Producing more crops in less land is not really more "efficient" because it requires significantly more synthetic (fossil fuel derived) fertilizer. Good top soil produces fertilizer itself, so growing the same yield on less acreage means higher fertilizer usage which means less efficiency, not more. Not to mention corporate farmland is more likely to grow monoculture crops and do less crop rotation, which also increases fertilizer usage and decreases topsoil depth.
Corporate farming COULD be more efficient, but in common practice it is not.
> Producing more crops in less land is not really more "efficient"
I'm open to different definitions of efficiency, but this isn't really in question. HOW they are getting that efficiency (more fertilizer, etc.) we can agree/disagree. But they are more efficient in the most basic sense possible [more production, less land].
Corporate farming COULD be more efficient, but in common practice it is not.