Republic of the Philippines

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHEASTERN PHILIPPINES

Graduate Studies of Agriculture and Related Sciences
Department of Agriculture and Biosystems Engineering
Apokon, Tagum City

Energy Use Analysis of Rainfed Lowland Corn Production in

Tagum City, Davao del Norte

By: Engr. Mizpah Amba, Engr. Hannah Mae Cobrado, Engr. April Joy C. Lascuña,
Engr. Drexand Perocho, Engr. Albert Orpiano, MSE – LAWREAT

I. Rationale

In terms of production in the world, Corn (Zea mays) is considered as the third

most important cereal, after wheat and rice (Beiragi, et al., 2011). It is used not only for

human consumption but also for animal feed and agricultural applications, which is why

it is a vital crop for the growth of the livestock and manufacturing industries.

Corn is one of the most important staple crops in the Philippines. It ranks second

to rice in the utilization of agricultural resources (ExcoNDE, 1975). Maize growing varies

depending on the environment and the production cycle is different in all areas of the

world. In the country, corn production is based on the landscape and topography of an

area. In 2019, the production volume of corn in the Philippines was almost eight million

metric tons, higher than the produced quantity of eight million metric tons in 2018

(Sanchez, 2020).

Since 1980s, the Philippines already recognized the need of agricultural

development and the importance of energies (mainly fertilizers, pesticides, fuels, and

irrigation) to support the increase in agricultural productivity (Garrity, et al., 2013).

However, an improvement in agricultural productivity is impossible if sufficient inputs

such as energy, improved seeds, fertilizers, and irrigation water are not available in a

1
timely manner and are wisely applied. With the current growth in the world's population,

energy use must be planned effectively. That is, the input elements need to be identified

to prescribe the most efficient methods for controlling them (Bockari-Gevao, et al.,

2005).

Energy needs in agriculture are classified into two classes, both direct and

indirect. Direct energy is required to perform various tasks related to crop production

processes such as land preparation, irrigation, intercultural operations, threshing,

harvesting and transportation of agricultural inputs and farm produce (Singh, 2000).

Direct energy is shown to be used directly in farms and in fields. Indirect energy on the

other hand, consists of the energy used in the manufacture, packaging and transport of

fertilizers, pesticides, and farm machinery (Kennedy, 2000; CAEEDAC, 2000) As the

name suggests, indirect energy is not used explicitly on the farm. Major indirect energy

products are fertilizers, seeds, equipment, and pesticides.

In order to optimize energy consumption in agriculture, it is vital to determine the

efficiency of methods and techniques used (Safa & Tabatabaeefar, 2002). It is important

to define the input elements in order to recommend the most effective methods for

controlling them (Bockari-Gevao, et al., 2005). Crop-yield is directly proportional to the

energy input (Srivastava, 1982).

Based on a report from the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), the country’s

self-sufficiency ratio (SSR) of corn in 2018 settled at 88.43%, down 5.91 percentage

points from the 99.34% in 2017 (Philippine Statistics Authority, 2019). This means that

79.8% of the domestic supply of corn came from the country’s own production. The

reduction in the SSRs of the commodity was due to the decrease in local production

while there was a strong rise in imports. Subsequently, based on the current PSA data,

2
Davao del Norte corn production in January to March 2018 dropped massively to 4,978

metric tons from 24,486 metric tons in October to December 2018 data. Area harvested

at 3,563 hectares trimmed down by 64 percent. Corn yield, at 1.40 metric tons per

hectare, dropped by 32% (Philippine Statistics Authority, 2019).

Declining corn sufficiency has now become a global battle due to a decrease in

corn production and an increase in demand. Boosting crop yields can tackle fast-growing

world population and consumption. Thus, energy planning is crucial and requires a

comprehensive analysis of energy inputs and outputs (Khan, et al., 2010).

Several studies on energy analysis of corn production have already been

conducted in different countries. In Sikkim, a state of northeastern India, the energy input

and output of corn production is about 4,386.435 and 25,700.9 MJ/ha, respectively. Land

preparation had the highest energy input (1,772.2 MJ/ha) in the farm operations which

accounts for 50% of the total energy input. Moreover, 25.6% (909.2 MJ/ha) energy was

consumed for weeding and interculture operation which is the second highest energy

consumption followed by the 17.4% (615.6 MJ/ha) for sowing operation. Harvesting and

transportation had consumed about 7.1% (250.3 MJ/ha) of the total energy input (Yadav,

et al., 2013).

Further, source-wise, the average human energy use in cultivation of maize crop

in Sikkim, India has been estimated as 1,445.624 MJ/ha (32.95%), the use of animal

energy was estimated as 1,174.346 MJ/ha (26.78%), the use of machine energy had

been found as 926.665 MJ/ha (21.1%) of the total energy input. Seed and farmyard

manure energy contributed to 750.88 MJ/ha (17.1%) and 88.92 MJ/ha (2.0%),

respectively (Yadav, et al., 2013).

3
 Another energy input-output analysis was carried out by Lorzadeh, et al. (2011)

in Shooshtar, Iran. It recorded that N fertilizer used in maize production systems had a

high share with 39.10% followed by diesel fuel energy with 37.82% of the total energy

input. Water for irrigation came in next with 9.31%. The lowest share of total energy was

recorded for human labor (0.57%) which is a renewable resource of energy. Total

energy input and output in maize production systems were 39,295.50 and 58,065 MJ/ha,

respectively. Likewise, the energy use efficiency, energy productivity, specific energy,

net energy of maize production systems were 1.48, 0.10 kg/MJ, 9.95 MJ/kg, and

18,769.5 MJ/ha, respectively (Lorzadeh, et al., 2011).

Efficient use of energy in agriculture is one of the principal requirements for

sustainable agricultural production. Nowadays, many are aiming for sustainable

agriculture, and the main challenge for it is to make agriculture productive and

sustainable. This can only be achievable through reducing the cost of agriculture by

greater productivity through the usage of inputs and higher returns to farmers by added

value in output catchments and through taking steps to reduce losses.

II. Significance of the Study

The researchers proposed to conduct a study that would identify and estimate

the energy usage in corn production. This study will help the researchers better

understand the scope and activities associated with corn farming in the province of

Tagum City, Davao del Norte. Furthermore, this research will allow the researchers to

test the cost efficiencies of corn farming and provide relevant information and assistance

to farmers to develop their practices and attain productivity at the most economical way

to become more globally competitive and have a sustainable business.

4
III. Objectives of the Study

This study aims to:

1. Determine the inputs and output energy use of corn production in Tagum

City, Davao del Norte.

2. Determine the benefit-cost ratio of corn production in Tagum City, Davao

del Norte.

3. Determine the relationship between corn production energy inputs and

production yield.

IV. Scope and Limitation of the Study

The study only focuses on quantifying the energy inputs and practices of corn

production from land preparation to post-harvest practices in the city of Tagum, Davao

del Norte province. Production processes such as land preparation, crop establishment,

crop care and maintenance, harvesting/hauling, and post-harvest practices were

compared among the barangays. The study only covers the cropping season from

January to May 2019.

5
V. Methodology

A. Data Collection

Data are collected from five (5) barangays of Tagum, Davao del Norte with one-

half (1/2) hectare and above land holdings. Three respondents are selected to represent

each barangay. Figure 1 showed the sequence of data collection. A pre-designed survey

questionnaire is prepared to interview farmers selected at random from the chosen

barangays. Farmers were personally interviewed to collect the information needed for

the study. Corn production process are divided as land preparation, crop establishment,

crop care and maintenance, harvesting/hauling, and post-harvest processes. Production

input are also divided into two subgroups such as direct (labor, fuel, machinery, manual

equipment, and animal power) and indirect (seeds, fertilizers, and chemicals).

5
1

Figure 1. Barangay Boundary Map of Tagum City

6
 B. Energy and Computation of Parameters

The direct energy use is computed by the following equation (Moerschner &

Gerowitt, 2000):

ED=h × AFU × PEU × RU Equation 1

where:
ED = Specific direct energy use (fuel) for a field operation, MJ/ha
h = Specific working hours per run, h/ha
AFU = Average fuel use per working hour, L/h
PEU = Specific energy value per liter of fuel, MJ/L
RU = Runs, number of applications in the considered field operation.

The energy contribution of machinery is determined by the following equation

(Moerschner & Gerowitt, 2000):

TW ×CED
EID= × h× RU Equation 2
UL

where:
EID = Specific indirect energy for machinery use for a field operation, MJ/ha
TW = Total weight of the specific machine, kg.
CED = Cumulative energy demand for machinery, MJ/kg
UL = Wear-out life of machinery, h
h = Specific working hours per run, h/ha
RU = Runs, number of applications in the considered field operation.

The indirect energy is determined by the following equation (Moerschner &

Gerowitt, 2000):

EID=RATE × MATENF Equation 3

where:
EID = indirect energy input, MJ/ha
RATE = application rate of input, kg/ha
MATENF = energy factor of material used, MJ/kg

The labor energy input (MJ/ha) at every stage in the production process is

estimated by the following equation:

LABOR ×TIME
LABEN = × LABENF
AREA

Equation 4

7
where:
LABEN = labor energy, MJ/ha
LABOUR = number of working laborers
TIME = operating time, h
AREA = operating area, ha
LABENF = labor energy factor, MJ/h

Different literatures studying energy consumption analysis in corn farming uses

various energy coefficients. Below is the tabulated energy coefficient that will be used by

the researcher in the computation of energy consumption analysis.

Table 1. Energy coefficient used in energy calculation

Energy coefficient
Energy source Reference/s
(MJ/unit)
Inputs
Human labor (hr)
Male 1.96 MJ/hr Singh & Mittal (1992)
Female 0.80 MJ/hr
Diesel 47.80 MJ/L Safa & Tabatabaeefar (2002)
Machinery
Sheller (kg) 7.52 MJ/kg Nassiri and Singh (2009)
Tractors and Other 62.70 MJ/kg Gundogmus (2006)
Machines (kg)
Manual Equipment
Plough 0.63 MJ/kg
Nassiri and Singh (2009)
Disc Harrow 3.14 MJ/kg
Sprayer 0.50 MJ/kg
Sickle 0.84 MJ/kg
Animal power (hr) 10.50 MJ/hr Bowers (1992)
Seed (kg) 100.0 MJ/kg Houshyar et al. (2012)
Fertilizer (kg)
Nitrogen (N) 60.0 MJ/kg CIGR (1999)
Phosphate (P2O5) 17.4 MJ/kg CIGR (1999)
Potash (K2O) 13.1 MJ/kg CIGR (1999)
Organic 0.30 MJ/kg Gundogmus (2006)
Chemicals (kg)
Insecticide 199 MJ/kg Gundogmus (2006)
Herbicides 263 MJ/kg Clements, et al. (1995)
Rodenticide 97 MJ/kg Anon (2004)
Ouputs
Corn (kg) 14.70 MJ/kg Singh & Mittal (1992)

8
 C. Energy Indices

Based on the energy equivalents of inputs and outputs in Table 2, the energy

ratio (energy use efficiency), energy productivity, specific energy and net energy gain

are calculated (Mohammadi & Omid, 2010)

Energy use efficiency =

Total energy output( ha )
MJ

Equation 5
Total energy input (
ha )
MJ

Energy productivity=
(
Corn ouput
ha )
kg

Totalenergy input (
ha )
MJ

Equation 6

Specific energy=
( MJ
ha )
Total energy input
Equation 7
CornOuput ( )
kg
ha

Net Energy=Total energy output ( MJha )−Totalenergy input ( MJha ) Equation 8

D. Cost Economics

The capital input was separated into variable cost and fixed cost (Sandigodmath,

2007). Variable cost involved the various input sources such as labor, machinery and

equipment, animal power, fuel, seeds, fertilizers, and chemicals. On the other hand, the

fixed cost consisted of rental value of owned land and interest on the fixed cost. The

9
labor cost involved the different activities from land preparation to post-harvest practices

such as drying, shelling, storing, and transportation.

E. Conceptual Framework

In this study, the independent variable is the energy inputs such as Labor, Diesel,

Animal power, Machinery, Manual Equipment, Seed, Fertilizers, and Chemicals (Alipour

et al., 2012 and Tanate et al., 2014).

Impact to the corn production yield measured in kilogram per hectare is treated

as the dependent variable (Srivastava, 1982).

F. Conceptual Model

INDEPENDENT VARIABLE DEPENDENT VARIABLE

Energy Inputs Output

 Labor  Yield
 Diesel
 Animal Power
 Machinery
 Manual Equipment
 Seed
 Fertilizers
 Chemicals

G. Statistical Design and Layout

The experimental design is done using the Complete Randomized Design (CRD)

with two factorial experiment. Each treatment is replicated thrice (3) to minimize error.

Table 2. Experimental layout for Corn Production process per barangay

Factor 1
  Land Crop Crop Care Harvestin Post-
Preparati Establishm & g/ Harvest

10
 Maintenan
on ent Hauling
ce
Apokon T1 T6 T11 T16 T21
Madaum T2 T7 T12 T17 T22
Factor Magdum T3 T8 T13 T18 T23
2 Mankilam T4 T9 T14 T19 T24
Visayan T5 T10 T15 T20 T25
Village

Table 3. Experimental layout for Corn Production Inputs per barangay

Factor 1
Anim
Manual
Lab Fu Machine al Seed Fertilize Chemic
Equipme
or el ry Powe s rs als
nt
  r
Apokon T1 T6 T11 T16 T21 T26 T31 T36
Madaum T2 T7 T12 T17 T22 T27 T32 T37
Magdum T3 T8 T13 T18 T23 T28 T33 T38
Fact
Mankila
or 2
m T4 T9 T14 T19 T24 T29 T34 T39
Visayan T1
Village T5 0 T15 T20 T25 T30 T35 T40

Table 4. Experimental layout for treatments and replications

Treatmen
t Replications
R1 R2 R3
T1 T1R1 T1R2 T1R3
T2 T2R1 T2R2 T2R3
T3 T3R1 T3R2 T3R3
·
·
·

H. Statistical Analysis

The study used the analysis of variance (ANOVA) of two factorial experiment as

its statistical tool to determine the differences between factors and its parameter while

Tukey’s Honest Significant Difference (HSD) Test is used to determine the differences

among treatments.

11
 Furthermore, the study also used the regression analysis to determine the

relationship between energy inputs and yield.

VI. Results and Discussion

The study was conducted to quantify the energy inputs and practices of corn

production in the city of Tagum. The energy inputs considered are labor, fuel, machinery,

manual equipment, animal power, seeds, fertilizers, and chemicals. Furthermore,

production processes such as land preparation, crop establishments, crop care and

maintenance, harvesting/hauling, and post-harvest practices were also examined.

Moreover, the study aimed to determine the benefit-cost ratio of corn production in the

research area, and to determine the relationship between energy inputs and crop yield

and in what extent that it will influence the other. The study only gathered data of one

cropping.

A. Level of energy inputs in Barangays of Tagum City

The two-factorial test of analysis of variance (ANOVA) in Table 5 exhibited high

significant difference between production energy inputs and the barangays, as well as

the interaction between the two factors. The result implied that each barangay in Tagum

City, Davao del Norte has different level of energy inputs employed to its respective

farms.

Table 5. ANOVA Result for Corn Production Inputs per Barangay

VS DF SS MS F Pr (>F)
Barangay –
4 2286.3529 571.5882 36.59** 0.00001
F1
Energy
7 32855.2340 4693.6049 300.50** 0.00001
Input –F2
Interaction
28 6327.1750 225.9705 14.47* 0.00001
–F1:F2
Error 80 1249.5535 15.6194
Total 119 42718.3154
** Significant at a level of 1% of probability (p<.01)

12
* Significant at a level of 5% of probability (.01=<p<.05)
ns Non-significant (p>=.05)

Since the ANOVA result indicated that the level of energy input and location, and

the interaction among them are highly significant, a Tukey’s HSD Test was used to

determine the pairwise mean comparison among variables. As shown in Table 9 in the

Appendices, Barangay Apokon and Magdum are significantly different for Animal Power

input, same with Fertilizer input along with Barangay Madaum. Barangay Apokon and

Madaum are significantly different in the Chemicals input, while Barangay Apokon is the

only barangay that is significantly different in Diesel energy input. For labor, Barangay

Apokon and Visayan Village are significantly different, same with Barangay Madaum and

Visayan Village. For machinery input, Barangay Apokon and Magdum are significantly

different, same with Barangay Apokon and Visayan Village.

Figure 2 exhibited that fertilizer has the highest share of production input

(3,963.97 MJ/ha out of 5,938.90 MJ/ha) of the total energy input of corn production

process, followed by chemical (635.70 MJ/ha) and labor (628.76 MJ/ha). The result is

almost the same from the study of energy analysis of corn grain production in Iran

wherein highest share was machinery at 44% (Taki, et al., 2012). Similar results have

been reported from various literature that the energy input of chemical fertilizers has the

biggest share of the total energy input in agricultural crops production (Tsatsarelis, 1993;

Kizilaslan, 2009).

13
 Chemicals Labor Diesel Machinery
11% 11% 5% 2% Manual Equipment
2%
Animal Power
3%
Seeds
1%

Fertilizers
67%

Figure 2. Corn Energy Use based on Production Inputs of Tagum City

It is apparent in Figure 3 that barangays have varying amounts of energy inputs

employed in their corn production. Hence, statistics analysis showed there is a high

significant difference among the practices of each barangay.

Energy (MJ/ha)

r l t
o se er
y
en er d
s
er
s
al
s
b e
La D
ie in m ow Se li
z ic
h ip P m
ac u al r ti he
M Eq im Fe C
l n
ua A
an
M

Figure 3. Corn Energy Use based on Production Inputs per Barangay

B. Level of Production Processes in Barangays of Tagum City

Another two-factorial test of analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed to

determine the difference between production processes of each barangay. Table 6
revealed that there was a high significant difference in production processes and
barangays, and the interaction between two factors as well. The result implied that each
barangay has different energy inputs based on production processes.

14
 Table 6. ANOVA Result for Corn Production process per Barangay

VS DF SS MS F Pr (>F)
Barangay –
4 2609.1044 652.2761 28.12** 0.00001
F1
Production
Process – 4 34461.9247 8615.4812 371.45** 0.00001
F2
Interaction
16 6635.0081 414.6880 17.88** 0.00001
–F1:F2
Error 50 1159.7077 23.1942
Total 74 44865.7449
** Significant at a level of 1% of probability (p<.01)
* Significant at a level of 5% of probability (.01=<p<.05)
ns Non-significant (p>=.05)

Since the ANOVA result indicated that the level of corn production processes and

location, and the interaction among them are highly significant, a Tukey’s HSD Test was

used to determine the pairwise mean comparison among variables. As shown in Table

10 in the Appendices, Barangay Apokon, Madaum, and Magdum are significantly

different for Crop Care and Maintenance. Barangay Madaum and Visayan Village are

significantly different in the Harvesting/Hauling, same with Barangay Mankilam and

Visayan Village. For Land Preparation, Barangay Apokon and Visayan Village are

significantly different, same with Barangay Madaum and Mankilam, and Barangay

Magdum and Mankilam. For Post-Harvest, Barangay Apokon and Magdum are

significantly different, same with Barangay Apokon and Visayan Village.

Having a high significant difference between corn production processes, the

percent share of each parameters was explicitly shown in Figure 4. The highest share is

the crop care and maintenance (4,886.55 MJ/ha out of 5,938.90 MJ/ha) which accounts

for 82%, followed by post-harvest and land preparation, at 370.90 MJ/ha and 342.09

MJ/ha, respectively. This result is highly attributable to the high degree of fertilizer and

chemical investment of corn farmers that accounts almost 95% of the total energy of

crop care and maintenance process. Wherein, this result is very high if compared to the

15
practices of other countries like Iran with only 13.03% crop care out of total energy input

(Taki et al., 2012).

With this, the researcher inferred the need to reassess the fertilizer application

techniques used by the farmers for they might be investing too much on something that

will no longer provide an optimum crop yield or otherwise will cause a detrimental effect

to their field and crop in the worst-case scenario.

Post-Harvest Land PreparationCrop Es-

6% 6% tab-
Harvesting lish-
/ Hauling ment
4% 2%

Crop Care & Maintenance

82%

Figure 4. Corn Energy Use based on Production Processes of Tagum City

Figure 5 showed that barangays have the various amounts of energy inputs

based on production processes. Hence, statistics analysis showed there is a high

significant difference among the practices of each barangay.

16
 Energy (MJ/ha)

n . . . t
o .. .. .. es
ti h n au v
ra li
s ai H ar
a ab M / H
p t & g t-
re Es e n os
P
d p ar es
ti P
n ro C v
La C p ar
ro H
C

Figure 5. Corn Energy Use based on Production Process per Barangay

C. Direct and Indirect Energy Inputs

Labor has the highest share with 48% out of 1,296.19 MJ/ha total direct energy

inputs for corn production as shown in Figure 6. Most of the farmers surveyed used

manual labor in their corn farms. It is because most of them have small areas and they

are unable to access machineries that can help them in their corn production from land

preparation to post-harvest processes. However, in Barangay Madaum, land preparation

is done by tractors with disc ploughs and disc harrows which were aided by the City

Agriculture Office of Tagum. Also, in Barangay Visayan Village, corn farmers used

Kubota sheller which they rented from a local machinery supplier. Overall, manual labor

was mostly used from land preparation to post-harvest for most of the farms surveyed.

In the indirect inputs, fertilizer is the highest player at 85% out of 4,642.71 MJ/ha

total indirect energy input as shown in Figure 7. Complete, Urea, and Ammophos

fertilizers are the most commonly used fertilizers by the farmers. Per their practice,

17
farmers are just repeating the fertilizers application from previous cropping without

conducting any soil analysis. The next highest share is chemical having 14%. The

chemicals used by the farmers are insecticides such as Boswak, Parasaulod, Disease,

Agro-blue, and G-shot, and herbicides like RoundUp, ClearOut, and GroundPlus.

Man
ual Ani-
Equip mal
ment Powe Chem- Seeds
7% r icals 1%
14% 14%

Ma-
chin Labor
ery 49%
9% Fertilizers
85%
Diesel
22%

Figure 6. Direct Energy Input Figure 7. Indirect Energy Input

Figure 8 showed that each barangay has a high indirect energy input compared

to direct energy. In fact, indirect energy has 78.17% share out of total energy input of

5,938.90 MJ/ha, while direct energy only has 21.83% share.

18
 9 ,3 4 4 .7 1
En ergy M J/h a)

5 ,6 6 8 .8 5

3 ,4 6 4 .8 9
3 ,0 3 2 .9 7

1 ,8 3 2 .4 2
1 ,7 7 7 .5 8
1 ,6 1 8 .1 0

1 ,1 5 3 .8 5

8 9 7 .3 5
8 1 9 .7 3

Apo k on Mad au m Magdu m Man ki l am Vi say an Vi l l age

Figure 8. Corn Energy Consumption based on Direct and Indirect Input

D. Energy Input and Yield Relationship

The relationship between energy input and crop yield was determined using the

regression analysis technique as shown in Figure 9. The data displayed that crop yield

changes along with the change in energy input. The crop yield increases as the energy

input also increases. This relationship was conceptualized by Srivastava (1982) and was

claimed in this result. However, the relationship has a trend following the natural

logarithm pattern. In which, the rate of yield increment decreases over time until it comes

to a plateau.
Energy Input (MJ/ha)

Output (Yield) Logarithmic (Output (Yield))

3,000.00
2,500.00 f(x) = 550.136096674004 ln(x) − 2426.81608110278
R² = 0.93222341703543
2,000.00
1,500.00
1,000.00
500.00
-
2,000.00 4,000.00 6,000.00 8,000.00 10,000.00 12,000.00
Yield

Figure 9. Energy and Yield Relationship

19
 E. Energy Efficiency and Net Energy Gain

The energy efficiency was determined as the ratio of output energy to input

energy. The city, based on the farms surveyed, has an energy use efficiency of 6.84,

which is a high value compared to a similar study in Iran by Taki, et. al. (2012) with 2.60

energy use efficiency. Among all the barangays, Apokon has the highest energy use

efficiency. It is because the surveyed area has the lowest energy input since the farmers

do not use machinery and fuel in their corn production. This means that Barangay

Apokon purely uses man-animal power in producing its harvested corn. Overall, the high

energy efficiency in Tagum City implies that corn production business in the city is

gaining or economically feasible. Furthermore, it indicates that for every unit of energy

input there is 6.84 unit of energy output return. Energy productivity also implied that for

every mega Joule of input, there is 0.47 kg of corn yield produced. Similarly, specific

energy also showed that 1 kilogram of crop yield needs 2.49 mega Joule of energy.

Average corn yield in the city is 2,281.80 kg/ha and representing 33,542.46

MJ/ha energy output. Average energy input is 5,938.90 MJ/ha, hence making net energy

gain to be 27,620.37 MJ/ha. The values of energy indices of corn production in Tagum

City are shown in the table below.

Table 7. Energy Indices of Corn Production in Tagum City

Visayan
Apokon Madaum Magdum Mankilam
    Village
Energy unitles
10.65 5.17 3.50 8.35 6.55
Efficiency s
Energy
kg/MJ 0.72 0.35 0.24 0.57 0.45
Productivity
Specific
MJ/kg 1.38 2.84 4.20 1.76 2.24
Energy
23,532.1 28,457.3 29,394.7
Net Energy MJ 27,832.70 28,884.98
7 0 0

20
 F. Cost Analysis of Corn Production

Cost analysis is needed to assess if a certain farm is gaining from the production

of its particular crop. From Table 8, the total cost involved in corn production in one

cropping was ₱₱22,392.56 per hectare, out of which the variable cost is about 86.87%.

Under the variable cost, labor has the highest share of 46.17% (₱8,974.98). It is mainly

because most of the farms surveyed used man-animal power in its production. The

second highest share in the variable cost was fertilizer with 10.19% (₱1,990.56) due to

the high usage of fertilizers in the farm, followed by seed with 10.11% (₱1,974.27).

The remaining variable costs consisted of chemical usage, animal power,

machineries and equipment (involves cost of rent for trucks in transporting corn products

and manual equipment such as knapsack sprayer and other farm tools), animal power,

fuel, and interest on working capital (9.33%). Whereas, the fixed cost involved the rental

value of the land which has the highest share of 90.09% (₱2,660.00 per hectare)

followed by interest on fixed cost (₱292.60 – 11% of the rental value of land).

The total cost of corn production was ₱22,392.56 per hectare, out of which

₱19,528.76 was variable cost (86.87%) and fixed cost was ₱2,952.60 per hectare

(13.13%). The average yield obtained from all the farms surveyed was 2,281.80 kg per

hectare. The price per kg of yield of corn was ₱15.00 for sweet corn and ₱12.00 for

white corn. The average gross return was ₱31,488.84 per hectare. Net returns over

variable cost were ₱11,960.08 (57.04%) and net returns over total cost were ₱9,007.48

(42.96%) per hectare. The average cost of production per kg of corn was ₱9.38. The

benefit cost ratio in corn production was 1.49, which implies that the corn production in

Tagum City has a positive return to its farmers.

21
 Table 8. Cost and Return Structure of Corn Production in Tagum City

Visayan
  Apokon Madaum Magdum Mankilam AVERAGE
Village
COSTS            
Variable
Costs            
₱10,960.0 ₱11,406.6
Labor ₱5,466.67 ₱7,800.00 ₱9,241.58 0 7 ₱8,974.98
Machinery --- --- ₱1,000.00 ₱1,000.00 ₱2,000.00 ₱1,333.33
Manual
equipment ₱800.00 ₱500.00 ₱800.00 ₱800.00 ₱500.00 ₱680.00
Animal Power ₱1,380.00 --- ₱1,875.00 ₱500.00 --- ₱1,251.67
Fuel --- ₱1,000.00 ₱300.00 ₱400.00 ₱600.00 ₱575.00
Seed ₱2,400.00 ₱2,083.33 ₱2,398.00 ₱1,390.00 ₱1,600.00 ₱1,974.27
Fertilizer ₱1,230.48 ₱2,597.00 ₱3,368.33 ₱1,346.00 ₱1,011.00 ₱1,990.56
Chemical ₱721.00 ₱1,066.67 ₱1,433.33 ₱833.33 ₱583.33 ₱927.53
Interest on
working
capital ₱1,319.80 ₱1,655.17 ₱2,245.79 ₱1,895.23 ₱1,947.11 ₱1,812.62
Total ₱13,317.9 ₱16,702.1 ₱22,662.0 ₱19,124.5 ₱19,648.1 ₱19,439.9
Variable Cost 5 7 3 6 1 6
Fixed Costs            
Rental value
of land ₱5,000.00 ₱2,000.00 ₱5,000.00 ₱500.00 ₱800.00 ₱2,660.00
Interest on
fixed cost ₱550.00 ₱220.00 ₱550.00 ₱55.00 ₱88.00 ₱292.60
Total Fixed
Cost ₱5,550.00 ₱2,220.00 ₱5,550.00 ₱555.00 ₱888.00 ₱2,952.60
Total Cost of ₱18,867.9 ₱18,922.1 ₱28,212.0 ₱19,679.5 ₱20,536.1 ₱22,392.5
Production 5 7 3 6 1 6
RETURNS            
Yield, kg/ha 1766.67 2400.00 2650.00 2232.33 2360.00 2281.80
Price, ₱ per
kg ₱15.00 ₱15.00 ₱15.00 ₱12.00 ₱12.00 13.80
₱26,500.0 ₱36,000.0 ₱39,750.0 ₱26,787.9 ₱28,320.0 ₱31,488.8
Gross returns 5 0 0 6 0 4
Net returns
over variable ₱13,182.1 ₱19,297.8 ₱17,087.9 ₱12,048.8
cost 0 3 7 ₱7,663.40 ₱8,671.89 8
Net returns ₱17,077.8 ₱11,537.9
over total cost ₱7,632.10 3 7 ₱7,108.40 ₱7,783.89 ₱9,096.28
Cost of
production, ₱
per kg ₱10.68 ₱7.88 ₱10.65 ₱8.82 ₱8.70 ₱9.35
Benefit-Cost
Ratio 1.40 1.90 1.41 1.36 1.38 1.49

22
VII. Conclusion

In this study, the energy use analysis of rainfed lowland corn production was

conducted in Tagum City, Davao del Norte. Results showed that corn production

consumed a total energy of 5,938.90 MJ/ha, which was mainly due to fertilizers (67% of

total energy), while total output is 33,542.46 MJ/ha, thereby producing a net energy of

27,620.37 MJ/ha. Out of the total energy inputs, 78.17% is from indirect inputs and

21.83% is from direct inputs. A major part of direct energy inputs is labor with 628.76

MJ/ha, and followed by fuel, animal power, machinery, and manual equipment, with

280.69, 177.49, 113.21, and 96.03 MJ/ha, respectively. On the other hand, the highest

share in indirect inputs is fertilizer with 3,963.97 MJ/ha, followed by chemical and seed,

with 635.70 and 43.05 MJ/ha, respectively.

In comparing level of energy use based on production process, the highest is the

crop care and maintenance with 4,886.55 MJ/ha followed by post-harvest, land

preparation, harvesting/hauling, and crop establishment, with 370.90, 342.09, 222.53,

and 116.83 MJ/ha, respectively. Moreover, it is also concluded that practices and extent

of energy inputs among the barangays in Tagum City are significantly different.

Furthermore, there is money in the production of corn in the city of Tagum,

province of Davao del Norte. It is supported by the energy use efficiency result of 6.84

that indicates that for every unit of energy invested, there is 6.84 units of energy

returned. Hence, corn production business is gaining. This claim was further

strengthened by the benefit-cost ration of 1.49, which points out that corn production in

the city is gaining or has positive returns to its farmers, regardless if the farmer uses

machinery in its farm or not.

23
 Additionally, the result of regression analysis between yield and energy inputs

also agreed to the statement of Srivastava (1982) that yield is directly proportional to its

energy inputs. However, since the relationship is in natural logarithm, there is a point

where the rate of increase in yield declines over time before the peak is reached.

VIII. Recommendations

The researcher would like to suggest further study of below listed:

 Explore differences in energy inputs during dry and wet season and

during calamities such as flooding.

 Explore irrigated corn farms.

 Explore more on the economic analysis parameters such as payback

period, break-even point, internal rate of return, and cash flow.

 Expand comparison by extending scope of study.

24
IX. References

Alipour, A., Veisi, H., Darijani, F., Mirbagheri, B., & Behbahani, A. G. (2012). Study and
determination of energy consumption to produce conventional rice of the Guilan
province. Res. Agr. Eng. Vol. 58, 99-106.

Anon. (2004, March 1). Appendix C: Units, Equivalents and Energy Constants. Retrieved
November 23, 2020, from Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and
Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida: https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/body_eh015

Beiragi, M. A., Ebrahimi, M., Mostafavi, K., Golbashy, M., & Khorasani, S. K. (2011). A
study of morphological basis of corn (Zea mays L.) yield under drought stress
condition using correlation and path coefficient analysis. Journal of Cereals and
Oilseeds, 2(2), 32-37.

Bockari-Gevao, S. M., Wan Ishak, W. I., Azmi, Y., & Chan, C. W. (2005). Analysis of
energy consumption in lowland rice-based cropping system. Songklanakarin J.
Sci. Technology, 819-826.

Bowers, W. (1992). Agricultural Field Equipment. In B. A. Stout, Energy in World

Agriculture (pp. 117-129). New York, U.S.A.: Elsevier Science Publishing
Company Inc.

CAEEDAC, A. (2000). Descriptive analysis of energy consumption in agriculture and

food sector in Canada. Final Report.

CIGR. (1999). International Commission of Agricultural Engineering. CIGR Handbook of

Agri-cultural Engineering, Volume V Energy and Biomass Engineering. American
Society of Agri-cultural Engineers. Retrieved from International Commission of
Agricultural Engineering: http://www.cigr.org/Handbook

Clements, D. R., Weise, S. F., Brown, R., Stonehouse, D. P., Hume, D. J., & Swanton,
C. J. (1995). Energy analysis of tillage production and herbicide inputs in
alternative weed management systems. Agriculture, Ecosystems and
Environment, 52(2-3), 119-128.

ExcoNDE, O. R. (1975). Corn in the Philippines: its production and research activities
with emphasis on downy mildew. Trop Agric Res, 8, 21-30.

Garrity, D. P., Kummer, D. P., & Guiang, E. S. (2013). Sustainable Agriculture and the
Environment in the Humid Tropics. The Philippines, 549.

Gundogmus, E. (2006). Energy use on organic farming: a comparative analysis on

organic versus conventional apricot production on small holding in Turkey.
Energy Conversation Management, 47, 3351-3359.

25
Houshyar, E., Azadi, H., Almassi, M., & Sheikh Davoodi, M. J. (2012). Sustainable and
efficient energy consumption of corn production in Southwest Iran: Combination
of Multi-Fuzzy and DEA Modeling. Energy, 44, 672-681.

Kennedy, S. (2000, May). Energy use in American agriculture. Sustainable Energy Term
Paper, 1-26.

Khan, S., Khan, M. A., & Latif, N. (2010). Energy requirements and economic analysis of
wheat, rice and bar;ey production in Australia. Soil and Environment, 1-8.

Kizilaslan, H. (2009). Input–output energy analysis of cherries production in Tokat

province of Turkey. Appl. Energy 86, 1354-1358.

Lorzadeh, S. H., Mahdavidamghani, A., Enayatgholizadeh, M. R., & Yousefi, M. (2011,

May). Energy Input-Output Analysis for Maize Production Systems in Shooshtar,
Iran. Advances in Environmental Biology, 5(11), 3641-3644.

Moerschner, J., & Gerowitt, B. (2000). Direct and indirect energy use in arable farming -
An example of winter wheat in Northern Germany. In B. P. Weidema, & M. G.
Meeusen, Agricultural Data for Life Cycle Assessments (p. 195). The Hague,
Agricultural Economics Research Institute (LEI). Report 2.00.01, Volume 1.

Mohammadi, A., & Omid, M. (2010). Economical analysis and relation between energy
inputs and yield of greenhouse cucumber production in Iran. Appl Energy 87,
191-196.

Nassiri, S. M., & Singh, S. (2009). Study on energy use efficiency for paddy crop using
data envelopment analysis (DEA) technique. Applied energy, 86(7-8), 1320-
1325.

Philippine Statistics Authority. (2019, October). Agricultural Indicators System (AIS)

Food Sufficiency and Security. Retrieved December 10, 2020, from psa.gov:
https://psa.gov.ph/sites/default/files/ais_Food_Sufficiency_and_Security_2019.pd
f

Philippine Statistics Authority. (2019). Philippine Statistics Authority, Region XI - Davao

Region. Retrieved November 23, 2020, from RSSO11:
http://rsso11.psa.gov.ph/agricultural-statistics

Safa, M., & Tabatabaeefar, A. (2002, November 28). Energy consumption in wheat
production in irrigated and dry land farming. International Agricultural
Engineering Conference, 1-10.

Sanchez, M. J. (2020, September 21). Corn production volume in the Philippines.

Retrieved December 10, 2020, from Statista:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/751372/philippines-corn-production/
#statisticContainer

26
Sandigodmath, N. M. (2007). Maize Seed Production under Contract Farming In Haveri
District, Karnataka - An Economic Analysis. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Univ. Agric.
Sci., Dharwad.

Singh, J. M. (2000). On farm energy use pattern in different cropping systems in

Haryana, India. Sustainable Energy Systems and Management, Master of
Science.

Singh, S., & Mittal, J. (1992). Energy in Production Agriculture. India: Mittal Publishing
Company.

Srivastava, A. (1982). A Comparative Study of Conventional and Mechanized Farming

Relative to Energy Use and Cost. AMA Spring, 42-46.

Taki, M., Mobtaker, H., & Monjezi, N. (2012). Energy input–output modeling and
economical analyze for corn grain profuction in Iran. Elixir Agriculture (52),
11500-11505.

Tanate, C., Phethuayluk, S., Tepnual, T., & Yaibok, T. (2014). Energy consumption
analysis for Sangyod rice production. Energy Proc, 52, 126-130.

Tsatsarelis, C. A. (1993). Energy inputs and outputs for soft winter wheat production in
Greece. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ 43, 109-118.

Yadav, S. N., Chandra, R., Khura, T. K., & Chauhan, N. S. (2013, September). Energy
input–output analysis and mechanization status for cultivation of rice and maize
crops in Sikkim. Agric Eng Int: CIGR Journal, 1-9.

27
28
X. APPENDICES

Table 9. Tukey’s Honest Significant Difference (HSD) Test for Level of Energy Inputs in 5 Barangays of Tagum City

F2=Animal F2=Chemica F2=Manual

F1 N F2 = Diesel F2 = Fertilizer F2 = Labor F2=Machinery F2 = Seed
Power l Equipment
Apokon 3 15.2301 b 21.0487 b 0.7071 b 34.0677 d 21.9159 b 0.7071 b 10.1738 a 3.8271 a
Madaum 3 0.7071 c 31.4433 a 21.3717 a 68.0805 b 21.3975 b 9.5393 ab 11.6683 a 3.3335 a
Magdum 3 24.4839 a 25.7753 ab 15.4746 a 91.3328 a 25.2766 ab 12.7225 a 9.7510 a 7.7795 a
Mankilam 3 5.3040 c 23.7211 ab 14.2672 a 49.3996 c 23.5097 ab 7.8985 ab 6.8315 a 4.9347 a
Vis Vill 3 0.7071 c 22.7030 ab 22.3165 a 54.1311 c 31.3113 a 15.4280 a 9.8422 a 4.5074 a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different

Table 10. Tukey’s Honest Significant Difference (HSD) Test for Level of Production Processes in 5 Barangays of Tagum City

F2=Crop Care & F2 = Crop F2=Harvesting/ F2 = Post

F1 N F2 = Land Preparation
Maintenance Establishment Hauling Harvest
Apokon 3 43.7873 d 8.2017 a 12.0890 ab 17.5001 ab 0.7071 b
Madaum 3 78.3139 b 8.8074 a 5.8125 b 23.3934 a 0.7071 b
Magdum 3 95.8739 a 11.3435 a 16.6797 ab 27.9034 a 20.4190 a
Mankilam 3 56.0986 c 11.5194 a 10.8595 b 6.4010 bc 23.1963 a
Vis Vill 3 61.1198 c 13.1485 a 22.9978 a 0.7071 c 29.6967 a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different

29