農業機械化水準과 適正耕地規模

Optimal Farm Size in Relation with Levels of Farm Mechanization

Most villages in Korea are now faced with a serious labor shortage problem, particularly, in the labor demand peak seasons. This fact seems to be supported by a fact about 39 million persons (students, civil servants, industrial workers, and others) amounting to nearly 10 times that of the rural labor force, were mobilized to help farmers transplant rice in the June season of 1977. The number is likely higher this year, 1978. This fact happens obviously because of over-outmigration, without balancing labor demand and supply by introducing appropriate farm machines or other technology. On the one hand, the political leaders seem now to recognize the necessity of fam mechanization. On the other hand, some insist that it is crucial to first relax or eliminate the ceiling of the land holding size, 3 ha, defined in the Land Reform Law of 1949. This belief seems to be based on recommendations derived from the so-called break-even point analysis. According to this sort of research, the minimum farm size for most farm machines such as rice transplanters, binders or combines is around 10 ha, that is approx imately 10 times the present average-sized farm. The policy implication drawn is either to wait with farm mechanization until the average farm size grows by that much, or to relax the maximum holding size. The break-even point analysis used often makes unrealistic assumptions, such as a perfect cempe titive labor market, machines being the only limiting factor, no allowance being given to the possibility of custom works. Hence, the production level or farm size is likely over-estimated by this technique. Thus more comprehensive analysis seems to be required for taking into consideration the real world situation in terms of resource constraints, production possibilities, technologies, factor markets, etc. Indeed, his study intends to do such an analysis. With an appropriate linear programming model constructed, this study intends to investigate (1) how much the desired size would be expanded, (2) which means of expanding land size-direct purchase or rent (sharecrop)-would be more efficient, ~3) what enterprise combination would be likely, and so on, when a representative farm owns each of he following combinations of farm machinec: 1. Power tiller 2. Power tiller + rice transplanter 3. Power tiller + rice transplanter + reaper 4. Power tiller + rice transplanter + binder 5. Power tiller + rice transplanter + combine A typical representative rice family farm located in the Jinju area is used as an example. The results and conclusions are summarized as follows: 1. The optimal farm size derived is about 1.3 ㏊, 1.5, 2.1, 3.1, and 3.9, respectively, in order of the farm machinary combinations listed above. The ceiling of land holding does not seem to be required to be relaxed much as far as a value is given not to a large-scale farm, but to a family farm, and presently known technologies are assumed. 2. The efficient means of expanding farm size is different, depending on the relative prices; user costs of iwestment for land and the rental rate. On the other hand, it is estimated that a typical farmer presently holding one hector of land requires about 40 years to expand to his farm 3 hectar with the present levels of farm income surplus and land price. The fact might well suggest that land tenancy is worthwhile to legalize as a steppingstone to ownership to a desired size, since this is a means to increase farm income under a certain condition. 3. As the level of farm mechanization is deepened, or the farm size increases, intensity or the double cropping ratio decreases rather rapidly while it recovers some when the combine is introduced. In other words, it is suggested that specialization of rice alone is more profitable, without producing much barley which is known as a supplementary crop of rice and other upland crops. This hzppens because of biased technological changes and price policy in favor of rice. If other