Search

Efficiency analysis is used for assessing links between technical efficiency (TE) of livestock farms and animal diseases. However, previous studies often do not make the link with the allocation of inputs and mainly present average effects that ignore the often huge differences among farms. In this paper, we studied the relationship between exposure to gastrointestinal (GI) nematode infections, the TE and the input allocation on dairy farms. Although the traditional cost allocative efficiency (CAE) indicator adequately measures how a given input allocation differs from the cost-minimising input allocation, they do not represent the unique input allocation of farms. Similar CAE scores may be obtained for farms with different input allocations. Therefore, we propose an adjusted allocative efficiency index (AAEI) to measure the unique input allocation of farms. Combining this AAEI with the TE score allows determining the unique input-output position of each farm. The method is illustrated by estimating efficiency scores using data envelopment analysis (DEA) on a sample of 152 dairy farms in Flanders for which both accountancy and parasitic monitoring data were available. Three groups of farms with a different input-output position can be distinguished based on cluster analysis: (1) technically inefficient farms, with a relatively low use of concentrates per 100 l milk and a high exposure to infection, (2) farms with an intermediate TE, relatively high use of concentrates per 100 l milk and a low exposure to infection, (3) farms with the highest TE, relatively low roughage use per 100 l milk and a relatively high exposure to infection. Correlation analysis indicates for each group how the level of exposure to GI nematodes is associated or not with improved economic performance. The results suggest that improving both the economic performance and exposure to infection seems only of interest for highly TE farms. The findings indicate that current farm recommendations regarding GI nematode infections could be improved by also accounting for the allocation of inputs on the farm.

The growing global demand for sustainable and safe food is a major challenge that increases the need for advanced alternatives such as tissue engineering (TE). TE offers promising solutions by improving yields, nutritional value and resilience of crops while also producing cultivated meat that reduces the environmental impact of livestock farming. The market potential for TE in meat production is considerable, and significant growth is expected. However, the regulatory framework for these innovations is developing slowly, and approval procedures vary across regions. This overview critically assesses the current applications of TE in the agri-food sector, their socio-economic potential and the regulatory challenges. It emphasises the need for harmonised, flexible and adaptive policies to effectively integrate engineered foods into the market., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Grazing management (GM) interventions, such as reducing the grazing time or mowing pasture before grazing, have been proposed to limit the exposure to gastrointestinal (GI) nematode infections in grazed livestock. However, the farm-level economic effects of these interventions have not yet been assessed. In this paper, the economic effects of three GM interventions in adult dairy cattle were modelled for a set of Flemish farms: later turnout on pasture (GM1), earlier housing near the end of the grazing season (GM2), and reducing the daily grazing time (GM3). Farm accountancy data were linked to Ostertagia ostertagi bulk tank milk ELISA results and GM data for 137 farms. The economic effects of the GM interventions were investigated through a combination of efficiency analysis and a whole-farm simulation model. Modelling of GM1, GM2 and GM3 resulted in a marginal economic effect of € 8.36, € -9.05 and € -53.37 per cow per year, respectively. The results suggest that the dairy farms can improve their economic performance by postponing the turnout date, but that advancing the housing date or reducing daily grazing time mostly leads to a lower net economic farm performance. Overall, the GM interventions resulted in a higher technical efficiency and milk production but these benefits were offset by increased feed costs as a result of higher maintenance and cultivation costs. Because the results differed highly between farms, GM interventions need to be evaluated at the individual level for appropriate decision support., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Efficiency analysis is used for assessing links between technical efficiency (TE) of livestock farms and animal diseases. However, previous studies often do not make the link with the allocation of inputs and mainly present average effects that ignore the often huge differences among farms. In this paper, we studied the relationship between exposure to gastrointestinal (GI) nematode infections, the TE and the input allocation on dairy farms. Although the traditional cost allocative efficiency (CAE) indicator adequately measures how a given input allocation differs from the cost-minimising input allocation, they do not represent the unique input allocation of farms. Similar CAE scores may be obtained for farms with different input allocations. Therefore, we propose an adjusted allocative efficiency index (AAEI) to measure the unique input allocation of farms. Combining this AAEI with the TE score allows determining the unique input-output position of each farm. The method is illustrated by estimating efficiency scores using data envelopment analysis (DEA) on a sample of 152 dairy farms in Flanders for which both accountancy and parasitic monitoring data were available. Three groups of farms with a different input-output position can be distinguished based on cluster analysis: (1) technically inefficient farms, with a relatively low use of concentrates per 100 l milk and a high exposure to infection, (2) farms with an intermediate TE, relatively high use of concentrates per 100 l milk and a low exposure to infection, (3) farms with the highest TE, relatively low roughage use per 100 l milk and a relatively high exposure to infection. Correlation analysis indicates for each group how the level of exposure to GI nematodes is associated or not with improved economic performance. The results suggest that improving both the economic performance and exposure to infection seems only of interest for highly TE farms. The findings indicate that current farm recommendations regarding GI nematode infections could be improved by also accounting for the allocation of inputs on the farm.

The use of genetically modified (GM) crops and their applications is partially suppressed in European Union (EU) agriculture, even if one would expect otherwise given their complementarity with the neoliberal and industrialised EU agricultural regime in place. By applying a qualitative content analysis, this paper analyses how food manufacturers and retailers (referred to as gatekeepers in the food industry) explain and defend the exclusion of GM-labelled food products on the EU market. The study design places emphasis on the role of perceptions in the strategic behaviour of gatekeepers and on the role of interaction in this regard, as we assume that the way in which gatekeepers perceive the 'rules of the game' for commercialising GM crop applications on the EU food market will be influenced by their interaction with other agribusiness actors. In a first stage, the analysis determines thematic congruence in the (types of) perceptions that explain an agribusiness actor's overall interpretation of the EU business environment for GM crop applications. This perceived 'structuring arena' (SA) for GM crop applications - as conceptualised within our framework - contains areas of either internal and external tensions, that have a compelling or non-committal influence on the agribusiness actor's interpretation. In a second stage, the analysis particularly defines how gatekeepers in the food industry perceive and experience the SA for GM crop applications on the EU market, and how these perceptual tensions subsequently influence their strategic behaviour for GM-labelled products on the EU market. Finally, we highlight how these perceptions and actions (or inaction) suppress the main changes in practice that are necessary to manage this wicked problem., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Within the framework of the nitrate directive, member states have the opportunity to apply for derogation, i.e. increasing fertilisation standards under certain conditions. Several EU regions have utilised this opportunity, but each in a different way, resulting in six very different derogation policies within the EU in 2009. This paper focuses on the differences between the policies applied and makes an assessment with regard to the impact of these differences on the application rate for derogation, the manure surplus and the cost of allocating manure. Based on the MP-MAS model described by Van der Straeten et al. (2010) the different scenarios are applied on a single case area (Flanders) and the economic effects have been simulated. Results show considerable differences between the policy alternatives, leading to the conclusion that member states not only have to focus on whether or not to allow derogation, but also on the actual details of the derogation policy. Granting derogation at parcel level (plot of land), instead of farm level, increases the potential effect of derogation; the level of increase in fertilisation standards under derogation determines the application rate for derogation: a higher increase leads to a higher application rate., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Stocking density is a prominent topic in public debates on animal welfare and was one of the reasons for the European Commission to set limits to the stocking density on broiler farms. The objective of this paper was to calculate in detail the financial impact of changes in technical and management variables due to decreasing stocking densities in line with new European Union (EU) regulations. Therefore, the productive performance indicators such as BW, mortality, or feed conversion and farm technical data such as water consumption and heating of 3 independent experiments conducted at a poultry research station in Flanders (Belgium) were combined. Using the partial budget technique only those elements that change with stocking density have been taken into account. Reducing stocking density implies a recalculation of all costs on a reduced number of birds. This yields an economic situation that leaves hardly any profit margin for most of the broiler producers under the present market conditions. It was found that the critical threshold of stocking density for maintaining profitability under the present market and technical conditions is around 46 kg/m(2), thus well above the EU maximum of 42 kg/m(2). It is shown, however, that with changing broiler feed and meat prices, the impact might be less negative in economic terms.