3 ms·

> Why should lots of microfarms produce less food, than one "macrofarm" of the same size? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economies_of_scale https://en.wikipedia

• hutzlibu 10y ago
  But the amount of sun shining on the same size of land is exactly the same - no matter how small you splitt it up.
  • snikeris 10y ago
    The macrofarm will be able to afford innovations before each microfarm will. Suppose a tool is developed that harvests vegetables better than existing methods. Let's say it's less likely to crush the vegetable it's picking. It's new technology so it's expensive, but if you're operating at a large enough scale, it might be worth the cost. In this case, each microfarm will produce less vegetables than a macrofarm of the same size. I wasn't trying to be a jerk by linking to the Wikipedia article. It seemed to me like you weren't familiar with the concept.
    • hutzlibu 10y ago
      > It seemed to me like you weren't familiar with the concept And you seem to me, like you were not familiar with the topic being discussed: output of the same amount of land, no matter the required work (because of robots) So, nevermind ;)
      • HeyLaughingBoy 10y ago
        The problem isn't the potential output of the land; it's that the costs go up rapidly. With a very large field a traditional tractor/plow/disk/seeder/cultivator can do a lot of work in a short amount of time. If the field is now 1/100 the size, the "tractor" (robot, etc.) and its implements don't cost 1/100 as much. They may only cost 1/5 as much, so your costs are now 20x what they would otherwise have been for the proportional output. I think that's the point he was trying to make.