Methodology for evaluating the effectiveness of land asset management by companies in agribusiness and renewable energy

Abstract

The article develops and tests a comprehensive methodology for evaluating the effectiveness of land asset management by companies combining agribusiness and renewable energy projects, under intensifying competition for land and the need to balance food security with the energy transition; the aim is to bridge the methodological gap between monocriteria approaches and strategic planning practice by constructing a composite index that integrates financial-economic, operational-technological, and ecological-social parameters. The empirical base draws on anonymized financial and production data for 2018–2023 covering land banks totaling over 500,000 hectares and is supplemented with industry statistics; the methodology includes a systems approach, comparative and economic-statistical analysis, simulation modeling, and the Analytic Hierarchy Process with 15 experts to determine block weights. A composite index is proposed with weights of 0.4 for the financial block (revenue and EBITDA per hectare, ROA, capital intensity), 0.4 for the operational block (electricity generation per hectare, crop yield, coefficient of land utilization — KIZ), and 0.2 for the environmental block (impacts on soils and biodiversity). Comparative evaluation of three archetypal strategies (agricultural, energy, diversified) shows that the diversified model achieves maximum effectiveness: a final index of 0.934 versus 0.802 for energy and 0.613 for agriculture; the diversified company exhibits the highest ROA (9.57%), combining high-margin renewables with less capital-intensive crop production, whereas a pure-play energy model, despite leading in revenue/EBITDA per hectare, lags in return on assets due to high capital intensity and a lower KIZ. The discussion confirms that managed diversification (including agrivoltaics) with 15–20% of land allocated to renewables while maintaining high agronomic standards maximizes composite efficiency; the methodology can serve as a tool for strategic audit, investment appraisal, and regulatory benchmarking, while further research should incorporate price stochasticity and climate risks.