IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v162y2018icp34-45.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholder-driven modelling the impact of animal profile and market conditions on optimal delivery weight in growing-finishing pig production

Author

Listed:
  • Leen, Frederik
  • Van den Broeke, Alice
  • Aluwé, Marijke
  • Lauwers, Ludwig
  • Millet, Sam
  • Van Meensel, Jef

Abstract

Pig delivery weight optimisation (PDWO) has been studied extensively and has resulted in several optimisation models. A previous participatory analysis of the problem has revealed that existing models are too complex and might therefore be under-valorised. Farmers desire a simple but reliable model based on available farm data to learn about the problem. A spreadsheet simulation model was therefore developed based on empirical animal performance models. The present study aims at conceptualising a stakeholder-driven model concerning PDWO that should provide insights into four key questions: I) how do the driving forces behind the optimisation determine the optima, II) what is the dependency of the optimal delivery weight on market conditions, III) how do the opportunity costs due to suboptimal delivery evolve, in addition to the mere optimisation results and IV) what is the effect of differences in animal performance profile, in terms of growth, feed intake and average carcass quality on the optimal delivery results? The results generated by the simulation model generally align with those generated using more sophisticated modelling approaches in previous studies. Our results indicate that the animal's growth and feed intake profile can more importantly affect the location of the optima, the stability of the optima and economic importance of delivery weight optimisation compared to market conditions. Moreover, the effect of market conditions on the optimisation was dependent on the animal profile, which determines the flatness of the payoff curve per pig. The possible flat payoff curves imply that the benefits of accurate PDWO can be limited and that some error margin in decisions on PDWO can be exploited. Moreover, this finding illustrates and corroborates the increased benefit of a shift in technology, i.e. an improved animal performance, compared to striving for the optimum on the production function of an inferior technology. Using this simplified model, farmers can investigate the flatness of their farm-specific payoff curve and the stability of their farm-specific optima. That information may help them to determine the appropriateness of a robust decision-supportive rule about optimal delivery weight on their farm.

Suggested Citation

  • Leen, Frederik & Van den Broeke, Alice & Aluwé, Marijke & Lauwers, Ludwig & Millet, Sam & Van Meensel, Jef, 2018. "Stakeholder-driven modelling the impact of animal profile and market conditions on optimal delivery weight in growing-finishing pig production," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 34-45.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:162:y:2018:i:c:p:34-45
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2018.01.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X17306182
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2018.01.013?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David J. Pannell, 2006. "Flat Earth Economics: The Far-reaching Consequences of Flat Payoff Functions in Economic Decision Making," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 28(4), pages 553-566.
    2. Van Meensel, Jef & Lauwers, Ludwig & Van Huylenbroeck, Guido & Van Passel, Steven, 2010. "Comparing frontier methods for economic-environmental trade-off analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(2), pages 1027-1040, December.
    3. Jean-Paul Chavas & James Kliebenstein & Thomas D. Crenshaw, 1985. "Modeling Dynamic Agricultural Production Response: The Case of Swine Production," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 67(3), pages 636-646.
    4. Martin, A. H. & Sather, A. P. & Fredeen, H. T. & Jolly, Robert W., 1980. "Alternative Market Weights for Swine: Carcass Composition and Meat Quality," Staff General Research Papers Archive 11385, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    5. Kathryn A. Boys & Ning Li & Paul V. Preckel & Allan P. Schinckel & Kenneth A. Foster, 2007. "Economic Replacement of a Heterogeneous Herd," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(1), pages 24-35.
    6. Boland, Michael A. & Preckel, Paul V. & Schinckel, Allan P., 1993. "Optimal Hog Slaughter Weights Under Alternative Pricing Systems," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 25(2), pages 1-16, December.
    7. Sather, A. P. & Jolly, Robert W. & Martin, A. H. & Fredeen, H. T., 1980. "Alternative Market Weights for Swine: Production Economics," Staff General Research Papers Archive 11382, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    8. Boland, Michael A. & Foster, Kenneth A. & Preckel, Paul V., 1999. "Nutrition and the Economics of Swine Management," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(1), pages 83-96, April.
    9. Sather, A. P. & Jolly, Robert W. & Martin, A. H. & Fredeen, H. T., 1980. "Alternative Market Weights for Swine: Feedlot Performance," Staff General Research Papers Archive 11386, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Davoudkhani, M. & Mahé, F. & Dourmad, J.Y. & Gohin, A. & Darrigrand, E. & Garcia-Launay, F., 2020. "Economic optimization of feeding and shipping strategies in pig-fattening using an individual-based model," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Leen, Frederik & Van den Broeke, Alice & Aluwé, Marijke & Ludwig, Lauwers & Sam, Millet & Jef, Van Meensel, 2017. "Simulation Modelling To Provide Insights Into The Optimization Of Delivery Weights Of Finisher Pigs," 2017 International Congress, August 28-September 1, 2017, Parma, Italy 261272, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Jeffrey Ohlmann & Philip Jones, 2011. "An integer programming model for optimal pork marketing," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 190(1), pages 271-287, October.
    3. Pourmoayed, Reza & Nielsen, Lars Relund & Kristensen, Anders Ringgaard, 2016. "A hierarchical Markov decision process modeling feeding and marketing decisions of growing pigs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(3), pages 925-938.
    4. Sara Rodríguez & Lluis Plà & Javier Faulin, 2014. "New opportunities in operations research to improve pork supply chain efficiency," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 219(1), pages 5-23, August.
    5. Boland, Michael A. & Foster, Kenneth A. & Preckel, Paul V., 1999. "Nutrition And The Economics Of Swine Management," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 31(1), pages 1-14, April.
    6. Greer, Heather C. & Trapp, James N., 2000. "Impact Of Alternative Grid Pricing Structures On Cattle Marketing Decisions," 2000 Conference, April 17-18 2000, Chicago, Illinois 18926, NCR-134 Conference on Applied Commodity Price Analysis, Forecasting, and Market Risk Management.
    7. Reza Pourmoayed & Lars Relund Nielsen, 2022. "Optimizing pig marketing decisions under price fluctuations," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 314(2), pages 617-644, July.
    8. Parsons, Jay R. & Hoag, Dana L. & Koontz, Stephen R., 2001. "Economics Of Variable Swine Growth," 2001 Annual Meeting, July 8-11, 2001, Logan, Utah 36082, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    9. Thompson, Nathanael M. & DeVuyst, Eric A. & Brorsen, B. Wade & Lusk, Jayson L., 2014. "Value of Genetic Information for Management and Selection of Feedlot Cattle," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 39(1), pages 1-17, April.
    10. Parsons, Jay R. & Hoag, Dana L. & Frasier, W. Marshall & Koontz, Stephen R., 2002. "Variable Growth Impacts On Optimal Market Timing In All-Out Production Systems," 2002 Annual Meeting, July 28-31, 2002, Long Beach, California 36610, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    11. Thompson, Nathanael M. & DeVuyst, Eric A. & Brorsen, B. Wade & Lusk, Jayson L., 2014. "Value of Genetic Information for Beef Cattle at the Feedlot Stage," 2014 Annual Meeting, February 1-4, 2014, Dallas, Texas 162431, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    12. Asci, Serhat & Borisova, Tatiana & VanSickle, John J., 2015. "Role of economics in developing fertilizer best management practices," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 251-261.
    13. Atkinson, Scott E. & Tsionas, Mike G., 2021. "Generalized estimation of productivity with multiple bad outputs: The importance of materials balance constraints," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(3), pages 1165-1186.
    14. Trapp, James N., 1989. "The Dawning Of The Age Of Dynamic Theory: Its Implications For Agricultural Economics Research And Teaching," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 21(1), pages 1-11, July.
    15. Bijttebier, J. & Hamerlinck, J. & Moakes, S. & Scollan, N. & Van Meensel, J. & Lauwers, L., 2017. "Low-input dairy farming in Europe: Exploring a context-specific notion," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 43-51.
    16. Hutchings, Timothy R., 2009. "A financial analysis of the effect of the mix of crop and sheep enterprises on the risk profile of dryland farms in south-eastern Australia – Part 1," AFBM Journal, Australasian Farm Business Management Network, vol. 6(1), pages 1-16, October.
    17. Doole, Graeme J. & Romera, Alvaro J., 2014. "Implications of a nitrogen leaching efficiency metric for pasture-based dairy farms," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 10-18.
    18. Roemen, J.H.J. & de Klein, J., 1998. "An optimal delivery strategy for porkers with heterogeneity and dependent prices," Other publications TiSEM 4775b203-6880-43c8-b1c7-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. David J. Pannell & Getu Hailu & Alfons Weersink & Amanda Burt, 2008. "More reasons why farmers have so little interest in futures markets," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 39(1), pages 41-50, July.
    20. Sanaz Shoghi Kalkhoran & David Pannell & Maksym Polyakov & Ben White & Morteza Chalak Haghighi & Amin William Mugera & Imma Farre, 2021. "A dynamic model of optimal lime application for wheat production in Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 65(2), pages 472-490, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:162:y:2018:i:c:p:34-45. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.