and future†. Environmental science & technology. 45, 90-96.
  38. Haas, G., Deittert, C. and Koepke, U., 2007. Farm-gate nutrient balance assessment of organic dairy farms at different intensity levels in Germany. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems. 22, 223-232.
  39. Hadi, S., 2006. Energy efficiency and ecological sustainability in conventional and integrated potato production system. In "Proceeding of the IASTED conference on advanced technology in the environmental field, Lanzarote, Canary Islands, Spain".
  40. Haile, M., Abay, F. and Waters-Bayer, A., 2001. Joining forces to discover and celebrate local innovation in land husbandry in Tigray, Ethiopia. Farmer innovation in Africa: a source of inspiration for agricultural development. 58-73.
  41. Hillier, J., Hawes, C., Squire, G., Hilton, A., Wale, S. and Smith, P., 2009a. The carbon footprints of food crop production. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability. 7, 107-118.
  42. Hillier, J., Whittaker, C., Dailey, G., Aylott, M., Casella, E., Richter, G. M., Riche, A., Murphy, R., Taylor, G. and Smith, P., 2009b) Greenhouse gas emissions from four bioenergy crops in England and Wales: integrating spatial estimates of yield and soil carbon balance in life cycle analyses. Gcb Bioenergy. 1, 267-281.
  43. Hokazono, S. and Hayashi, K., 2012. Variability in environmental impacts during conversion from conventional to organic farming: A comparison among three rice production systems in Japan. Journal of Cleaner Production. 28, 101-112.
  44. Houghton, J.T., Ding, Y., Griggs, D.J., Noguer, M., van der Linden, P. J., Dai, X., Maskell, K. and Johnson, C., 2001. Climate change 2001: the scientific basis.
  45. Huang, X., Chen, C., Qian, H., Chen, M., Deng, A., Zhang, J. and Zhang, W., 2017. Quantification for carbon footprint of agricultural inputs of grains cultivation in China since 1978. Journal of Cleaner Production. 142, 1629-1637.
  46. Hülsbergen, K.-J., Feil, B., Biermann, S., Rathke, G.-W., Kalk, W.-D. and Diepenbrock, W., 2001. A method of energy balancing in crop production and its application in a long-term fertilizer trial. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment. 86, 303-321.
  47. IPCC, 1995. Climate change, the science of climate change. In: Houghton, J.T., Meira Filho, L.G., Callander, B.A., Harris, N., Kattenberg, A., Maskell, K. (Eds.), Intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, UK.
  48. IPCC, 2007. ‘‘Summary for Policymakers’’ in climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. In: Parry, M.L., Canziani, O.F., Palutikof, J.P., van der Linden, P.J., Hanson, C.E. (Eds.), Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, UK, p. 976.
  49. Iqbal, M. T., 2007. Energy input and output for production of boro rice in Bangladesh. EJEAFChe 6, 2144-2149.
  50. Isaksson, L.H., 2005. Abatement costs in response to the Swedish charge on nitrogen oxide emissions. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 50, 102-120.
  51. Johnson, M. D., Rutland, C. T., Richardson, J. W., Outlaw, J. L. and Nixon, C.J., 2016. Greenhouse Gas Emissions from US Grain Farms. Journal of Crop Improvement. 1-31.
  52. Jost, C., Kyazze, F., Naab, J., Neelormi, S., Kinyangi, J., Zougmore, R., Aggarwal, P., Bhatta, G., Chaudhury, M. and Tapio-Bistrom, M.L., 2016. Understanding gender dimensions of agriculture and climate change in smallholder farming communities. Climate and Development. 8, 133-144.
  53. Ju, X.-T., Xing, G. X., Chen, X.P., Zhang, S. L., Zhang, L. J., Liu, X. J., Cui, Z. L., Yin, B., Christie, P. and Zhu, Z.-L., 2009. Reducing environmental risk by improving N management in intensive Chinese agricultural systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 106, 3041-3046.
  54. Kazemi, H., Kamkar, B., Lakzaei, S., Badsar, M. and Shahbyki, M., 2015. Energy flow analysis for rice production in different geographical regions of Iran. Energy. 84, 390-396.
  55. Kerr, R. B., Snapp, S., Chirwa, M., Shumba, L. and Msachi, R., 2007. Participatory research on legume diversification with Malawian smallholder farmers for improved human nutrition and soil fertility. Experimental Agriculture. 43, 437-453.
  56. Khoshnevisan, B., Rafiee, S., Omid, M. and Mousazadeh, H., 2013. Applying data envelopment analysis approach to improve energy efficiency and reduce GHG (greenhouse gas) emission of wheat production. Energy. 58, 588-593.
  57. Kronsell, A., 2013. Gender and transition in climate governance. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions. 7, 1-15.
  58. Lal, R., 2004. Carbon emission from farm operations. Environment international 30, 981-990.
  59. Li, X., Hu, C., Delgado, J.A., Zhang, Y., and Ouyang, Z. (2007). Increased nitrogen use efficiencies as a key mitigation alternative to reduce nitrate leaching in north china plain. Agricultural Water Management. 89, 137-147.
  60. Liu, Y., Zhou, Z., Zhang, X., Xu, X., Chen, H. and Xiong, Z., 2015. Net global warming potential and greenhouse gas intensity from the double rice system with integrated soil–crop system management: A three-year field study. Atmospheric Environment. 116, 92-101.
  61. Ma, B., Liang, B., Biswas, D.K., Morrison, M. J. and McLaughlin, N. B., 2012. The carbon footprint of maize production as affected by nitrogen fertilizer and maize-legume rotations. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems. 94, 15-31.
  62. Mancini, F., Van Bruggen, A.H., Jiggins, J.L., Ambatipudi, A.C. and Murphy, H., 2005. Acute pesticide poisoning among female and male cotton growers in India. International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health. 11, 221-232.
  63. Maraseni, T. N., Cockfield, G. and Apan, A., 2007. A comparison of greenhouse gas emissions from inputs into farm enterprises in Southeast Queensland, Australia. Journal of Environmental Science and Health Part A. 42, 11-18
  64. McCright, A. M.,and Dunlap, R.E., 2000) Challenging global warming as a social problem: An analysis of the conservative movement's counter-claims. Social problems. 47, 499-522.
  65. Ministry of Jihad-e-Agriculture, 2015. Statistics report of 2014-2015 years. Statistics and Information Office of Jihad-e-Agriculture Iran, Tehran.
  66. Mohammadi, A., Rafiee, S., Jafari, A., Dalgaard, T., Knudsen, M.T., Keyhani, A., Mousavi-Avval, S.H. and Hermansen, J.E., 2013. Potential greenhouse gas emission reductions in soybean farming: a combined use of life cycle assessment and data envelopment analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production. 54, 89-100.
  67. Mohammadi, A., Rafiee, S., Jafari, A., Keyhani, A., Mousavi-Avval, S. H. and Nonhebel, S., 2014. Energy use efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions of farming systems in north Iran. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 30, 724-733.
  68. Mohammadi, A., Tabatabaeefar, A., Shahin, S., Rafiee, S. and Keyhani, A., 2008. Energy use and economical analysis of potato production in Iran a case study: Ardabil province. Energy Conversion and Management. 49, 3566-3570.
  69. Nabavi-Pelesaraei, A., Abdi, R., Rafiee, S. and Taromi, K., 2014. Applying data envelopment analysis approach to improve energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emission of rice production. Engineering in Agriculture, Environment and Food. 7, 155-162.
  70. Naser, H. M., Nagata, O., Tamura, S. and Hatano, R., 2007. Methane emissions from five paddy fields with different amounts of rice straw application in central Hokkaido, Japan. Soil Science & Plant Nutrition. 53, 95-101.
  71. Nassiri, S. M. and Singh, S., 2009. Study on energy use efficiency for paddy crop using data envelopment analysis (DEA) technique. Applied Energy. 86, 1320-1325.
  72. Nemecek, T., Hayer, F., Bonnin, E., Carrouee, B., Schneider, A. and Vivier, C., 2015. Designing eco-efficient crop rotations using life cycle assessment of crop combinations. European Journal of Agronomy. 65, 40-51.
  73. Njuki, J., Waithanji, E., Sakwa, B., Kariuki, J., Mukewa, E. and Ngige, J., 2014. A qualitative assessment of gender and irrigation technology in Kenya and Tanzania. Gender, Technology and Development. 18, 303-340.
  74. Noordzij, M., Tripepi, G., Dekker, F. W., Zoccali, C., Tanck, M. W. and Jager, K.J., 2010. Sample size calculations: basic principles and common pitfalls. Nephrology dialysis transplantation. 25, 1388-1393.
  75. OECD. (2001). Environmental Indicators for Agriculture. http://www.oecd.org/tad/sustainable agriculture/40680869.
  76. Pandey, D., Agrawal, M. and Bohra, J.S., 2013. Impact of four tillage permutations in rice–wheat system on GHG performance of wheat cultivation through carbon footprinting. Ecological engineering. 60, 261-270.
  77. Parveen, S., 2008. Access of rural women to productive resources in Bangladesh: a pillar for promoting their empowerment. International Journal of Rural Studies 15.
  78. Pathak, H., Jain, N., Bhatia, A., Patel, J. and Aggarwal, P.K., 2010. Carbon footprints of Indian food items. Agriculture, ecosystems & environmen.t. 139, 66-73.
  79. Peterman, A., Behrman, J.A. and Quisumbing, A.R., 2014. A review of empirical evidence on gender differences in nonland agricultural inputs, technology, and services in developing countries. In "Gender in Agriculture", pp. 145-186. Springer.
  80. Pimentel, D. and Burgess, M., 2014. Environmental and economic costs of the application of pesticides primarily in the United States. In "Integrated pest management", pp. 47-71. Springer.
  81. Pishgar-Komleh, S., Ghahderijani, M. and Sefeedpari, P., 2012. Energy consumption and CO 2 emissions analysis of potato production based on different farm size levels in Iran. Journal of Cleaner production. 33, 183-191.
  82. Pishgar-Komleh, S., Sefeedpari, P. and Rafiee, S., 2011. Energy and economic analysis of rice production under different farm levels in Guilan province of Iran. Energy. 36, 5824-5831.
  83. Ponsioen, T. and Blonk, T., 2012. Calculating land use change in carbon footprints of agricultural products as an impact of current land use. Journal of Cleaner Production. 28, 120-126.
  84. Poudel, D., Horwath, W., Mitchell, J. and Temple, S., 2001. Impacts of cropping systems on soil nitrogen storage and loss. Agricultural Systems. 68, 253-268.
  85. Pratibha, G., Srinivas, I., Rao, K., Raju, B., Thyagaraj, C., Korwar, G., Venkateswarlu, B., Shanker, A.K., Choudhary, D.K. and Rao, K.S., 2015. Impact of conservation agriculture practices on energy use efficiency and global warming potential in rainfed pigeonpea–castor systems. European Journal of Agronomy. 66, 30-40.
  86. Qiao, Y., Miao, S., Han, X., You, M., Zhu, X. and Horwath, W.R., 2014. The effect of fertilizer practices on N balance and global warming potential of maize–soybean–wheat rotations in Northeastern China. Field Crops Research. 161, 98-106.
  87. Rassam, G., Poorshirazi, S., Dadkhah, A. and Gholami, M., 2015. ON THE STUDY OF GHG (GREENHOUSE GAS) EMISSIONS IN RICE PRODUCTION SYSTEMS IN DARGAZ, IRAN. Annales of West University of Timisoara. Series of Biology. 18, 115.
  88. Ravon, L. (2014). "Resilience in Times of Food Insecurity: Reflecting on the experiences of women’s organizations," Oxfam Canada.
  89. Rosa, E. A. and Dietz, T., 2012. Human drivers of national greenhouse-gas emissions. Nature Climate Change. 2, 581-586.
  90. Rother, H.A., 2000. Influences of pesticide risk perception on the health of rural South African women and children. African Newsletter on Occupational Health and Safety. 10, 11.
  91. Sefeedpari, P., Ghahderijani, M. and Pishgar-Komleh, S., 2013. Assessment the effect of wheat farm sizes on energy consumption and CO2 emission. Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy. 5, 023131.
  92. Sekhavatjou, M., Alhashemi, A.H., Daemolzekr, E. and Sardari, A., 2011. Opportunities of GHGs emission minimization through processes improvement in Iranian oil industries. Energy Procedia. 4, 2104-2112.
  93. Soltani, A., Rajabi, M., Zeinali, E. and Soltani, E., 2013. Energy inputs and greenhouse gases emissions in wheat production in Gorgan, Iran. Energy. 50, 54-61.
  94. Tatlıdil, F. F., Boz, I. and Tatlidil, H., 2009. Farmers’ perception of sustainable agriculture and its determinants: a case study in Kahramanmaras province of Turkey. Environment, development and sustainability. 11, 1091-1106.
  95. Team, S. and Doss, C., 2011. "The role of women in agriculture. Agricultural development economics division. Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations." working paper. 11: 02.
  96. Thapa, S., 2008. Gender differentials in agricultural productivity: evidence from Nepalese household data. Munich Personal ReREC Archive, MRPA Paper.
  97. Tilman, D., Cassman, K.G., Matson, P.A., Naylor, R. and Polasky, S., 2002. Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature. 418, 671.
  98. Tubiello, F. N., Salvatore, M., Rossi, S., Ferrara, A., Fitton, N. and Smith, P., 2013. The FAOSTAT database of greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture. Environmental Research Letters. 8, 015009.
  99. Tzilivakis, J., Warner, D., May, M., Lewis, K. and Jaggard, K., 2005. An assessment of the energy inputs and greenhouse gas emissions in sugar beet (Beta vulgaris) production in the UK. Agricultural Systems. 85, 101-119.
  100. Udry, C., Hoddinott, J., Alderman, H. and Haddad, L., 1995. Gender differentials in farm productivity: implications for household efficiency and agricultural policy. Food policy. 20, 407-423.
  101. Ungar, S., 1992. The rise and (relative) decline of global warming as a social problem. The Sociological Quarterly. 33(4), 483-501.
  102. USDA NASS, 2012. The 2012 Census of Agriculture. Washington, DC: United States Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service.
  103. Van Groenigen, J., Velthof, G., Oenema, O., Van Groenigen, K. and Van Kessel, C., 2010. Towards an agronomic assessment of N2O emissions: a case study for arable crops. European Journal of Soil Science. 61, 903-913.
  104. Vitousek, P. M., Mooney, H. A., Lubchenco, J. and Melillo, J.M., 1997. Human domination of Earth's ecosystems. Science. 277, 494-499.
  105. Wamukonya, N. and Skutsch, M., 2002. Gender angle to the climate change negotiations. Energy & environment. 13, 115-124.
  106. West, T. O. and Marland, G., 2002. A synthesis of carbon sequestration, carbon emissions, and net carbon flux in agriculture: comparing tillage practices in the United States. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 91, 217-232.
  107. Women, U., 2015. The Cost of the Gender Gap in Agricultural Productivity in Malawi, Tanzania, and Uganda.
  108. World Bank, 2005. Agricultural Growth for the Poor: An Agenda for Development. Directions in Development Series. Washington, DC: World Bank.
  109. World Bank, 2009. Gender in agriculture source book. Washington, DC: World Bank.
  110. World Bank, 2011. World Development Report 2012: Gender equality and development. Washington, DC: World Bank.
  111. Yagi, K., Tsuruta, H. and Minami, K., 1997. Possible options for mitigating methane emission from rice cultivation. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems. 49, 213-220.
  112. Yang, S.M., Wang, P., Suo, D.R., Malhi, S., Chen, Y., Guo, Y. J. and Zhang, D.W., 2011. Short-Term Irrigation Level Effects on Residual Nitrate in Soil Profile and N Balance from Long-Term Manure and Fertilizer Applications in the Arid Areas of Northwest China. Communications in soil science and plant analysis. 42, 790-802.
  113. Yousefi, M., Damghani, A.M. and Khoramivafa, M., 2014a. Energy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions and assessment of sustainability index in corn agroecosystems of Iran. Science of the Total Environment. 493, 330-335.
  114. Yousefi, M., Khoramivafa, M. and Mondani, F., 2014b. Integrated evaluation of energy use, greenhouse gas emissions and global warming potential for sugar beet (Beta vulgaris) agroecosystems in Iran. Atmospheric Environment. 92, 501-505.
  115. Zhang, F., Cui, Z., Fan, M., Zhang, W., Chen, X. and Jiang, R., 2011. Integrated soil–crop system management: reducing environmental risk while increasing crop productivity and improving nutrient use efficiency in China. Journal of Environmental Quality. 40, 1051-1057.
  116. Zhang, W.F., Dou, Z.X., He, P., Ju, X.T., Powlson, D., Chadwick, D., Norse, D., Lu, Y.L., Zhang, Y. and Wu, L., 2013. New technologies reduce greenhouse gas emissions from nitrogenous fertilizer in China. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 110, 8375-8380.
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 8,305
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 3,494