IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jagaec/v40y2008i01p287-300_02.html

Incorporating Environmentally Compliant Manure Nutrient Disposal Costs into Least-Cost Livestock Ration Formulation

Author

Listed:
  • Hadrich, Joleen C.
  • Wolf, Christopher A.
  • Roy Black, J.
  • Harsh, Stephen B.

Abstract

Livestock rations are formulated to minimize feed cost subject to nutritional requirements for a target performance level, which ignores the potentially substantial cost of disposing of nutrients fed in excess of nutritional requirements. We incorporate nutrient disposal costs into a modified least-cost ration formulation model to arrive at a joint least-cost decision that minimizes the sum of feed and net nutrient disposal costs. The method is demonstrated with phosphorus disposal costs on a representative dairy farm. Herd size, land availability and proximity, crop rotation, and initial soil phosphorus content are shown to be important in determining phosphorus disposal costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Hadrich, Joleen C. & Wolf, Christopher A. & Roy Black, J. & Harsh, Stephen B., 2008. "Incorporating Environmentally Compliant Manure Nutrient Disposal Costs into Least-Cost Livestock Ration Formulation," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 287-300, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jagaec:v:40:y:2008:i:01:p:287-300_02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S107407080002811X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Schmit, Todd M. & Verteramo, Leslie & Tomek, William G., 2009. "Implications of Growing Biofuel Demands on Northeast Livestock Feed Costs," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(2), pages 200-212, October.
    2. Jones, Crystal & Tonsor, Glynn T. & Black, J. Roy & Rust, Steven R., 2007. "Economically Optimal Distiller Grain Inclusion in Beef Feedlot Rations: Recognition of Omitted Factors," 2007 Annual Meeting, July 29-August 1, 2007, Portland, Oregon 9741, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Enahoro, D. & Schmit, T.M. & Boisvert, R.N., 2016. "Assessment Of New York’S Pollution Discharge Elimination Permits For Cafo’S: A Regional Analysis," Working Papers 250026, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    4. De Matteis, Maria C. & Yu, T. Edward & Boyer, Christopher N. & DeLong, Karen L. & Smith, Jason, 2018. "Economic and environmental implications of incorporating distillers’ dried grains with solubles in feed rations of growing and finishing swine in Argentina," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 21(6), July.
    5. Gebrezgabher, Solomie A. & Meuwissen, Miranda P.M. & Oude Lansink, Alfons G.J.M., 2014. "A multiple criteria decision making approach to manure management systems in the Netherlands," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(3), pages 643-653.
    6. S Mutua & B Bebe & A Kahi & A Guliye, 2013. "Incorporation of Milk Yield, Dry Matter Intake and Phosphorous Excretion Predictive Functions in the Development of a Multi-Objective Dairy Feed Formulation Software Program," Journal of Agricultural Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 5(11), pages 208-208, October.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • Q52 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Pollution Control Adoption and Costs; Distributional Effects; Employment Effects

    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:cup:jagaec:v:40:y:2008:i:01:p:287-300_02. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/aae .

    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.