Labor efficiency in agricultural enterprises: indicators, trends, increasing strategy

Keywords: labor efficiency, labor productivity, GDP at purchasing power parity, sectoral structure of employment, agricultural enterprise, strategy to increase labor efficiency


The article has been further developed the recommendations for increasing labor efficiency in agricultural enterprises. The peculiarities and role of labor in the agricultural sector have been revealed. Various conceptual approaches to assessing labor efficiency, indicators and factors of its provision have been considered. It has been substantiated that labor productivity not only characterizes the efficiency of the enterprise’s personnel, but also shows the general results of social development and the country’s rating on a global scale.

It has been substantiated that a significant labor productivity increase is positive in terms of economic efficiency; however, such trends have negative social consequences, as the need for staff decreases. To assess the personnel use effectiveness of the worldwide, indicators such as the production of GDP at purchasing power parity per capita and GDP at purchasing power parity per person-hour have been evaluated. Leaders among European countries in terms of labor efficiency have been identified. These include Ireland, Norway, Luxembourg, France, the Netherlands, Denmark, Switzerland, Sweden, Austria and the United Kingdom.

A research of labor efficiency trends in agriculture has been carried out. It has been found that in 2019 the share of workers employed in agriculture on average in the world was 26.9 %, which is 16.8 percentage points less than in 1991. The share of agricultural employment in European countries, which are leaders in the level of labor efficiency, ranges from 0.961 % in Belgium to 6.873 % in Lithuania, the highest labor productivity in agriculture is observed in Denmark – 216.68 million EUR per worker, labor productivity in agricultural enterprises of Ukraine has been twice lower than in Latvia and 20 times lower than in Denmark.

The main strategy to increase labor efficiency in agricultural enterprises should be a balanced approach to ensuring economic, social and environmental efficiency.


1. Petrova I. L. (1996) Rynok pratsi: protses sehmentatsii [Labor market: the process of segmentation]. UDPU. Kyiv.
2. Pogorelova T.O. (2016) «Analysis of factors that affect the efficiency of the personnel of the enterprise». Visnyk Natsional'-noho tekhnichnoho universytetu «Kharkivs'kyj politekhnichnyj instytut». no. 27 (1199). pp. 17-21.
3. Ryzhikh V. and Morozova N. (2018) «Features of the structure of employment and the problem of quality of labor potential in the domestic labor market: aspects of state regulation». Derzhavne upravlinnia ta mistseve samovriaduvannia. Issue 3 (38). pp. 84-92.
4. Markina I. A. and Mikhailov O. O. (2014) «Formation of personnel potential of Ukrainian enterprises in modern realities». Ekonomichnyj analiz : zb. nauk. prats': Ternopil's'kyj natsional'nyj ekonomichnyj universytet; redkol. Volume 17. № 2. pp. 69–75.
5. Tanasyuk I. and Orlenko O. (2018) «The main directions of increasing staff productivity in modern conditions». Naukovyj visnyk Odes'koho natsional'noho ekonomichnoho universytetu. no. 11. pp. 179–196.
6. Orlenko O.M. (2011) Labor productivity as a criterion for the effectiveness of innovative activities of the enterprise. Visnyk Khmel'nyts'koho natsional'noho universytetu. no. 2. Volume. 2. pp. 91-95.
7. Samoilyk Iu., Zos-Kior М., Kuksa I., & Storoška M. (2017) Methodology for assessing globalisation development of countries. Economic Annals-XXI. Volume 168, Issue 11-12. pp. 4-8.
8. Eurostat. Database. URL :
9. OECD (2019). Productivity-statistics. URL :
10. Worldbank. URL :
11. Agricultural statistics for 2018. Editor Prokopenko O.V. State Statistics Service of Ukraine. K. 2019. 235 p.
How to Cite
Berezina , L., Samoilyk , I., & Bodryi , Y. (2019). Labor efficiency in agricultural enterprises: indicators, trends, increasing strategy. Bulletin of Sumy National Agrarian University, (4 (82), 106-113.