Man vs machine - which works best in SA's farming sector?

South African farmers have embraced both mechanisation and staffing solutions to improve farm level efficiency. Sabrina Dean investigated the pros and cons of both and filed this report.

- 

Which is best for farm efficiency: capital investments into machinery or a labour workforce? The answer is not clear cut as it depends on a host of factors, ranging from scale of production to type of farming to social considerations.

In certain scenarios it is crucial to invest in the best machinery to remain competitive. Large-scale commercial grain farming is not viable with manual labour, for example.

On the other hand, many fruit or vegetable production scenarios require human-based feel and judgement, such as selecting properly ripe fruit during harvest, for example, or planting a bulb to face in the correct direction.

In cases of small-scale or seasonal operations, investment into machinery could turn into a liability if it fails to contribute enough to reach break-even point on the initial capital investment. In this article, we unpack some of the facts on both sides using localised examples, including costing considerations, as well as regulatory and wage dynamics. We will look into several different industries, including macadamias, grains, vegetables and pigs, to outline pros and cons of both approaches.

WHAT DOES THE RESEARCH SAY?

Farmers are working in an incredibly competitive global playing field with tight margins.

One critical choice is whether to commit financial resources for expensive, efficient machinery (capital investment), or instead focus efforts on staff expansion or upskilling (human capital).

The decision translates directly into efficiency, productivity and profitability at farm level. In the South African context, though, there are broader considerations that feed into the role of farming in the rural socioeconomic context, with impacts on rural communities also weighing on decisions in some cases.