Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T04:08:27.394Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Productivity and technical efficiency of suckler beef production systems: trends for the period 1990 to 2012

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2015

P. Veysset*
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR1213 Herbivores, 63122 St-Genès-Champanelle, France Clermont Université, VetAgro Sup, UMR1213 Herbivores, BP 10448, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France
M. Lherm
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR1213 Herbivores, 63122 St-Genès-Champanelle, France Clermont Université, VetAgro Sup, UMR1213 Herbivores, BP 10448, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France
M. Roulenc
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR1213 Herbivores, 63122 St-Genès-Champanelle, France Clermont Université, VetAgro Sup, UMR1213 Herbivores, BP 10448, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France
C. Troquier
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR1213 Herbivores, 63122 St-Genès-Champanelle, France Clermont Université, VetAgro Sup, UMR1213 Herbivores, BP 10448, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France
D. Bébin
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR1213 Herbivores, 63122 St-Genès-Champanelle, France Clermont Université, VetAgro Sup, UMR1213 Herbivores, BP 10448, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France
*
Get access

Abstract

Over the past 23 years (1990 to 2012), French beef cattle farms have expanded in size and increased labour productivity by over 60%, chiefly, though not exclusively, through capital intensification (labour–capital substitution) and simplifying herd feeding practices (more concentrates used). The technical efficiency of beef sector production systems, as measured by the ratio of the volume value (in constant euros) of farm output excluding aids to volume of intermediate consumption, has fallen by nearly 20% while income per worker has held stable thanks to subsidies and the labour productivity gains made. This aggregate technical efficiency of beef cattle systems is positively correlated to feed self-sufficiency, which is in turn negatively correlated to farm and herd size. While volume of farm output per hectare of agricultural area has not changed, forage feed self-sufficiency decreased by 6 percentage points. The continual increase in farm size and labour productivity has come at a cost of lower production-system efficiency – a loss of technical efficiency that 20 years of genetic, technical, technological and knowledge-driven progress has barely managed to offset.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agabriel, J, Farrie, JP, Pottier, E, Note, P and Pomies, D 2012. Consequences of management simplifications on animal performances: the example of feed distribution and milking in cows. INRA Productions Animales 25, 141158.Google Scholar
Boussemart, JP, Butault, JP and Ojo, O 2012. Generation and distribution of productivity gains in French agriculture. Who are the winners and the losers over the last fifty years? Bulletin USAMV Hoticulture 69, 5567.Google Scholar
Butault, JP 2006. La baisse des revenus et l’essoufflement de la productivité dans l’agriculture française depuis 1998. INRA Sciences Sociales 2, 8.Google Scholar
Butault, JP, Delame, N and Rousselle, JM 1995. Formation et répartition des gains de productivité dans l’agriculture française, analyse par produit. Cahiers d’Economie et de Sociologie Rurales 33, 5572.Google Scholar
Charroin, T, Veysset, P, Devienne, S, Fromont, JL, Palazon, R and Ferrand, M 2012. Labour productivity and economy in herbivore rearing: concepts, analysis and stakes. INRA Productions Animales 25, 193210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cochet, H and Devienne, S 2006. Fonctionnement et performances économiques des systèmes de production agricole: une démarche à l’échelle régionale. Cahiers Agricultures 15, 578583.Google Scholar
Coquil, X, Beguin, P and Dedieu, B 2014. Transition to self-sufficient mixed crop–dairy farming systems. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 29, 195205.Google Scholar
Devun, J, Bébin, D, Moreau, S, Roulenc, M, Manneville, V, Chassaing, C and Lherm, M 2014. Conséquences des pratiques fourragères et des caractéristiques du parcellaire sur la consommation de carburant dans les exploitations bovin viande du bassin Charolais. Rencontres Recherches Ruminants 21, 44.Google Scholar
European Commission 2015. Agriculture and rural development, Farm Accountancy Data Network. About FADN. Methodology. Retrieved March 9, 2015, from http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/rica/methodology1_en.cfm Google Scholar
Eurostat 2015. Agricultural output, price indices. Retrieved March 9, 2015, from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/metadata/en/apri_pi_esms.htm#stat_pres1418757859591 Google Scholar
Garambois, N and Devienne, S 2012. Les systèmes herbagers économes du Bocage Vendéen: une alternative pour un développement agricole durable? Innovations Agronomiques 22, 117134.Google Scholar
Guihard, V and Lesdos, C 2007. L’agriculture sur trente ans: une analyse comparative avec l’industrie et les services. In L’agriculture, nouveaux défis, coll. Références (ed.) INSEE pp. 4763. INSEE, Paris, France.Google Scholar
Hallam, A 1991. Economies of size and scale in agriculture: an interpretive review of empirical measurement. Review of Agricultural Economics 13, 155172.Google Scholar
Havet, A, Coquil, X, Fiorelli, JL, Gibon, A, Martem, G, Roche, B, Ryschawy, J, Schaller, N and Dedieu, B 2014. Review of livestock farmer adaptation to increase forages in crop rotations in western France. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 190, 120127.Google Scholar
Helfand, SM and Levine, ES 2004. Farm size and the determinants of productive efficiency in the Brazilian center-west. Agricultural Economics 31, 241249.Google Scholar
Hostiou, N and Fagon, J 2012. Simplification of livestock management: an analysis of simplified practices developed in herbivore and grain-fed production systems. INRA Productions Animales 25, 127140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
INRA 2007. Alimentation des bovins, ovins, caprins. Besoins des animaux – Valeurs des aliments. Tables INRA 2007. Éditions Quæ, INRA, Paris, France.Google Scholar
Jaforullah, M and Whiteman, J 1999. Scale efficiency in the New Zealand dairy industry: a non-parametric approach. The Australian Journal of Agricultural Resource Economics 43, 523541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latruffe, L 2010. Competitiveness, productivity and efficiency in the agricultural and agri-food sectors, OECD food, agriculture and fisheries papers, No. 30. OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5km91nkdt6d6-en Google Scholar
Lebacq, T, Baret, PV and Stilmant, D 2014. Role of input self-sufficiency in the economic and environmental sustainability of specialized dairy farms. Animal 9, 544552.Google Scholar
Madelrieux, S and Dedieu, B 2008. Qualification and assessment of work organization in livestock farms. Animal 2, 435446.Google Scholar
Martel, G, Dourmand, JY and Dedieu, B 2008. Do labour productivity and preferences about work load distribution affect reproduction management and performance in pig farms? Livestock Science 118, 96117.Google Scholar
Morrison Paul, C, Nehring, R, Banker, D and Smwaru, A 2004. Scale economies and efficiency in U.S. agriculture: are traditional farms history? Journal of Productivity Analysis 22, 185205.Google Scholar
Mosheim, R and Knox Lovell, CA 2009. Scale economies and inefficiency of U.S. dairy farms. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 91, 777794.Google Scholar
Perrot, C, Caillaud, D and Chambaut, H 2013. Économies d’échelle et économies de gamme en production laitière. Analyse technico-économique et environnementale des exploitations de polyculture-élevage. Notes et études socio-économiques 37, 732.Google Scholar
Ripoll-Bosch, R, Joy, M and Bernués, A 2014. Role of self-sufficiency, productivity and diversification on the economic sustainability of farming systems with autochthonous sheep breeds in less favoured areas in Southern Europe. Animal 8, 12291237.Google Scholar
Ryschawy, J, Choisis, N, Choisis, JP and Gibon, A 2013. Paths to last in mixed crop-livestock farming: lessons from an assessment of farm trajectories of change. Animal 7, 673681.Google Scholar
Sheng, Y, Zhao, S, Nossal, K and Zhang, D 2014. Productivity and farm size in Australian agriculture: reinvesting the return to scale. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 59, 1638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singbo, AG and Larue, B 2014. Scale economies and technical efficiency of Quebec dairy farms. Cahier de recherche/working paper 2014-7. CREATE, Université de Laval, Québec.Google Scholar
Veysset, P, Bébin, D and Lherm, M 2007. Impacts de la sécheresse de 2003 sur les résultats technico-économiques en élevage bovin allaitant Charolais. Fourrages 191, 311322.Google Scholar
Veysset, P, Lherm, M and Bébin, D 2004. Performances technico-économiques pour les grands troupeaux bovins allaitants: le cas du Charolais. Rencontres Recherches Ruminants 11, 141144.Google Scholar
Veysset, P, Lherm, M and Bébin, D 2005. Evolutions, scatters and determinants of the farm income in suckler cattle Charolais farms. A study over 15 years (1989 - 2003) from a 69 farm constant sample. INRA Productions Animales 18, 265275.Google Scholar
Veysset, P, Benoit, M, Laignel, G, Bébin, D, Roulenc, M and Lherm, M 2014a. Analysis and determinants of the performances evolution of sheep for meat and suckler cattle farms in less favored area from 1990 to 2012. INRA Productions Animales 27, 4964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veysset, P, Lherm, M, Bébin, D and Roulenc, M 2014b. Mixed crop-livestock farming systems: a sustainable way to produce beef? Commercial farms results, questions and perspective. Animal 8, 12181228.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Veysset supplementary material S1

Supplementary Table

Download Veysset supplementary material S1(PDF)
PDF 105.5 KB
Supplementary material: PDF

Veysset supplementary material S2

Supplementary Table

Download Veysset supplementary material S2(PDF)
PDF 20.3 KB
Supplementary material: PDF

Veysset supplementary material S3

Supplementary Table

Download Veysset supplementary material S3(PDF)
PDF 29.8 KB