Revista Cultura Científica - web logo
Submit Your Research
  • Research Article

Technical Efficiency and Productivity Gaps in Wheat Farming: A Comparative Analysis of Conservation Agriculture Adopters and Non-Adopters in Nineveh Governorate, Iraq

Mahmood Khalaf Wasmi AlKhulaifi1, {bid Ali Hasan Al-doski1
1Department of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, College of Agricultural Engineering Sciences, University of Dohuk, Dohuk, Iraq
DOI: https://doi.org/10.70517/revcc2624209
Published: 13/11/2026
: Mahmood Khalaf Wasmi AlKhulaifi, {bid Ali Hasan Al-doski. Technical Efficiency and Productivity Gaps in Wheat Farming: A Comparative Analysis of Conservation Agriculture Adopters and Non-Adopters in Nineveh Governorate, Iraq. Revista Cultura Científica, 2026 Issue 24. pg. 2607-2617.

Abstract

Technical efficiency (TE) in wheat production is important for achieving food security in resource-constrained regions such as northern Iraq. Nineveh Governorate, a major grain-producing region of Iraq, has experienced productivity shortfalls despite substantial investment in agricultural inputs, creating a need for rigorous efficiency analysis to inform policy and extension programs. This study estimates and compares the TE of 450 wheat farmers in Nineveh Governorate during the 2023–2024 agricultural season using input-oriented data envelopment analysis (DEA) under variable returns to scale (VRS). The sample comprised 225 farmers officially enrolled in a conservation agriculture (CA) program and 225 conventional-tillage farmers selected from the same agro-climatic districts. The estimates indicate a substantial difference in efficiency between the two groups. The mean TE score was 0.849 for CA adopters and 0.551 for non-adopters, corresponding to estimated proportional input-reduction potentials of 15.1% and 44.9%, respectively, relative to the estimated frontier. In the high-efficiency category (TE ≥ 0.81), CA adopters accounted for 69.33% of their group, compared with 10.67% of non-adopters. The reported Mann–Whitney test indicated a statistically significant difference between groups (Z = −14.71; p < 0.001). Descriptive comparisons showed lower mean pesticide, fertilizer, and seed quantities among adopters, although input-specific inefficiency cannot be established from group means alone. The observed efficiency advantage occurred during the relatively favorable rainfall conditions described for the study season. However, a single-season observational comparison cannot isolate management effects from weather, selection into adoption, or other farm characteristics. The findings support further evaluation of CA promotion and targeted extension interventions in Iraq and comparable dryland wheat-producing areas, with attention to appropriate input use and consistent implementation of CA practices.

Keywords: Conservation agriculture; Data envelopment analysis; Food security; Nineveh Governorate; Resource efficiency; Wheat production

Abstract

Technical efficiency (TE) in wheat production is important for achieving food security in resource-constrained regions such as northern Iraq. Nineveh Governorate, a major grain-producing region of Iraq, has experienced productivity shortfalls despite substantial investment in agricultural inputs, creating a need for rigorous efficiency analysis to inform policy and extension programs. This study estimates and compares the TE of 450 wheat farmers in Nineveh Governorate during the 2023–2024 agricultural season using input-oriented data envelopment analysis (DEA) under variable returns to scale (VRS). The sample comprised 225 farmers officially enrolled in a conservation agriculture (CA) program and 225 conventional-tillage farmers selected from the same agro-climatic districts. The estimates indicate a substantial difference in efficiency between the two groups. The mean TE score was 0.849 for CA adopters and 0.551 for non-adopters, corresponding to estimated proportional input-reduction potentials of 15.1% and 44.9%, respectively, relative to the estimated frontier. In the high-efficiency category (TE ≥ 0.81), CA adopters accounted for 69.33% of their group, compared with 10.67% of non-adopters. The reported Mann–Whitney test indicated a statistically significant difference between groups (Z = −14.71; p < 0.001). Descriptive comparisons showed lower mean pesticide, fertilizer, and seed quantities among adopters, although input-specific inefficiency cannot be established from group means alone. The observed efficiency advantage occurred during the relatively favorable rainfall conditions described for the study season. However, a single-season observational comparison cannot isolate management effects from weather, selection into adoption, or other farm characteristics. The findings support further evaluation of CA promotion and targeted extension interventions in Iraq and comparable dryland wheat-producing areas, with attention to appropriate input use and consistent implementation of CA practices.

Keywords: Conservation agriculture; Data envelopment analysis; Food security; Nineveh Governorate; Resource efficiency; Wheat production

References

  1. Khan, N., Ray, R. L., Sargani, G. R., Ihtisham, M., Khayyam, M., and Ismail, S. (2021). Current progress and future prospects of agriculture technology: Gateway to sustainable agriculture. Sustainability, 13(9), 4883. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094883

  2. Farrell, M. J. (1957). The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General), 120(3), 253–290. https://doi.org/10.2307/2343100

  3. Geffersa, A. G., Agbola, F. W., and Mahmood, A. (2019). Technical efficiency in crop production across agro-ecological zones in Ethiopia: A meta-analysis of frontier studies. Outlook on Agriculture, 48(1), 5–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/0030727019830416

  4. Alemayehu, S., Ayalew, Z., Sileshi, M., and Zeleke, F. (2026). The impact of climate smart agriculture practices on the technical efficiency of wheat farmers in northwestern Ethiopia. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 28, 7231–7253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-05288-9

  5. Jimmy, S. P., Omeje, J. E., Effiong, M. O., Achike, A. I., and Arene, C. J. (2026). Efficiency differential of adopters and non-adopters of improved technologies among plantain farmers in South-South, Nigeria. Global Journal of Agricultural Innovation, Research and Development, 13(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.15377/2409-9813.2026.13.1

  6. Isnurdiansyah, Pratami, N., Saputra, S. G., Mahastian, P. W., Khasanah, N., and Leimona, B. (2026). Climate-smart practices for sustainable rice farming: Impacts on farm technical efficiency and income in Pasuruan, East Java, Indonesia. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1608(1), 012043. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1608/1/012043

  7. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (n.d.). What is conservation agriculture? https://www.fao.org/conservation-agriculture/overview/what-is-conservation-agriculture/en/

  8. Pittelkow, C. M., Liang, X., Linquist, B. A., van Groenigen, K. J., Lee, J., Lundy, M. E., van Gestel, N., Six, J., Venterea, R. T., and van Kessel, C. (2015). Productivity limits and potentials of the principles of conservation agriculture. Nature, 517, 365–368. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13809

  9. AlKhulaifi, M. K. W., and Al-doski, A. A. H. (2025). A comparison of social, economics, and communication factors between adopting and non-adopting conservation agriculture wheat farmers in Nineveh Governorate, Iraq. Journal of King Abdulaziz University: Meteorology, Environment and Arid Land Agriculture, 35(1), 91–105. https://doi.org/10.64064/1319-1039.1019

  10. Farooq, A., Hassan, A., Ishaq, M., Nawaz, A., Qadar, A., and Usman, M. (2026). Adoption of chip bud technology in sugarcane farming: Investigating influential factors in central Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 42(1), 179–190. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2026/42.1.179.190

  11. Wongnaa, C. A., Tawiah, F. O., Ogunleye, A. S., Prah, S., Ampomah, M. A., Akweley, G. A., and Gyekye, A. (2026). Impact of adoption of integrated soil fertility management on household welfare: Evidence from tomato farmers in Ghana. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 55(1), 76–103. https://doi.org/10.1017/age.2025.10014

  12. Chaied Al-Fahdawy, L. K., and Ahmed Al-Jumaily, J. S. (2024a). The total costs of wheat and watermelon crops grown in Diyala Governorate / Al-Adhim Region, a model for the year 2022. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1371(10), 102001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1371/10/102001

  13. Chaied Al-Fahdawy, L. K., and Ahmed Al-Jumaily, J. S. (2024b). A comparative study of the economic and social factors for the use of Al-Adhim Dam water and groundwater for wheat and watermelon crops in Diyala Governorate for the year 2022. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1371(10), 102002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1371/10/102002

  14. Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., and Cooper, W. W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30(9), 1078–1092. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.30.9.1078

  15. Coelli, T. (1996). A guide to DEAP version 2.1: A data envelopment analysis (computer) program. CEPA Working Paper 96/08. University of New England. https://economics.uq.edu.au/cepa/software

  16. Radmand, H., Rezaei, H., Keramatzadeh, A., and Eshraghi, F. (2026). Productivity analysis of agricultural inputs in wheat cultivation in Afghanistan. Discover Food, 6, 192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44187-026-00933-w

  17. Knowler, D., and Bradshaw, B. (2007). Farmers’ adoption of conservation agriculture: A review and synthesis of recent research. Food Policy, 32(1), 25–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2006.01.003

  18. Endalew, B., Aynalem, M., Anteneh, A., and Mossie, H. (2023). Sources of wheat production technical inefficiency among smallholder farmers in Northwestern Ethiopia: Beta regression approach. Cogent Economics and Finance, 11(1), 2208895. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2023.2208895

  19. Aynalem, M., Ayalew, Z., and Terefe, A. T. (2026). Drivers of adoption of climate-smart agricultural practices by smallholders on high-value vegetable crops in Northwestern Ethiopia. CABI Agriculture and Bioscience, 7(1), 0012. https://doi.org/10.1079/ab.2026.0012

  20. Kassa, L. B., and Sakurai, T. (2026). Impact of digital ability and rice technology adoption on rice farming performance in Benin. Agribusiness. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1002/agr.70097

  21. Katengeza, S. P., Rashid, K., Tione, S., Holden, S. T., and Tilahun, M. (2026). Toward sustainable impact of farm input subsidies in Malawi: Is integration with climate-smart agriculture a practical solution? Sustainability, 18(8), 3929. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18083929

  22. Nadhim, M. M., Jabara, O. K., and Abdulradh, M. J. (2025). Economic analysis of the impact of development programs on buffalo milk producers in the marshes of Iraq as a model. Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 31(148), 144–157. https://doi.org/10.33095/5ytqsw20

  23. Sharna, S. C., Rana, M. J., and Maraseni, T. (2026). Adoption of hybrid, high-yielding and traditional rice varieties and their adoption drivers in climate-hazardous locations. Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, 10, 16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41885-026-00196-w

Mahmood Khalaf Wasmi AlKhulaifi
Department of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, College of Agricultural Engineering Sciences, University of Dohuk, Dohuk, Iraq
alkhulaifimahmood@gmail.com
{bid Ali Hasan Al-doski
Department of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, College of Agricultural Engineering Sciences, University of Dohuk, Dohuk, Iraq

How to cite:

Mahmood Khalaf Wasmi AlKhulaifi, {bid Ali Hasan Al-doski. Technical Efficiency and Productivity Gaps in Wheat Farming: A Comparative Analysis of Conservation Agriculture Adopters and Non-Adopters in Nineveh Governorate, Iraq. Revista Cultura Científica, 2026 Issue 24. pg. 2607-2617.

Publication History

  • Received: 09/06/2026
  • Accepted: 10/11/2026
  • Published: 13/11/2026
Copyright © 2026, Mahmood Khalaf Wasmi AlKhulaifi, {bid Ali Hasan Al-doski. Published by Revista Cultura Científica. This article is published as open access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Browse Advance Search