IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaae17/261431.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Stochastic Bio-Economic Farm Model for Brazilian Farrow-to-finish Pig Production System

Author

Listed:
  • Ali, Beshir Melkaw
  • Berentsen, Paul
  • Bastiaansen, John W.M.
  • Oude Lansink, Alfons

Abstract

A stochastic bio-economic farm model was developed to assess the impact of innovations on pig farm performance. The model accounts for emissions of greenhouse gases by using the shadow price of CO2 and for stochastic prices. The model was used to assess the impact of using co-products in pigs’ diets on private and social profits for a typical Brazilian farrow-to-finish pig farm. The results show that social profits are 2.2-3.6% lower than private profits in all the standard and alternative cases. The stochasticity of profits is large (with coefficients of variation 52% to 61%) following from the volatility of prices.

Suggested Citation

  • Ali, Beshir Melkaw & Berentsen, Paul & Bastiaansen, John W.M. & Oude Lansink, Alfons, 2017. "A Stochastic Bio-Economic Farm Model for Brazilian Farrow-to-finish Pig Production System," 2017 International Congress, August 28-September 1, 2017, Parma, Italy 261431, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae17:261431
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.261431
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/261431/files/Ali%20BM%20etal%20%282017%29%20A%20Stochastic%20Bio-Economic%20Farm%20Model.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/261431/files/Ali%20BM%20etal%20%282017%29%20A%20Stochastic%20Bio-Economic%20Farm%20Model.pdf?subformat=pdfa
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.261431?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nguyen, Thu Lan T. & Hermansen, John E. & Mogensen, Lisbeth, 2010. "Fossil energy and GHG saving potentials of pig farming in the EU," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 2561-2571, May.
    2. Janssen, Sander & van Ittersum, Martin K., 2007. "Assessing farm innovations and responses to policies: A review of bio-economic farm models," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(3), pages 622-636, June.
    3. Weidema, Bo Pedersen, 2009. "Using the budget constraint to monetarise impact assessment results," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1591-1598, April.
    4. Tol, Richard S. J., 2008. "The Social Cost of Carbon: Trends, Outliers and Catastrophes," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 2, pages 1-22.
    5. Edivan Cherubini & Guilherme Zanghelini & Jorge Tavares & Frank Belettini & Sebastião Soares, 2015. "The finishing stage in swine production: influences of feed composition on carbon footprint," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 1313-1328, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Rosalie Arendt & Till M. Bachmann & Masaharu Motoshita & Vanessa Bach & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2020. "Comparison of Different Monetization Methods in LCA: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-39, December.
    2. Nguyen, Thu Lan T. & Hermansen, John E. & Mogensen, Lisbeth, 2013. "Environmental performance of crop residues as an energy source for electricity production: The case of wheat straw in Denmark," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 633-641.
    3. van den Bergh, J.C.J.M. & Botzen, W.J.W., 2015. "Monetary valuation of the social cost of CO2 emissions: A critical survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 33-46.
    4. Anni Orola & Anna Härri & Jarkko Levänen & Ville Uusitalo & Stig Irving Olsen, 2022. "Assessing WELBY Social Life Cycle Assessment Approach through Cobalt Mining Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-26, September.
    5. Pycroft, Jonathan & Vergano, Lucia & Hope, Chris & Paci, Daniele & Ciscar, Juan Carlos, 2011. "A tale of tails: Uncertainty and the social cost of carbon dioxide," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 5, pages 1-29.
    6. Steve Newbold & Charles Griffiths & Christopher C. Moore & Ann Wolverton & Elizabeth Kopits, 2010. "The "Social Cost of Carbon" Made Simple," NCEE Working Paper Series 201007, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Aug 2010.
    7. Gradus, Raymond H.J.M. & Nillesen, Paul H.L. & Dijkgraaf, Elbert & van Koppen, Rick J., 2017. "A Cost-effectiveness Analysis for Incineration or Recycling of Dutch Household Plastic Waste," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 22-28.
    8. Figge, Frank & Hahn, Tobias & Barkemeyer, Ralf, 2014. "The If, How and Where of assessing sustainable resource use," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 274-283.
    9. Wang Cheng, 2022. "The Impact of Enterprise Digital Transformation on Service Innovation Performance -- Taking the construction enterprises in the Yangtze River Delta as the research object," International Journal of Science and Business, IJSAB International, vol. 14(1), pages 155-172.
    10. Benjamin Jones & Michael Keen & Jon Strand, 2013. "Fiscal implications of climate change," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 20(1), pages 29-70, February.
    11. 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.
    12. Schreefel, L. & de Boer, I.J.M. & Timler, C.J. & Groot, J.C.J. & Zwetsloot, M.J. & Creamer, R.E. & Schrijver, A. Pas & van Zanten, H.H.E. & Schulte, R.P.O., 2022. "How to make regenerative practices work on the farm: A modelling framework," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    13. Tol, Richard S.J., 2012. "A cost–benefit analysis of the EU 20/20/2020 package," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 288-295.
    14. Parisa Aghajanzadeh-Darzi & Pierre-Alain Jayet & Athanasios Petsakos, 2017. "Improvement of a Bio-Economic Mathematical Programming Model in the Case of On-Farm Source Inputs and Outputs," Journal of Quantitative Economics, Springer;The Indian Econometric Society (TIES), vol. 15(3), pages 489-508, September.
    15. Wen, Wen & Zhou, P. & Zhang, Fuqiang, 2018. "Carbon emissions abatement: Emissions trading vs consumer awareness," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 34-47.
    16. Dietz, Simon, 2012. "The treatment of risk and uncertainty in the US social cost of carbon for regulatory impact analysis," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 6, pages 1-12.
    17. Jacquet, Florence & Butault, Jean-Pierre & Guichard, Laurence, 2011. "An economic analysis of the possibility of reducing pesticides in French field crops," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(9), pages 1638-1648, July.
    18. Gómez-Limón, José A. & Gutiérrez-Martín, Carlos & Riesgo, Laura, 2016. "Modeling at farm level: Positive Multi-Attribute Utility Programming," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 17-27.
    19. Simon Dietz, 2011. "The treatment of risk and uncertainty in the US Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis," GRI Working Papers 54, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    20. Viaggi, Davide & Raggi, Meri & Gomez y Paloma, Sergio, 2011. "Farm-household investment behaviour and the CAP decoupling: Methodological issues in assessing policy impacts," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 127-145, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:eaae17:261431. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    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.