## Unit-area Yield Comparison: Rice vs Wheat ## 단위면적당 생산량 비교: 쌀 vs 밀
Page Info
Writer Joshuaa
Hit 194 Hits
Date 26-01-05 12:54
Content
## Unit-area Yield Comparison: Rice vs Wheat
## 단위면적당 생산량 비교: 쌀 vs 밀
---
## English
### 1) What “yield per area” actually means (and why rice–wheat comparisons often go wrong)
**Yield** is typically reported as **tonnes per hectare (t/ha)**, i.e., how much grain is harvested per unit land area. For Korea, yield is often reported as **kg per 10a (10아르)**, where **10a = 0.1 ha** (so multiply by **10** to convert kg/10a → kg/ha).
Key pitfall: “Rice” can mean **paddy (rough rice)** or **milled (edible white rice)**. Many agricultural statistics report **paddy yield** for rice, while wheat is reported as harvested grain. Our World in Data’s FAO-based “rice yields” indicator explicitly defines yield as produced amount per unit land (t/ha). ([Our World in Data][1])
### 2) Typical yield levels (global scale vs Korea example)
#### Global “rule-of-thumb” averages (order-of-magnitude)
* **Rice (paddy)**: commonly cited global average around **~4–5 t/ha**; for example, one widely referenced figure is **~4.7 t/ha (2022)**.
* **Wheat**: global average often around **~3–4 t/ha**; one reported world-average estimate across **2016–2020** is **~3.48 t/ha**.
These are not “laws of nature”; they move with weather, technology, and where each crop is grown.
#### Korea (concrete, recent, apples-to-apples illustration)
* **Rice (Korea, 2024)**: Statistics Korea reported **514 kg/10a**, which equals:
* 514 kg/10a × 10 = **5,140 kg/ha = 5.14 t/ha**
* **Wheat (Korea, recent marketing-year estimates)**: USDA/FAS reporting for Korea lists wheat yields on the order of **~3.8 t/ha** (with year-to-year variation).
**Comparison (Korea example):**
5.14 t/ha (rice) ÷ 3.8 t/ha (wheat) ≈ **1.35** → rice is about **35% higher** in harvested weight per hectare in that illustrative pairing.
### 3) Why rice often yields more per hectare than wheat
**A. Production environment and management intensity**
* **Paddy rice** is frequently grown in controlled water conditions (flooded fields) that can stabilize yields and suppress weeds, enabling high biomass and grain filling.
* Rice systems in Asia often have **high input intensity** (irrigation infrastructure, transplanting/direct seeding systems, fertilizer regimes, pest management), pushing yields upward.
**B. Climate and where the crop is grown**
* Wheat is widely cultivated in **rainfed** and **semi-arid** regions, where moisture stress is common; this tends to pull down the global average.
* Rice is also grown in rainfed systems, but the “iconic” high-yield paddy systems dominate many production hubs.
**C. Crop physiology (practical takeaway, not textbook trivia)**
* Wheat is a cool-season cereal; heat waves during flowering/grain fill are damaging.
* Rice tolerates warm conditions better, but is vulnerable to heat at flowering too—so both face climate risks; the risk timing differs.
### 4) The “fair comparison” checklist (important for real analysis)
If you want a comparison that is meaningful for food security, economics, or diet, do not stop at raw t/ha.
1. **Edible output vs harvested output**
* Rice paddy → milled rice typically loses hull/bran; edible recovery can be roughly **~60–70%** depending on variety and milling.
* Wheat grain → flour extraction also loses bran/germ; recovery varies by milling goals.
Result: a rice advantage in paddy-weight can shrink when comparing **edible** kilograms.
2. **Calories and protein per hectare**
* Rice tends to produce **very high calories/ha** in intensive systems.
* Wheat often provides **higher protein concentration** and gluten functionality; for “nutrition per hectare,” wheat can look better on protein even if tonnes/ha are lower.
3. **Cropping intensity (multiple harvests per year)**
* Some rice regions manage **2–3 crops/year**; wheat is often **1 crop/year** (or part of a rotation). Annualized production per hectare can flip the story.
4. **Water footprint and risk**
* Rice can be yield-strong but water-demanding; where water is constrained, wheat (or other cereals) may be more viable.
### 5) Future outlook (what is likely to change the gap)
* Baseline trend: long-run yield growth has historically come from genetics + agronomy + mechanization + fertilizer efficiency; this is the backbone of OECD–FAO style outlooks that project continued yield increases (with variation by crop and region).
* Constraint trend: climate change is already assessed in research and reporting as a material drag on crop yields; wheat is often highlighted as climate-sensitive. ([Eco-Business][2])
Practical expectation:
* In advanced systems, **both** crops see incremental gains, but **water scarcity, heat stress, and input costs** will increasingly determine which crop “wins” economically per hectare, not just biological yield potential.
---
## 한국어
### 1) “단위면적당 생산량”의 의미와 비교가 흔히 틀어지는 지점
단위면적당 생산량(수량)은 보통 **t/ha(헥타르당 톤)**로 말합니다. 한국 통계에서는 **10a당 kg(kg/10a)**가 자주 쓰이며, **10a = 0.1ha**이므로 **kg/10a × 10 = kg/ha**로 바꾸면 됩니다.
비교에서 가장 큰 함정은 “쌀”이 **벼(왕겨 포함, paddy/rough)** 기준인지, **도정미(먹는 쌀, milled)** 기준인지입니다. OWID(FAO 기반)의 쌀 수량 지표는 단위면적 생산량을 **t/ha**로 정의합니다. ([Our World in Data][1])
### 2) 세계적 대략치 vs 한국의 구체 예시
#### 세계 평균(대략 범위)
* **쌀(벼 기준)**: 세계 평균은 대체로 **4~5 t/ha** 수준으로 많이 인용되며, 예시로 **2022년 약 4.7 t/ha** 같은 수치가 널리 알려져 있습니다.
* **밀**: 세계 평균은 대체로 **3~4 t/ha** 범위로 자주 언급되며, **2016~2020년 세계 평균 3.48 t/ha** 같은 추정치가 보고된 바 있습니다.
#### 한국(최근 수치로 감 잡기)
* **쌀(2024년)**: 통계청 발표 **10a당 514kg** →
* 514 × 10 = **ha당 5,140kg = 5.14 t/ha**
* **밀(한국, 최근 추정)**: USDA/FAS 자료에서 한국 밀 수량은 대략 **~3.8 t/ha** 수준(연도별 변동)으로 제시됩니다.
따라서 이 조합으로 단순 비교하면:
5.14 ÷ 3.8 ≈ **1.35** → 쌀이 **약 35%** 정도 더 “무게 기준 수량”이 높은 그림입니다.
### 3) 왜 쌀이 단위면적 수량에서 우세한 경우가 많은가
* **재배 환경(물 관리)**: 논벼는 물 관리(담수/관개)를 통해 잡초·변동성을 줄이고 안정적인 생육을 만들 수 있어 수량이 높아지기 쉽습니다.
* **투입 강도**: 비료·병해충 방제·기계화·품종개량이 집중된 지역에서 쌀은 매우 높은 수량을 냅니다.
* **밀의 입지**: 밀은 전 세계적으로 **건조·반건조, 천수(비의존) 지역** 비중이 높아 평균이 낮아지기 쉽습니다.
### 4) “공정 비교”를 위한 체크리스트(핵심)
1. **수확물(벼) vs 식품(쌀)**: 벼 수량이 높아도 도정 과정에서 줄어듭니다.
2. **칼로리/단백질/가공성**: 쌀은 칼로리/ha가 강하고, 밀은 단백질·글루텐 기반 가공성이 강점입니다.
3. **연간 작부체계**: 쌀은 2모작 이상 지역이 있고, 밀은 윤작의 일부인 경우가 많아 “연간 생산” 비교가 달라집니다.
4. **물·리스크 비용**: 물 부족 지역에서는 밀이 총비용 측면에서 유리해질 수 있습니다.
### 5) 미래(격차를 바꾸는 변수)
* OECD–FAO 계열 전망은 기술·품종·경영 개선으로 수량 증가가 이어질 가능성을 전제로 합니다(작물·지역별 차이 큼).
* 동시에 기후변화는 특히 밀에서 수량 하방 압력으로 자주 거론됩니다. ([Eco-Business][2])
결론적으로 앞으로는 “쌀이냐 밀이냐”를 단순 수량만이 아니라 **물/에너지 비용, 기후 리스크, 식품 수요 구조**까지 포함한 **단위면적당 ‘가치’**로 판단하는 비중이 커집니다.
---
## 日本語
### 1) 「単位面積当たり収量」と比較の注意点
収量は通常 **t/ha（ヘクタール当たりトン）**で表します。韓国の **kg/10a** は **×10** で **kg/ha** に換算できます。
最大の落とし穴は、米が **籾（もみ付き）**基準か、**精米（食用）**基準かです。OWID（FAOベース）は「収量＝単位面積当たりの生産量（t/ha）」として説明しています。 ([Our World in Data][1])
### 2) 水準感（世界の目安）と韓国の例
* 世界の目安として、米（籾）は **4～5 t/ha**程度がよく参照され、例として **2022年 約4.7 t/ha** が挙げられます。
* 小麦は **3～4 t/ha**程度が多く、**2016～2020年 世界平均 3.48 t/ha** という報告例があります。
韓国の例：
* 米（2024年）**514 kg/10a → 5.14 t/ha**
* 小麦（近年の推計）**~3.8 t/ha**規模
→ 5.14/3.8 ≈ **1.35**（米が約35%高い）
### 3) 米が高収量になりやすい理由
* 水管理・雑草抑制など、稲作は管理の“テコ”が効きやすい。
* 一方、小麦は乾燥地・天水栽培の比率が高く、平均収量が押し下げられやすい。
### 4) ちゃんと比べるための基準
* 籾→精米の歩留まり、
* カロリー/ha とタンパク/ha、
* 年間の作付回数（多収は「年」なのか「作」なのか）、
* 水コストと気象リスク、
を揃えると比較が実務的になります。
### 5) 将来の見通し
OECD–FAO系の見通しでは、技術・品種・経営改善で収量上昇が続く前提が一般的です。
ただし気候要因は小麦にとって逆風になり得る点が報じられています。 ([Eco-Business][2])
---
## Español
### 1) Qué significa “rendimiento por área” y por qué la comparación se confunde
El rendimiento suele expresarse como **t/ha**. En Corea también se usa **kg/10a** (10a = 0,1 ha), por lo que **kg/10a × 10 = kg/ha**.
El error típico: en arroz, a veces se reporta **arroz con cáscara (paddy)** y no **arroz blanco (molienda)**. OWID/FAO describe el rendimiento como producción por unidad de tierra (**t/ha**). ([Our World in Data][1])
### 2) Niveles típicos y ejemplo concreto (Corea)
* Arroz (paddy) suele citarse globalmente alrededor de **4–5 t/ha**; una cifra muy referenciada es **~4,7 t/ha (2022)**.
* Trigo suele ubicarse en **3–4 t/ha**; un promedio mundial reportado para **2016–2020** es **~3,48 t/ha**.
Ejemplo Corea:
* Arroz 2024: **514 kg/10a = 5,14 t/ha**
* Trigo: orden de **~3,8 t/ha** (variación anual)
→ 5,14/3,8 ≈ **1,35** (arroz ~35% superior en peso cosechado/ha)
### 3) Por qué el arroz suele rendir más por hectárea
* Sistemas de riego/inundación que estabilizan el cultivo y reducen malezas.
* Mayor intensidad de manejo en muchas regiones arroceras.
* El trigo se cultiva mucho en condiciones **de secano** y zonas semiáridas, lo que reduce el promedio.
### 4) Cómo comparar “bien”
* Convertir a **producto comestible** (paddy → arroz blanco).
* Comparar **calorías/ha** y **proteína/ha** (el trigo suele aportar más proteína).
* Considerar **número de cosechas por año** y **coste/limitación de agua**.
### 5) Futuro
Las proyecciones tipo OECD–FAO asumen mejoras continuas de productividad, aunque con diferencias por región y cultivo.
El clima puede actuar como freno, especialmente para el trigo según reportes basados en literatura científica. ([Eco-Business][2])
---
## Français
### 1) Définition du rendement surfacique et pièges de comparaison
Le rendement est généralement en **t/ha**. En Corée, **kg/10a** est fréquent (10a = 0,1 ha), donc **×10** pour passer en kg/ha.
Piège majeur : pour le riz, on parle parfois de **riz paddy (non décortiqué)**, parfois de **riz blanchi (consommable)**. OWID/FAO définit le rendement comme la production par unité de surface (**t/ha**). ([Our World in Data][1])
### 2) Ordres de grandeur et exemple (Corée)
* Riz (paddy) : souvent **4–5 t/ha** au niveau mondial ; une valeur largement citée est **~4,7 t/ha (2022)**.
* Blé : souvent **3–4 t/ha** ; une estimation de moyenne mondiale **2016–2020** est **~3,48 t/ha**.
Corée :
* Riz 2024 : **514 kg/10a = 5,14 t/ha**
* Blé : de l’ordre de **~3,8 t/ha** selon des estimations récentes, variable selon les années
→ 5,14/3,8 ≈ **1,35** (riz ~35% plus élevé en poids récolté/ha)
### 3) Pourquoi le riz dépasse souvent le blé en t/ha
* La riziculture irriguée/inondée amortit certaines contraintes (adventices, stress hydrique) et peut augmenter la stabilité.
* Le blé est massivement cultivé en **sec** et en zones à risque hydrique, ce qui tire la moyenne vers le bas.
### 4) Comparaison “utile” (au-delà des t/ha)
* Passer en **produit comestible** (paddy → riz blanchi).
* Comparer **énergie/ha** et **protéines/ha** (le blé est souvent avantagé en protéines).
* Intégrer **nombre de cultures par an**, **coût de l’eau**, et **risques climatiques**.
### 5) Perspective future
Les cadres prospectifs de type OECD–FAO misent sur la poursuite des gains de productivité via génétique, pratiques et technologies.
En parallèle, la contrainte climatique est fréquemment signalée comme un facteur de baisse relative, notamment pour le blé. ([Eco-Business][2])
[1]: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/rice-yields?utm_source=chatgpt.com "Rice yields"
[2]: https://www.eco-business.com/news/global-wheat-yields-would-be-10-per-cent-higher-without-climate-change/?utm_source=chatgpt.com "Global wheat yields would be 10 per cent higher without ..."
## 단위면적당 생산량 비교: 쌀 vs 밀
---
## English
### 1) What “yield per area” actually means (and why rice–wheat comparisons often go wrong)
**Yield** is typically reported as **tonnes per hectare (t/ha)**, i.e., how much grain is harvested per unit land area. For Korea, yield is often reported as **kg per 10a (10아르)**, where **10a = 0.1 ha** (so multiply by **10** to convert kg/10a → kg/ha).
Key pitfall: “Rice” can mean **paddy (rough rice)** or **milled (edible white rice)**. Many agricultural statistics report **paddy yield** for rice, while wheat is reported as harvested grain. Our World in Data’s FAO-based “rice yields” indicator explicitly defines yield as produced amount per unit land (t/ha). ([Our World in Data][1])
### 2) Typical yield levels (global scale vs Korea example)
#### Global “rule-of-thumb” averages (order-of-magnitude)
* **Rice (paddy)**: commonly cited global average around **~4–5 t/ha**; for example, one widely referenced figure is **~4.7 t/ha (2022)**.
* **Wheat**: global average often around **~3–4 t/ha**; one reported world-average estimate across **2016–2020** is **~3.48 t/ha**.
These are not “laws of nature”; they move with weather, technology, and where each crop is grown.
#### Korea (concrete, recent, apples-to-apples illustration)
* **Rice (Korea, 2024)**: Statistics Korea reported **514 kg/10a**, which equals:
* 514 kg/10a × 10 = **5,140 kg/ha = 5.14 t/ha**
* **Wheat (Korea, recent marketing-year estimates)**: USDA/FAS reporting for Korea lists wheat yields on the order of **~3.8 t/ha** (with year-to-year variation).
**Comparison (Korea example):**
5.14 t/ha (rice) ÷ 3.8 t/ha (wheat) ≈ **1.35** → rice is about **35% higher** in harvested weight per hectare in that illustrative pairing.
### 3) Why rice often yields more per hectare than wheat
**A. Production environment and management intensity**
* **Paddy rice** is frequently grown in controlled water conditions (flooded fields) that can stabilize yields and suppress weeds, enabling high biomass and grain filling.
* Rice systems in Asia often have **high input intensity** (irrigation infrastructure, transplanting/direct seeding systems, fertilizer regimes, pest management), pushing yields upward.
**B. Climate and where the crop is grown**
* Wheat is widely cultivated in **rainfed** and **semi-arid** regions, where moisture stress is common; this tends to pull down the global average.
* Rice is also grown in rainfed systems, but the “iconic” high-yield paddy systems dominate many production hubs.
**C. Crop physiology (practical takeaway, not textbook trivia)**
* Wheat is a cool-season cereal; heat waves during flowering/grain fill are damaging.
* Rice tolerates warm conditions better, but is vulnerable to heat at flowering too—so both face climate risks; the risk timing differs.
### 4) The “fair comparison” checklist (important for real analysis)
If you want a comparison that is meaningful for food security, economics, or diet, do not stop at raw t/ha.
1. **Edible output vs harvested output**
* Rice paddy → milled rice typically loses hull/bran; edible recovery can be roughly **~60–70%** depending on variety and milling.
* Wheat grain → flour extraction also loses bran/germ; recovery varies by milling goals.
Result: a rice advantage in paddy-weight can shrink when comparing **edible** kilograms.
2. **Calories and protein per hectare**
* Rice tends to produce **very high calories/ha** in intensive systems.
* Wheat often provides **higher protein concentration** and gluten functionality; for “nutrition per hectare,” wheat can look better on protein even if tonnes/ha are lower.
3. **Cropping intensity (multiple harvests per year)**
* Some rice regions manage **2–3 crops/year**; wheat is often **1 crop/year** (or part of a rotation). Annualized production per hectare can flip the story.
4. **Water footprint and risk**
* Rice can be yield-strong but water-demanding; where water is constrained, wheat (or other cereals) may be more viable.
### 5) Future outlook (what is likely to change the gap)
* Baseline trend: long-run yield growth has historically come from genetics + agronomy + mechanization + fertilizer efficiency; this is the backbone of OECD–FAO style outlooks that project continued yield increases (with variation by crop and region).
* Constraint trend: climate change is already assessed in research and reporting as a material drag on crop yields; wheat is often highlighted as climate-sensitive. ([Eco-Business][2])
Practical expectation:
* In advanced systems, **both** crops see incremental gains, but **water scarcity, heat stress, and input costs** will increasingly determine which crop “wins” economically per hectare, not just biological yield potential.
---
## 한국어
### 1) “단위면적당 생산량”의 의미와 비교가 흔히 틀어지는 지점
단위면적당 생산량(수량)은 보통 **t/ha(헥타르당 톤)**로 말합니다. 한국 통계에서는 **10a당 kg(kg/10a)**가 자주 쓰이며, **10a = 0.1ha**이므로 **kg/10a × 10 = kg/ha**로 바꾸면 됩니다.
비교에서 가장 큰 함정은 “쌀”이 **벼(왕겨 포함, paddy/rough)** 기준인지, **도정미(먹는 쌀, milled)** 기준인지입니다. OWID(FAO 기반)의 쌀 수량 지표는 단위면적 생산량을 **t/ha**로 정의합니다. ([Our World in Data][1])
### 2) 세계적 대략치 vs 한국의 구체 예시
#### 세계 평균(대략 범위)
* **쌀(벼 기준)**: 세계 평균은 대체로 **4~5 t/ha** 수준으로 많이 인용되며, 예시로 **2022년 약 4.7 t/ha** 같은 수치가 널리 알려져 있습니다.
* **밀**: 세계 평균은 대체로 **3~4 t/ha** 범위로 자주 언급되며, **2016~2020년 세계 평균 3.48 t/ha** 같은 추정치가 보고된 바 있습니다.
#### 한국(최근 수치로 감 잡기)
* **쌀(2024년)**: 통계청 발표 **10a당 514kg** →
* 514 × 10 = **ha당 5,140kg = 5.14 t/ha**
* **밀(한국, 최근 추정)**: USDA/FAS 자료에서 한국 밀 수량은 대략 **~3.8 t/ha** 수준(연도별 변동)으로 제시됩니다.
따라서 이 조합으로 단순 비교하면:
5.14 ÷ 3.8 ≈ **1.35** → 쌀이 **약 35%** 정도 더 “무게 기준 수량”이 높은 그림입니다.
### 3) 왜 쌀이 단위면적 수량에서 우세한 경우가 많은가
* **재배 환경(물 관리)**: 논벼는 물 관리(담수/관개)를 통해 잡초·변동성을 줄이고 안정적인 생육을 만들 수 있어 수량이 높아지기 쉽습니다.
* **투입 강도**: 비료·병해충 방제·기계화·품종개량이 집중된 지역에서 쌀은 매우 높은 수량을 냅니다.
* **밀의 입지**: 밀은 전 세계적으로 **건조·반건조, 천수(비의존) 지역** 비중이 높아 평균이 낮아지기 쉽습니다.
### 4) “공정 비교”를 위한 체크리스트(핵심)
1. **수확물(벼) vs 식품(쌀)**: 벼 수량이 높아도 도정 과정에서 줄어듭니다.
2. **칼로리/단백질/가공성**: 쌀은 칼로리/ha가 강하고, 밀은 단백질·글루텐 기반 가공성이 강점입니다.
3. **연간 작부체계**: 쌀은 2모작 이상 지역이 있고, 밀은 윤작의 일부인 경우가 많아 “연간 생산” 비교가 달라집니다.
4. **물·리스크 비용**: 물 부족 지역에서는 밀이 총비용 측면에서 유리해질 수 있습니다.
### 5) 미래(격차를 바꾸는 변수)
* OECD–FAO 계열 전망은 기술·품종·경영 개선으로 수량 증가가 이어질 가능성을 전제로 합니다(작물·지역별 차이 큼).
* 동시에 기후변화는 특히 밀에서 수량 하방 압력으로 자주 거론됩니다. ([Eco-Business][2])
결론적으로 앞으로는 “쌀이냐 밀이냐”를 단순 수량만이 아니라 **물/에너지 비용, 기후 리스크, 식품 수요 구조**까지 포함한 **단위면적당 ‘가치’**로 판단하는 비중이 커집니다.
---
## 日本語
### 1) 「単位面積当たり収量」と比較の注意点
収量は通常 **t/ha（ヘクタール当たりトン）**で表します。韓国の **kg/10a** は **×10** で **kg/ha** に換算できます。
最大の落とし穴は、米が **籾（もみ付き）**基準か、**精米（食用）**基準かです。OWID（FAOベース）は「収量＝単位面積当たりの生産量（t/ha）」として説明しています。 ([Our World in Data][1])
### 2) 水準感（世界の目安）と韓国の例
* 世界の目安として、米（籾）は **4～5 t/ha**程度がよく参照され、例として **2022年 約4.7 t/ha** が挙げられます。
* 小麦は **3～4 t/ha**程度が多く、**2016～2020年 世界平均 3.48 t/ha** という報告例があります。
韓国の例：
* 米（2024年）**514 kg/10a → 5.14 t/ha**
* 小麦（近年の推計）**~3.8 t/ha**規模
→ 5.14/3.8 ≈ **1.35**（米が約35%高い）
### 3) 米が高収量になりやすい理由
* 水管理・雑草抑制など、稲作は管理の“テコ”が効きやすい。
* 一方、小麦は乾燥地・天水栽培の比率が高く、平均収量が押し下げられやすい。
### 4) ちゃんと比べるための基準
* 籾→精米の歩留まり、
* カロリー/ha とタンパク/ha、
* 年間の作付回数（多収は「年」なのか「作」なのか）、
* 水コストと気象リスク、
を揃えると比較が実務的になります。
### 5) 将来の見通し
OECD–FAO系の見通しでは、技術・品種・経営改善で収量上昇が続く前提が一般的です。
ただし気候要因は小麦にとって逆風になり得る点が報じられています。 ([Eco-Business][2])
---
## Español
### 1) Qué significa “rendimiento por área” y por qué la comparación se confunde
El rendimiento suele expresarse como **t/ha**. En Corea también se usa **kg/10a** (10a = 0,1 ha), por lo que **kg/10a × 10 = kg/ha**.
El error típico: en arroz, a veces se reporta **arroz con cáscara (paddy)** y no **arroz blanco (molienda)**. OWID/FAO describe el rendimiento como producción por unidad de tierra (**t/ha**). ([Our World in Data][1])
### 2) Niveles típicos y ejemplo concreto (Corea)
* Arroz (paddy) suele citarse globalmente alrededor de **4–5 t/ha**; una cifra muy referenciada es **~4,7 t/ha (2022)**.
* Trigo suele ubicarse en **3–4 t/ha**; un promedio mundial reportado para **2016–2020** es **~3,48 t/ha**.
Ejemplo Corea:
* Arroz 2024: **514 kg/10a = 5,14 t/ha**
* Trigo: orden de **~3,8 t/ha** (variación anual)
→ 5,14/3,8 ≈ **1,35** (arroz ~35% superior en peso cosechado/ha)
### 3) Por qué el arroz suele rendir más por hectárea
* Sistemas de riego/inundación que estabilizan el cultivo y reducen malezas.
* Mayor intensidad de manejo en muchas regiones arroceras.
* El trigo se cultiva mucho en condiciones **de secano** y zonas semiáridas, lo que reduce el promedio.
### 4) Cómo comparar “bien”
* Convertir a **producto comestible** (paddy → arroz blanco).
* Comparar **calorías/ha** y **proteína/ha** (el trigo suele aportar más proteína).
* Considerar **número de cosechas por año** y **coste/limitación de agua**.
### 5) Futuro
Las proyecciones tipo OECD–FAO asumen mejoras continuas de productividad, aunque con diferencias por región y cultivo.
El clima puede actuar como freno, especialmente para el trigo según reportes basados en literatura científica. ([Eco-Business][2])
---
## Français
### 1) Définition du rendement surfacique et pièges de comparaison
Le rendement est généralement en **t/ha**. En Corée, **kg/10a** est fréquent (10a = 0,1 ha), donc **×10** pour passer en kg/ha.
Piège majeur : pour le riz, on parle parfois de **riz paddy (non décortiqué)**, parfois de **riz blanchi (consommable)**. OWID/FAO définit le rendement comme la production par unité de surface (**t/ha**). ([Our World in Data][1])
### 2) Ordres de grandeur et exemple (Corée)
* Riz (paddy) : souvent **4–5 t/ha** au niveau mondial ; une valeur largement citée est **~4,7 t/ha (2022)**.
* Blé : souvent **3–4 t/ha** ; une estimation de moyenne mondiale **2016–2020** est **~3,48 t/ha**.
Corée :
* Riz 2024 : **514 kg/10a = 5,14 t/ha**
* Blé : de l’ordre de **~3,8 t/ha** selon des estimations récentes, variable selon les années
→ 5,14/3,8 ≈ **1,35** (riz ~35% plus élevé en poids récolté/ha)
### 3) Pourquoi le riz dépasse souvent le blé en t/ha
* La riziculture irriguée/inondée amortit certaines contraintes (adventices, stress hydrique) et peut augmenter la stabilité.
* Le blé est massivement cultivé en **sec** et en zones à risque hydrique, ce qui tire la moyenne vers le bas.
### 4) Comparaison “utile” (au-delà des t/ha)
* Passer en **produit comestible** (paddy → riz blanchi).
* Comparer **énergie/ha** et **protéines/ha** (le blé est souvent avantagé en protéines).
* Intégrer **nombre de cultures par an**, **coût de l’eau**, et **risques climatiques**.
### 5) Perspective future
Les cadres prospectifs de type OECD–FAO misent sur la poursuite des gains de productivité via génétique, pratiques et technologies.
En parallèle, la contrainte climatique est fréquemment signalée comme un facteur de baisse relative, notamment pour le blé. ([Eco-Business][2])
[1]: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/rice-yields?utm_source=chatgpt.com "Rice yields"
[2]: https://www.eco-business.com/news/global-wheat-yields-would-be-10-per-cent-higher-without-climate-change/?utm_source=chatgpt.com "Global wheat yields would be 10 per cent higher without ..."