Adoption of new technologies or management systems on sheep and beef farms

Abstract

Adoption of new technologies or management systems on sheep and beef farms is a complex business. Multicriteria decision making (MCDM) methods provide a quantitative means to assist with decision making where there are multiple and conflicting goals measured in different units. The MCDM process consists of a series of stages from defining the problem to identifying the best alternatives. In a study investigating the adoption of beef production technologies, seven sheep and beef farmers from throughout New Zealand were confronted with a choice of improved or new systems for their beef production operations. Suggested systems had gross margin values calculated for them. The MCDM tool was then used to rank the new systems in order of preference. The farmers decided what criteria were important to them in making decisions. They then scored each system for each of the criteria, and decided on the importance of each criterion relative to other criteria. An overall ranking for each system was calculated using this information. Across all seven case studies, profit and issues directly related to profit made up less than half of the contribution to the top ranked system. In two cases, it contributed less than 20% of the total. Other criteria included sustainability, management complexity, labour requirements, family needs, impacts on pasture quality control and input costs risk. In nearly half of all cases, the most profitable option was not the preferred option when all criteria were considered. Keywords: multiple criteria decision making, farm systems, beef, decision making

Towards the integrated assessment of New Zealand pastoral farm systems

“…For the owner of a complex adaptive system such as a farm system, decision-making is itself a complex process, as shown by the challenges associated with the effective extension and implementation of research (Rhodes et al 2016). Smeaton & Dooley (2008) note that financial factors account for 50% of the influence on decision-making in mixed livestock farms, consistent with the assertion that financial modelling alone becomes less valuable as system complexity and diversity of values increases (Frame & O'Connor 2011). It is suggested that at a very simple level, three elements contribute to a change decision: 1) dissatisfaction with the current situation; 2) a clear picture of a better future; and 3) a feasible pathway of implementation.…”

Feed profile analysis of oil palm‐integrated beef cattle farming systems by metabolic energy budgeting and implications for beef production and pastoral system design

“…Similar trends were reported by Grinnell et al (2022), who gave values of 7.5 MJ kg −1 DM for ME and 15.1% for CP in their West Malaysia study and commented that the ME value would restrict animals to 1.6 times maintenance energy intake, which would be less than requirements for lactating animals or animals in late pregnancy. The minimum ME of herbage for cattle production is reported to be 8 MJ kg −1 DM (Gobilik, 2017; Smeaton, 2003) and for CP is 6%–8% (Humphreys, 1991). Average herbage ME on 9OP1/9PO2 and 12OP is at the lower end of the range reported for oil palm plantations in Malaysia.…”

Opportunities to sustain "greener" farming: comparing impacts of water quality regulations in two catchments: Lake Taupo (NZ) and Tomales Bay, California (USA)

“…al. 2005;Smeaton & Dooley 2006). These objectives can also be impacted by regulations, thus reducing farm sustainability.…”