Impact of eco-friendly practices on technical efficiency of grafting tomato production: Evidence from tomato growers of Moulvibazar district in Bangladesh

 Corresponding author: Subrata Koiry Copyright © 2025 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article. This article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0. Impact of eco-friendly practices on technical efficiency of grafting tomato production: Evidence from tomato growers of Moulvibazar district in Bangladesh Md Tarek Nasir Ullah 2, Subrata Koiry 1, *, Md. Rafizul Islam Mondal 3, S S R M MAHE ALAM SORWAR 3 and Atiqur Rahman 2 1 Department of Agricultural Finance and Banking, Sylhet Agricultural University, Sylhet, Bangladesh. 2 Rural Microenterprise Transformation Project (RMTP), Patakuri Society, Bangladesh. 3 Rural Microenterprise Transformation Project (RMTP), Palli Karma-Sahayak Foundation (PKSF), Bangladesh. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 28(02), 1855-1871 Publication history: Received 25 September 2025; revised on 17 November 2025; accepted on 19 November 2025 Article DOI: https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2025.28.2.3732 Abstract This study examines how eco-friendly farming practices affect the technical efficiency of grafted tomato production in Moulvibazar District, Bangladesh. Primary data was collected from 210 tomato producers using the multistage sampling technique. The collected data was analyzed to estimate technical efficiency and its determinants by employing stochastic frontier analysis (SFA). Results found that tomato farmers were about 71% efficient, which implies that tomato production could be increased by nearly 29% if resources and technology were used optimally. The study discovered that while higher input costs lowered productivity, using more land, labor, and tractors helped enhance tomato output. Education, household size, access to training, access to extension services, and experience with grafting improved efficiency, whereas leasing land and earning income from non-farming activities caused a lowering of efficiency. Eco-friendly practices like mixed cropping, using vermicompost, yellow sticky traps, pheromone traps, and mulching films significantly improved efficiency, making farmers 2% to 98% more efficient than those who didn’t adopt these methods. These practices helped better manage inputs, control pests, and maintain healthy soil, boosting both productivity and environmental sustainability. Therefore, promoting eco-friendly tomato production practices through national programs, better extension services, improved credit access, and secure land rights can promote sustainable farming adoption and raise tomato production efficiency. Keywords: Mixed Cropping; Mulching Films; Pheromone Trap; SFA; Yellow Paper 1. Introduction The concerns about sustainable agricultural production arise worldwide due to the dual implications of this sector in the economy and environment. On one hand, agriculture is criticized for damaging ecological balance, polluting air, water, and soil, and causing biodiversity and habitat loss. In contrast, it produces renewable energy, preserves landscapes and biodiversity (Röös et al., 2018), and ensures food security and safety. In response to the abovementioned challenges, the sustainability advocates are emphasizing eco-friendly and safe cultivation practices in agricultural production for environmental betterment. Therefore, it is necessary to direct agricultural production towards efficient and sustainable practices that can reduce the adverse effects generated by agriculture. Being an agriculturally based economy, Bangladesh aims to make its agricultural sector sustainable to provide rural livelihoods, ensure food security, and make a remarkable contribution to its economy. Therefore, to achieve sustainability, the country should prioritize pollution-lessening farming practices in the agriculture sector, especially in the crop and vegetable sector. These two sectors contribute approximately 5.88% to the country’s total gross domestic World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 28(02), 1855-1871 1856 product (GDP) (BBS, 2022). Also, vegetables play a crucial role in meeting food and nutrition security in Bangladesh. Among vegetables, tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) is the most widely cultivated high-value vegetable in Bangladesh, serving both domestic consumption and emerging markets. The favorable and diverse agro-ecological conditions, better market availability, and technological improvement permit the cultivation of tomatoes both in winter and summer (Das and Jahan, 2022) in Bangladesh. Bangladeshi vegetable producers gradually shifted from conventional to grafted tomato cultivation (Rahman and Acharjee, 2020), which is much more favorable for the environment. Grafting tomatoes is more suitable for the summer season than non-grafting tomatoes (Das and Jahan, 2022), provides higher yields, and benefits the environment by demanding fewer pesticides, as they are disease resistant (Petluru et al., 2024). Although they require higher costs, labor, and time for production and sometimes lead to plant health and growth issues due to physiological disorders and improper management (Barret et al., 2012; Lee et al., 2010). However, the popularity of grafting tomatoes is increasing day by day among Bangladeshi farmers due to its higher yield and long production season. Additionally, grafting in tomato production benefits farmers by enhancing income generation and contributing to poverty alleviation (Das and Jahan, 2022). Despite these advantages, tomato production in this country still relies heavily on synthetic inputs, excessive water use, and traditional input-intensive practices. Such practices generate higher yields in the short term, but they degrade soil, pollute water bodies, and compromise food safety in the long term (Amirahmadi et al., 2023). Additionally, excessive use of agrochemicals creates health hazards for both producers and consumers (Anjaria and Vaghela, 2024), highlighting the necessity for more sustainable approaches to vegetable production. Integrated pest management, mixed cropping, and the use of organic inputs are such eco-friendly and sustainable approaches in tomato production that they require fewer fossil inputs and are able to maintain productivity. Use of yellow sticky paper and pheromone traps physically controls insects and reduces the application of insecticides (Gan et al., 2024). Similarly, the use of mulching films lowers the weedicide and herbicide usage by deterring the growth of weeds (Zhang et al., 2024). These eco-friendly practices promote soil health, conserve natural resources, reduce the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, and enhance food safety and quality while mitigating pollution (Wang, 2023). However, the adoption of such safe farming practices remains limited, and several factors can contribute to it. For instance, how these practices affect the productivity and net income of farmers remains unclear. Farmers will only adopt these practices if they are beneficial in terms of both productivity and net returns. Efficiency, more specifically technical efficiency, is defined as the ability of a farm to produce the maximum output from a given set of inputs, which is an important indicator of farm performance or productivity. So, understanding how eco-friendly practices influence technical efficiency is essential for identifying strategies that simultaneously improve productivity, sustainability, and farmers' profitability. Specifically, this study will answer the following questions: What is the extent of adoption of ecofriendly and safe vegetable production techniques among tomato farmers? How do these practices affect technical efficiency in tomato production? What are the determinants of technical inefficiency? By addressing these questions, this study provides detailed insights into how eco-friendly practices contribute to both productivity and environmental sustainability in tomato farming. Empirical evidence suggests that ecofriendly practices may affect technical efficiency in both positive and negative ways. For instance, organic farming retards the use of synthetic inputs and lowers the cost of production but reduces productivity (OECD, 2018). Koiry and Huang (2023) showed that mixed cropping enhances productivity while organic farming reduces it. Application of pesticides protects production by lowering pest damage but adversely affects the organisms required for future production (Skevas and Lansink, 2014). Investment also plays a crucial role in the success of ecological practices (Jaeck and Lifran, 2014). Practices that demand higher investment but generate lower productivity may discourage further adoption. In the context of tomato cultivation, partial substitution of chemical fertilizers with organic fertilizers resulted in higher yield and net returns in Bangladesh (Haque et al., 2023), highlighting both economic and environmental benefits. Studies showed that conservation farming practices may bring efficiency gains (Chaudhary et al., 2022) but may result in substantial inefficiencies among tomato farmers (Kabir et al., 2020). Therefore, the evidence on the association between eco-friendly practices and technical efficiency is inconclusive, practice-, region-, and context-specific. So, there remains a notable gap in understanding the joint impact of multiple eco-friendly and safe vegetable production techniques on technical efficiency, particularly for tomato farming. The present study attempts to address this gap by examining the adoption status of eco-friendly and safe vegetable farming practices among tomato farmers in the Moulvibazar district of Bangladesh and their impact on technical efficiency. Additionally, it also examines the farm-specific, socioeconomic, and institutional determinants of inefficiency. Moreover, this study has significant contributions to the literature. Firstly, it will deliver evidence on the effect of ecofriendly practices on technical efficiency by focusing on an under-researched crop and region of Bangladesh. Secondly, it bridges the gap between identifying the practices that should be adopted and understanding how they affect farm performance. Thirdly, what factors should the policymakers consider for the design of targeted interventions in the World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 28(02), 1855-1871 1857 future? Overall, this study extends research that has largely focused on staple crops and broad national trends, thereby filling a critical knowledge gap. 2. Literature review The horticultural sector in Bangladesh has grown considerably in recent years, with tomatoes emerging as a major cash crop for rural households. Despite this growth, tomato production efficiency remains constrained by various factors. Therefore, understanding the determinants of technical efficiency is crucial from both empirical and policy-oriented viewpoints. An extensive body of literature discussed the several aspects of tomato production as well as presented that efficiency is affected not only by farm and household characteristics but also institutional factors, technological improvement, and production practices. Therefore, the relationship between eco-friendly production practices and technical efficiency is important to understand. This review summarizes the key contributions from the past literature by focusing on grafted tomato systems and eco-friendly practices and highlights the gaps that motivate the present study. A number of research studies examined the technical efficiency of tomato production, especially in smallholder settings. For instance, Mwangi et al. (2020) found that education and access to extension services are significant contributors to input inefficiencies in tomato production. Age and education were also found to be the main determinants of technical inefficiency in Pakistan (Khan and Shoukat, 2013). Mitra and Yunus (2018) used input-oriented data envelopment analysis (DEA) and estimated the existence of 17% inefficiency among Bangladeshi tomato farmers and identified the favorable effect of education, training, and improved variety on efficiency, whereas age had an adverse effect. By employing meta frontier analysis, Aloysius et al. (2021) found technological gaps such as choice of varieties and management practices among various farmer groups in terms of technical efficiency. The location of farms, extension services, irrigation rate, and cropping pattern are principal determinants of economic and technical efficiency in Nigeria (Tsoho et al., 2012). However, tomato yield can be affected in various ways. Precise application of pesticides and fertilizers can lower input wastages and improve crop health, thereby enhancing yield (Beyuo et al., 2024). Because depending too much on chemical-intensive methods results in pesticide resistance, ecological pollution, and pesticide poisoning to farmers (Schreinemachers et al., 2017b). Some production techniques, like the incorporation of organic inputs, improved irrigation plans, and balanced nutrition, increase the yield potential of plants whose root systems respond to soil conditions (Ray et al., 2025). Integrated pest management increases production efficacy along with attenuating crop losses and enhancing effective output. Timeliness of operations and worker safety measures affect labor productivity, which in turn influences crop yield. Therefore, safe farming practices have the potential to enhance technical efficiency, but that depends on several factors. Eco-friendly approaches have also been evaluated in terms of other contexts. Ahmed and Shams (1998) study the feasibility of ecological inputs using partial budget analysis. Smits et al. (2008) examined the role of good governance in the adoption of eco-friendly ways of production. The role of eco-friendly farming in poverty reduction, political stabilization, and environmental regeneration is studied by Shukla and Rajan (1996). Owusu-Sekyere et al. (2020) investigated the heterogeneous customer demand for ecologically produced food items, while the interaction between ecological farming and productivity is examined by Coomes et al. (2019). Based on this literature, it may be argued that ecologically friendly agriculture can play a role in various dimensions and contexts of society, the economy, and the environment. To conclude, there remains limited understanding of how specific eco-friendly practices affect technical efficiency in grafted tomato systems in Bangladesh, highlighting a clear gap for empirical investigation. 3. Methodology 3.1. Study area, sampling technique and data This study used a cross-sectional research design by following a quantitative approach to investigate the association between eco-friendly practices and technical efficiency in tomato production. Since there is uncertainty whether farmers will continue tomato production with eco-friendly practices in the medium or long term, the cross-sectional design was adopted. A multistage sampling procedure was followed to collect primary data from tomato farmers. At the first stage, Kamalganj upazila in Moulvibazar district was purposively chosen in accordance with the funders' and projects' demand, as interventions were conducted there. Kamalganj upazilla comprises 9 unions. In the second stage, World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 28(02), 1855-1871 1858 5 unions were randomly selected from 9 unions using the lottery method. In the third stage, 2 villages were randomly selected from each of the 5 selected unions. Finally, at the fourth stage, 210 grafted tomato producers from 10 villages were selected using a simple random sampling technique. The simple random sampling method was chosen for its ease of use, suitability for large populations, ability to minimize selection bias, and potential to generalize findings. The total sample size for this research was determined by employing Cochran's (1977) formula. 𝑛 =𝑍2𝑝(1−𝑝) 𝑑2 ………. (1) Where, n depicts the sample size, p is the population proportion (0.5), q = 1-p (0.5), d is the margin of error (i.e., 0.05) and Z is the standard deviation for 95% confidence interval. Therefore, the total sample size will be as follows, 𝑛 =(1.96)2×0.5×0.5 (0.05)2 =384 Due to time and funding constraints, and for the purpose of better representation, this study selected 210 tomato growers as sample respondents. Data were collected from sample respondents through face-to-face interviews using a structured questionnaire in the month of September, 2025. 3.2. Variables description This study incorporated many variables that represent the socio-economic characteristics of tomato producers, inputoutput relationships in tomato production, and several eco-friendly tomato production practices. Five input variables were used in this study through detailed calculations. Among them, land is the most crucial input in tomato cultivation. Land implies the total amount of area on which one household produced tomatoes in a season. Land was initially measured in decimal and then transformed into hectares (Ha) by dividing 247 decimals for standard representation. The variable Labor constituted both the family (i.e., family labor involved in tomato production activities directly) and hired labor. At first, the number of hours spent on each activity by both the family members and hired workers was accounted for and then converted to man-days by dividing the total hours of working by 8 hours. Materials implies the cost of physical inputs used in tomato production. It includes all types of physical inputs used in tomato production. For example, chemical fertilizers (i.e., ammonium sulfate, triple super phosphate, muriate of potash, borax, gypsum, zinc sulfate, diammonium phosphate), organic fertilizers (i.e., cow dung, vermicompost), plant protection materials (i.e., insecticides, pesticides, weedicides, herbicides), tomato saplings, staking materials, pheromone lures, yellow sticky papers, sticky materials, mulching films, and other materials such as rope, bamboo poles, and tying materials. To maintain the uniformity in units, the cost of all these physical inputs was summed up under the variable Materials. The irrigation cost is another important variable in tomato cultivation, which depicts the total amount of money a farmer spent for irrigating the tomato plants. The tractor cost implies the amount of money spent by the farmer to prepare land by ploughing, harrowing, and leveling. Output is measured in kilograms (kg) and used as the dependent variable in technical efficiency analysis in this paper. It represents the total amount of tomatoes produced from the total cultivated land area during a season. The variable Total return was calculated by adding all the money the farmer received from selling tomatoes at different times throughout the season and the opportunity cost of family consumption. Among the socio-economic variables Age was represented in years and calculated by subtracting the household head’s year of birth from the current year of production. Education was also measured in years by recording the number of years the farmer spent in a formal institution. Household size was measured by adding all individuals living in the household, including old-aged people, adults, and children, who share meals and contribute to or depend on household resources. Gender was recorded as that of the household head, coded as 0 for female and 1 for male. Marital status was also recorded as the legal or personal condition of a farmer in relation to marriage and coded as 0 for unmarried, 1 for married, and 2 for others (divorced or separated). The variable number of earning members implies the total number of active people in a household who earn and contribute to family resources. The variable Occupation was coded as 0 for the farmers whose primary livelihood depended on vegetable production and 1 for those who earned a livelihood by doing other activities such as day laboring, business, or formal or informal jobs. Experience indicates the number of years farmers have been actively engaged in vegetable or tomato production. The variable "years to adoption of grafted" depicts the number of years a farmer has been using grafted saplings in their tomato cultivation. The source of the grafted sapling was coded as 0 if the farmer produced the tomato sapling using the grafting technique by themselves and 1 if the farmer purchased grafted saplings from the market or local nursery. Land tenure is a categorical variable in this study that describes the type of land ownership or access arrangement a farmer had for cultivating tomatoes. It was World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 28(02), 1855-1871 1859 coded as 0 if the farmer cultivated tomatoes only on his own land, 1 if the farmer produced tomatoes on leased land, and 2 if the farmer cultivated tomatoes on both his own and leased land (i.e., mixed tenure). Access to extension services reflects whether the farmer received advice or support from government extension officers or non-government organizations. Access to credit denotes whether the farmer had access to formal or informal credit facilities for financing rice production. Access to training indicates whether the farmer has participated in any training programs related to crop production or farm management. All three of these variables are binary and coded as 0 for no access and 1 for access. The five variables related to eco-friendly practices—vermicompost use, mixed cropping adoption, yellow sticky paper use, pheromone trap use, and mulching film use—are binary in this study and were coded as 0 for farmers who did not adopt the practices and 1 for those who did. 3.3. Technical efficiency and stochastic frontier approach The production theory of economics postulates two measures of efficiency: allocative and technical efficiency. If a farm can attain both, that is regarded as economically efficient. This research mainly focused on technical efficiency, which indicates a farm’s ability to produce maximum output from a given number of inputs (Farrell, 1957). Because technical inefficiency can be reduced by managing the managerial practices in the farm. The measurement of efficiency is widely discussed in the literature, and researchers’ attempts to measure technical efficiency can be categorized into two approaches: parametric and non-parametric. Non-parametric approaches are those deterministic ways that use mathematical programming to measure efficiency. Data envelopment analysis (DEA) is such a non-parametric technique that estimates the technical efficiency of a decision-making unit (DMU) (Arabmaldar et al., 2023), although this approach is more useful for the industrial sector rather than agriculture (Srinivasulu et al., 2015). Although the DEA model can handle multiple outputs and inputs, it is unable to separate efficiency scores from unknown variations. Also, it is unable to estimate model parameters (Kavoi et al., 2016) and sensitive to outliers. In contrast, the parametric approach, such as stochastic frontier analysis (SFA), is advantageous as output variability arises from uncertain events. SFA allows for estimation of the production frontier by decomposing the error term into inefficiency and random error components. This study employs the SFA model, which was proposed by Aigner et al. (1977) and Meeusen and van den Broeck (1977) and further developed by Battese and Coelli (1995), to estimate the technical efficiency of tomato production. According to Aigner et al. (1977) and Meeusen and van den Broeck (1977), SFA estimates the deviation of actual output from the potential frontier and distinguishes between inefficiency and stochastic shocks caused by random external factors. The model is useful mainly for two reasons: 1) Tomato production usually depends on uncertain conditions like pest and disease attacks or climatic variability. 2) It allows for testing of hypotheses to specify a functional form. A tremendous advantage of this model is that it includes an inefficiency component, which is utilized to test for the degree of technical inefficiency of farming households (Okoye et al., 2016). Though its main weakness lies in its assumption, which requires an explicit form for technology and distribution of the inefficiency terms (Haji and Andersson, 2006). The stochastic production function can be represented as follows; 𝑌𝑙=𝑓(𝑋𝑙,𝛽)exp(∈𝑘) …………………(2) Where, Yl is the output produced by the lth farm, Xl is the vector of inputs used by the lth farm, l indicates number of farms (1,…,N), i 𝑓(.) indicates the production frontier, 𝛽 represents the vector of parameters, and ∈𝑙= 𝑉𝑙−𝑈𝑙. 𝑉𝑙 depicts the noise term which follows normal distribution with mean 0 and variance σ2. 𝑈𝑙 is the non-negative technical inefficiency of the lth farm. From equation (2) the technical inefficiency of the farmer can be expressed as; 𝑇𝐸𝑙=𝑌𝑙 𝑌𝑙∗ = (𝑋𝑙,𝛽)exp (𝑉𝑙−𝑈𝑙) (𝑋𝑙,𝛽)exp (𝑉𝑙) …………….(3) Where the numerator represents the frontier output and the denominator implies the observed output of the lth farmer. Therefore, 𝑇𝐸𝑙=exp(−𝑈𝑙) …………………….(4) The equation can be also expressed as follows; −𝑈𝑙= 𝛿𝑜+∑𝛿𝑟𝐾𝑟+𝜑𝑟 𝑟 𝑟=1 ………….. (5) World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 28(02), 1855-1871 1860 Where, 𝐾𝑟 indicates variables that affects technical inefficiency and 𝛿𝑟 is the estimated parameter of 𝐾𝑟. The value of technical inefficiency −𝑈𝑙 varies from 0 to 1, where 1 indicates full efficiency and 0 otherwise. 3.4. Empirical model specification for stochastic frontier analysis (SFA) Examination of technical efficiency by using the stochastic frontier model demands specifying a production function. The Cobb-Douglas production function was chosen over the translog production function in this paper due to its flexibility. Also, both the Cobb-Douglas and trans-log production functions were tested using the likelihood ratio (LR) test, and based on the results (Table 2), the Cobb-Douglas production function was chosen. It is specified as; 𝑌𝑗=𝛽0+∑𝛽𝑘ln𝑋𝑗𝑘 5 𝑘=1 +𝑣𝑗−𝑢𝑗……………..(6) 4. Results and Discussion 4.1. Descriptive statistics The descriptive statistics of socio-economic characteristics of tomato farmers in Kamalganj upazila, the status of ecofriendly practices, and the input used by sampled tomato farmers are presented in Table 1. The average age of tomato farmers was 42 years in the study area, which indicates that most of the tomato farmers were in their middle and active age. Middle-aged farmers are more involved in vegetable production due to their risk-bearing capacity and considerable experience (Hasan et al., 2025). The household heads had an average of five years of schooling, indicating that most tomato producers had completed primary education. Education is a crucial factor to increase awareness and adoption of good agricultural practices (Hasan et al., 2024). Our findings indicate the limited adoption of eco-friendly practices. The average household size of tomato-growing households was 5 members, indicating that a medium-sized family may provide adequate labor for grafted tomato production, which is labor-intensive in Bangladesh. The national rural average family size is also around five members (BBS, 2023). In the study area, the average number of earning members per household was one, suggesting a low dependency ratio. The agricultural sector is male-dominated (Peralta, 2022), which aligns with the findings of this study stating that 91% of households were headed by males in the study area. The majority, 93%, of farmers (i.e., household heads) were married, indicating family stability, which may favorably affect labor allocation and management. Vegetables, specifically tomatoes, were the main source of income for 95% of respondents, indicating a high level of specialization in vegetable farming. Such specialization may reduce inefficiency in vegetable production by enhancing technical knowledge and skills (Hasan et al., 2020). The tomato growers had a mean experience of 22 years in vegetable cultivation, which is likely to positively influence the productivity of grafted tomato production. Access to extension services from government and non-government institutions was relatively high in the study area, estimated at 83%, which is encouraging, as extension services, training, and credit play a crucial role in promoting eco-friendly practices and advanced production techniques. Access to training and extension services has a positive impact on productivity (Antwi-Agyei and Stringer, 2021; Hossain and Rahman, 2021; Boothby et al., 2010). Also, limited credit availability may constrain the adoption of eco-friendly practices, which may often require a handsome amount of investment (Zhang et al., 2025). In the study area, 53% of farmers received training, but only 23% of farmers had access to credit for tomato production. The descriptive statistics on the land tenure system show that 57% of farmers grew tomatoes on their own land, 33% on leased land, and 10% under mixed tenure arrangements. This distribution indicates a considerable share of tenant farming. The adoption of eco-friendly practices among tomato farmers was varied and specifically focused on pesticide reduction. About 59% of farmers produced grafted saplings in their own homestead area or nursery, while 41% purchased grafted saplings from a local market or nursery. The average time to adoption of grafting techniques was 5 years among tomato producers. Regarding organic soil management, 44% of farmers applied vermicompost to produce tomatoes, while cow dung remained the main organic input in the study area. About 94% of farmers applied cow dung as organic fertilizer for tomato production. The high use of cow dung reflects traditional organic practices, whereas vermicomposting, being a relatively modern method, remains less adopted. The use of pest management practices such as yellow sticky papers (45%), pheromone traps (42%), and mulching films (74%) shows growing awareness of nonchemical pest control. These practices are essential for reducing pesticide dependency, thus lowering production costs and environmental damage. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 28(02), 1855-1871 1861 Table 1 Descriptive Statistics Variables Unit Mean/Percentage Standard deviation Socio-economic related variables Age years 42.0 12.0 Education years 5.0 3.32 Household size number 5.0 1.64 Number of earning members number 1.0 0.69 Gender Female (0) % 9.0 28.09 Male (1) % 91.0 28.09 Marital Status Unmarried (0) % 6.0 23.58 Married (1) % 93.0 25.97 Others (2) % 1.0 0.09 Occupation Vegetable production (0) % 95.0 0.19 Others (1) % 5.0 0.17 Experience years 22.0 11.49 Access to extension service No (0) % 17.0 37.81 Yes (1) % 83.0 37.81 Access to training No (0) % 47.0 50.00 Yes (1) % 53.0 50.00 Access to credit No (0) % 77.0 42.22 Yes (1) % 23.0 42.22 Land tenure Own (0) % 57.0 49.61 Lease (1) % 33.0 47.13 Mixed (2) % 10.0 30.00 Eco-friendly farming related variables Sources of grafted saplings Own (0) % 41.0 49.32 Purchased (1) % 59.0 49.32 Years to adoption of grafting years 5 2.1 Use of vermicomposting World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 28(02), 1855-1871 1862 No (0) % 56.0 49.79 Yes (1) % 44.0 49.79 Cow dung No (0) % 6.0 24.41 Yes (1) % 94.0 24.41 Yellow paper use No (0) % 55.0 49.84 Yes (1) % 45.0 49.84 Pheromone trap use No (0) % 58.0 49.40 Yes (1) % 42.0 49.40 Mulching film use No (0) % 26.0 44.33 Yes (1) % 74.0 44.33 Input-Output related variables Output Kg 15807.0 15518.45 Land Ha 0.26 0.20 Labor Man-days 79.0 63.77 Material cost Taka 155862.0 141050.0 Irrigation cost Taka 7144.0 5683.19 Tractor cost Taka 6871.0 7804.42 Source: Authors’ estimation, 2025. Table 1 also shows that the average yield of grafted tomatoes was 15,807 kg per farm, with a standard deviation of 15,518 kg, indicating a considerable variability in yield among farmers. This may be the result of differences in management practices, technologies, and input application. The mean landholding among tomato farmers was 0.26 ha in the study area, suggesting smallholder tomato producers in Bangladesh. The average cost of materials, irrigation, and tractor cost of tomato production in the study area were calculated to be 155862, 7144, and 6871 Tk. Respectively. These findings are consistent with other studies, for instance (Das and Jahan, 2022). The mean amount of labor was calculated to be 79 man-days per farm, indicating the labor-intensive nature of tomato production in the study area. 4.2. Profitability of grafted tomato production Table 2 represents the profitability analysis of grafted tomato production in Kamalganj upazila. The findings demonstrated the impact of various costs and returns on tomato growers' profitability and its economic viability. The findings show that the per hectare average cost of production was calculated to be 1057161 Tk. The total variable cost of tomato production in the study area amounted to 872,494 Tk., involving seedling, staking, vermicomposting, chemical fertilizer, and plant protection material costs. The total fixed costs, including family labor and land use, accounted for 184,667 Tk. The cost of labor, land use, and physical input materials were the major contributors to the cost of tomato production. Tomato farmers received a total return of 1,507,220 Tk., resulting in a gross margin of 634,726 Tk. and a net profit of 450,059 Tk. The benefit-cost ratio of tomato production was calculated to be 1.43, suggesting graftingbased tomato production was profitable. Farmers gained 1.43 Tk. for every 1 Tk. invested, which highlights the economic viability of tomato production. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 28(02), 1855-1871 1863 Table 2 Per hectare profitability of tomato production Variables Unit Quantity Price Cost / Returns Seedling cost Number 21203 10.23 216907 Stalking cost Number 21457 3.05 65444 Vermicompost cost Kg 5036.1 13.80 69498 Cost of cow dung Kg 11808 2.00 23616 Cost of chemical fertilizer Tk. - - 109159 Cost of vitamin use Tk. - - 5833 Cost of yellow paper Number 83 45 3735 Cost of Pheromone trap Number 56 60 3360 Cost of Mulching Tk. - - 99739 Cost of plant protection materials Tk. - - 108512 Cost of irrigation Tk. - - 31257 Cost of tractor Tk. - - 30234 Cost of Hired labor Man-days 263 400 105200 A. Total Variable cost Tk. 872494 Cost of Family labor (a) Tk. 60 400 24000 Cost of land use (b) Tk. - - 164667 B. Total Fixed cost (a + b) Tk. 184667 C. Total cost of production (A+B) Tk. 1057161 D. Total Return Tk. 68510 22 1507220 E. Gross Margin (D – A) Tk. 634726 F. Net margin (E – B) Tk. - - 450059 G. Benefit-Cost ratio (BCR) (D/C) 1.43 Source: Authors’ estimation, 2025. The profitability findings from this study are consistent with the previous studies that indicate significant economic benefits of tomato production. The BCR of 1.43 that indicates a positive return on investment is somewhat moderate compared to BCR values reported for other regions. For example, past studies reported the BCR of 1.77 in rooftop tomato farming in northern Bangladesh (Yunus et al., 2023) and 4.19 in hybrid tomato cultivation in Jessore (Lyndem, 2021). Variations in BCR are attributable to differences in farming systems, input costs, and local agro-ecological conditions. The considerable input costs observed in this study, particularly for vermicomposting and mulching, reflect the emphasis on sustainable organic amendments and soil cover techniques. These practices are known to enhance soil health and reduce chemical dependency (Manzoor et al., 2024). The profitability scenario of the study area supports the sustainability of tomato production. Because the application of organic fertilizer and eco-friendly techniques enhanced both yield and production quality, thereby improving profitability (Laily et al., 2021). Labor remains a significant cost component of grafting-based tomato cultivation, constituting a considerable amount of total expenses when including hired and family labor, highlighting labor-intensive activities such as staking, mulching, and pest management. 4.3. Model specification test results Table 3 compares the Cobb-Douglas and Translog production functions for estimating technical efficiency by following the stochastic frontier approach. The Cobb-Douglas production function, with 26 parameters, yielded a log-likelihood of -140.67, an AIC of 167.89, and a BIC of 201.78. In contrast, the Translog production function, with 40 parameters, estimated a log-likelihood of -186.45, an AIC of 193.33, and a BIC of 280.36. Since the Cobb-Douglas production function has both lower AIC and BIC than the Translog function, the findings indicate that the Cobb-Douglas production function World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 28(02), 1855-1871 1870 [36] Jabran, K. (2019). Role of mulching in pest management and agricultural sustainability. Springer. [37] Jaeck, M., and Lifran, R. (2014). Farmers’ preferences for production practices: A choice experiment study in the Rhone River Delta. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 65, 112–130. [38] Kabir, M. H., Azad, M. J., and Islam, M. N. (2020). Exploring the determinants and constraints of smallholder vegetable farmers’ adaptation capacity to climate change: A case of Bogura District, Bangladesh. Journal of Agricultural and Crop Research, 8(9), 176–186. [39] Kavoi, M. M., Najjuma, E., and Mbeche, R. (2016). Assessment of technical efficiency of open field production in Kiambu county, Kenya (Stochastic frontier approach). Journal of Agriculture, Science and Technology, 17(2). [40] Khan REA, Shoukat G (2013). Technical efficiency of tomato production: a case study of district Peshawar (Pakistan). World Applied Sciences Journal 28(10):1389-1392. [41] Kifelew, H., Bihon, W., Ramasamy, S., Wondimu, G., and Bashir, B. (2024). Improving tomato production through good agricultural practices (GAP) in Central Rift Valley of Ethiopia. International Journal of Pest Management, 1– 10. [42] Laily, U. K., Rahman, M. S., Haque, Z., Barman, K. K., and Talukder, M. A. H. (2021). Effects of organic fertilizer on growth and yield of tomato. Progressive Agriculture, 32(1), 10–16. [43] Lee, J. M., Kubota, C., Tsao, S. J., Bie, Z., Hoyos Echevarria, P., Morra, L., and Oda, M. (2010). Current status of vegetable grafting: Diffusion, grafting techniques, automation. Scientia Horticulturae, 127, 93–105. [44] Lyndem, F. (2021). Profitability of summer BARI hybrid tomato cultivation in Jessore District of Bangladesh. Journal of Agricultural Research and Development, 7(1). [45] Manzoor, A., Naveed, M. S., Ali, R. M. A., Naseer, M. A., Ul-Hussan, M., Saqib, M., Hussain, S., and Farooq, M. (2024). Vermicompost: A potential organic fertilizer for sustainable vegetable cultivation. Scientia Horticulturae, 336, 113443. [46] Meeusen, W., and van den Broeck, J. (1977). Efficiency estimation from Cobb-Douglas production functions with composed error. International Economic Review, 18(2), 435–444. [47] Mekonnen, A., Bezabih, M., and Gebreegziabher, Z. (2021). Technical efficiency and determinants among tomato producers in Ethiopia: Evidence from stochastic frontier analysis. Cogent Food and Agriculture, 7(1), 1950385. [48] Mitra, S., and Yunus, M. (2018). Determinants of tomato farmers’ efficiency in Mymensingh district of Bangladesh: Data Envelopment Analysis approach. Journal of the Bangladesh Agricultural University, 16(1), 93–97. [49] Mkhabela, T. S. (2010). Technical efficiency in a vegetable-based mixed-cropping sector in Tugela Ferry, Msinga District, KwaZulu-Natal. Agrekon, 44(2), 187–204. [50] Mohapatra, S., Padhi, J., and Singh, S. (2024). Enhancing yield and economic benefits through sustainable pest management in okra cultivation. Scientific Reports, 14, 22220. [51] Moreira, B., Gonçalves, A., Pinto, L., Prieto, M. A., Carocho, M., Caleja, C., and Barros, L. (2024). Intercropping systems: An opportunity for environment conservation within nut production. Agriculture, 14(7), 1149. [52] Obianefo, C. A., Victor, U. U., Ezeano, I. C., and Anumudu, O. O. (2021). Technical efficiency and technological gap ratios of tomato production in Northern Nigeria: A stochastic meta‑frontier approach. Bangladesh Journal of Agricultural Economics, 42(1), 1–18. [53] OECD. (2025). Sustainable agricultural productivity to address food systems challenges: Measurement, data, drivers and policies. Proceedings from the OECD Conference, 28 October 2024. OECD Publishing, Paris. [54] Ogundari, K., and Ojo, S. O. (2007). Economic efficiency of small-scale food crop production in Nigeria: A stochastic frontier approach. Journal of Social Sciences, 14(2), 123–130. [55] Okoye, B. C., Abass, A., Bachwenkizi, B., Asumugha, G., Alenkhe, B., Ranaivoson, R., … Elliott, C. (2016). Differentials in technical efficiency among smallholder cassava farmers in Central Madagascar: A Cobb-Douglas stochastic frontier production approach. Cogent Economics and Finance, 4(1), 568. [56] Peralta, A. (2022). The role of men and women in agriculture and agricultural decisions in Vanuatu. Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies, 9(1), 59–80. [57] Petluru, S. S. R., Syed, S., and Priya, B. T. (2024). Effect of grafting on growth, yield, quality and nutrient uptake in tomato. International Journal of Advanced Biochemistry Research, 8(10). World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 28(02), 1855-1871 1871 [58] Rahman, M. S., and Acharjee, D. C. (2020). Impact of off-season summer tomato cultivation on income and food security of the growers. In I. O. Amao and I. B. Adeoye (Eds.), Agricultural economics. IntechOpen. [59] Rahman, S., and Salim, R. (2013). Six decades of total factor productivity change and sources of growth in Bangladesh agriculture (1948–2008). Journal of Agricultural Economics, 64(2), 275–294. [60] Ray, R. L., Kularathna, K. M., Griffin, R. W., Abeysingha, N., Woldesenbet, S., Elhassan, A., Awal, R., and Fares, A. (2025). Enhancing plant and soil health through organic amendments in a humid environment. Rhizosphere, 35, 101126. [61] Schreinemachers, P., Chen, H.-P., Nguyen, T. T. L., Buntong, B., Bouapao, L., Gautam, S., Le, N. T., Pinn, T., Vilaysone, P., and Srinivasan, R. (2017). Too much to handle? Pesticide dependence of smallholder vegetable farmers in Southeast Asia. Science of the Total Environment, 593–594, 470–477. [62] Sibiko, K. W., Ayuya, O. I., Gido, E. O., Mwangi, J. K., and Egerton, K. (2013). An analysis of economic efficiency in bean production: Evidence from Eastern Uganda. [63] Smits, M. J., Driessen, P., and Glasbergen, P. (2008). Governing agri-environmental schemes: Lessons to be learned from the new institutional economics approach. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 26(3), 627–643. [64] Srinivasulu, R., Victor, A. S., Daniel, K. K., Richard, M., Dannie, R., Magesa, A. M., and Radegunda, F. K. (2015). Technical efficiency of traditional African vegetable production: A case study of smallholders in Tanzania. Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics, 7(3), 92–99. [65] Tabe-Ojong, M. P. Jr., and Molua, E. L. (2017). Technical efficiency of smallholder tomato production in semiurban farms in Cameroon: A stochastic frontier production approach. Journal of Management and Sustainability, 7(4), 27–37. [66] Tsoho, B. A., Omotesho, O. A., Salau, S. A., and Adewumi, M. O. (2012). Determinants of technical, allocative and economic efficiencies among dry season vegetable farmers in Sokoto State, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Science, 3(2), 113–119. [67] Wang, P. L. (2023). Eco-friendly farming practices: Promoting sustainable agriculture. Ukrainian Journal of Ecology, 13(7), 10–12. [68] Xiao, L., Wei, X., Wang, C., and Zhao, R. (2023). Plastic film mulching significantly boosts crop production and water use efficiency but not evapotranspiration in China. Agricultural Water Management, 275, 108023. [69] Younas, H., Sadozai, K. N., Ali, A., and Ahmad, R. (2024). Technical efficiency and economic analysis of tomato production in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa: A stochastic frontier approach. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 40(3), 928– 942. [70] Yunus, M., Rahman, M. S., Islam, S., Saha, M., Foisal, M. S., and Islam, M. T. (2023). Organic and conventional tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) production in Mymensingh district of Bangladesh: A comparative profitability analysis. Journal of Agriculture, Food and Environment, 4(2), 16–21. [71] Zhang, H., Ma, W., and Sang, X. (2025). Credit access and sustainable farm investments: A dual perspective on chemical and environmentally friendly inputs. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 32(4), 485–497. [72] Zhang, J., Zhao, J., Sun, J., He, Y., Xie, Y., Liang, Q., Jing, J., Tao, Y., Yu, P., Jia, C., and Zhao, E. (2024). Herbigation combined with plastic film mulching to control weeds in maize (Zea mays L.) fields in the Hexi Corridor region, Northwest China. Crop Protection, 176, 106485.