IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v101y2009i3p139-151.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

GAMEDE: A global activity model for evaluating the sustainability of dairy enterprises. Part II - Interactive simulation of various management strategies with diverse stakeholders

Author

Listed:
  • Vayssières, Jonathan
  • Bocquier, François
  • Lecomte, Philippe

Abstract

GAMEDE is a stock-flow dynamic simulation model designed with farmers to represent dairy farm functioning and the consequences of the farmer's daily management decisions for whole-farm sustainability. Sustainability is evaluated according to its three pillars: technico-economic viability, respect for environment, and social liveability. The model provides original information for a better understanding of the processes regulating nitrogen dynamics within the farm, and the factors determining farmers' decisions and practices. Model implementation experiments have revealed that GAMEDE is also a useful tool to support discussions and to generate knowledge exchange among various stakeholders who play an important role in the development of farm sustainability: farmers, extension agents and researchers. While a majority of researchers and advisers are specialised and a majority of farmers fix their attention on specific and narrow themes of farm management, such a comprehensive model can help stakeholders complement their knowledge to gain a holistic view of the farming system. This holistic and integrated view is crucial: (i) for researchers who wish to explain diversity in farming systems and understand decisional and biophysical processes and their interrelated effects operating in such complex agro-ecosystems, (ii) for advisers whose aim is to define alternative management strategies applicable in practice, i.e. taking into account farm specificities, and (iii) for farmers who must choose practices compatible with their resources, assets, constraints and objectives. Holism can also improve versatility and thus the generic character of models. Issues are narrowly specified and greatly vary both among categories of stakeholders (e.g. scientists versus farmers) and within each category (e.g. among farmers). A comprehensive model that: (i) details all farm management operations, and (ii) represents their effects on different spatio-temporal levels and on the three sustainability dimensions, is more likely to respond to the various issues facing different stakeholders. We argue that capacity of models to respond to stakeholders' questions has to be considered in future evaluations of decision support systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Vayssières, Jonathan & Bocquier, François & Lecomte, Philippe, 2009. "GAMEDE: A global activity model for evaluating the sustainability of dairy enterprises. Part II - Interactive simulation of various management strategies with diverse stakeholders," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 101(3), pages 139-151, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:101:y:2009:i:3:p:139-151
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308-521X(09)00064-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Aubry, Christine & Paillat, Jean-Marie & Guerrin, Francois, 2006. "A conceptual representation of animal waste management at the farm scale: The case of the Reunion Island," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 88(2-3), pages 294-315, June.
    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. Hurrion, R. D., 1980. "An interactive visual simulation system for industrial management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 86-93, August.
    4. Michael T. Wallace & Joan E. Moss, 2002. "Farmer Decision‐Making with Conflicting Goals: A Recursive Strategic Programming Analysis," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 82-100, March.
    5. McCown, R. L., 2002. "Changing systems for supporting farmers' decisions: problems, paradigms, and prospects," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 179-220, October.
    6. Solano, C. & Leon, H. & Perez, E. & Tole, L. & Fawcett, R.H. & Herrero, M., 2006. "Using farmer decision-making profiles and managerial capacity as predictors of farm management and performance in Costa Rican dairy farms," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 88(2-3), pages 395-428, June.
    7. Schilizzi, Steven G. M. & Boulier, Fabien, 1997. "`Why do farmers do it?' Validating whole-farm models," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 477-499, August.
    8. Carberry, P. S. & Hochman, Z. & McCown, R. L. & Dalgliesh, N. P. & Foale, M. A. & Poulton, P. L. & Hargreaves, J. N. G. & Hargreaves, D. M. G. & Cawthray, S. & Hillcoat, N. & Robertson, M. J., 2002. "The FARMSCAPE approach to decision support: farmers', advisers', researchers' monitoring, simulation, communication and performance evaluation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 141-177, October.
    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. Thivierge, Marie-Noëlle & Jégo, Guillaume & Bélanger, Gilles & Chantigny, Martin H. & Rotz, C. Alan & Charbonneau, Édith & Baron, Vern S. & Qian, Budong, 2017. "Projected impact of future climate conditions on the agronomic and environmental performance of Canadian dairy farms," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 241-257.
    2. Vanwindekens, Frédéric M. & Stilmant, Didier & Baret, Philippe V., 2013. "Development of a broadened cognitive mapping approach for analysing systems of practices in social–ecological systems," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 250(C), pages 352-362.
    3. M V Eitzel & Jon Solera & K B Wilson & Kleber Neves & Aaron C Fisher & André Veski & Oluwasola E Omoju & Abraham Mawere Ndlovu & Emmanuel Mhike Hove, 2020. "Using mixed methods to construct and analyze a participatory agent-based model of a complex Zimbabwean agro-pastoral system," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-24, August.
    4. Le Gal, P.-Y. & Dugué, P. & Faure, G. & Novak, S., 2011. "How does research address the design of innovative agricultural production systems at the farm level? A review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(9), pages 714-728.
    5. Xabier Díaz de Otálora & Agustín del Prado & Federico Dragoni & Fernando Estellés & Barbara Amon, 2021. "Evaluating Three-Pillar Sustainability Modelling Approaches for Dairy Cattle Production Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-14, June.
    6. Paolo Cupo & Rinalda Alberta Di Cerbo, 2016. "The determinants of ranking in sustainable efficiency of Italian farms," RIVISTA DI STUDI SULLA SOSTENIBILITA', FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2016(2), pages 141-159.
    7. Vayssières, Jonathan & Vigne, Mathieu & Alary, Véronique & Lecomte, Philippe, 2011. "Integrated participatory modelling of actual farms to support policy making on sustainable intensification," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 146-161, February.

    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. Le Gal, P.-Y. & Dugué, P. & Faure, G. & Novak, S., 2011. "How does research address the design of innovative agricultural production systems at the farm level? A review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(9), pages 714-728.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Rossing, Walter A.H. & Albicette, Maria Marta & Aguerre, Veronica & Leoni, Carolina & Ruggia, Andrea & Dogliotti, Santiago, 2021. "Crafting actionable knowledge on ecological intensification: Lessons from co-innovation approaches in Uruguay and Europe," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    6. Pham, Huong Dien & Waibel, Hermann, 2018. "Risk attitudes, knowledge, skills and agricultural productivity," TVSEP Working Papers wp-007, Leibniz Universitaet Hannover, Institute of Development and Agricultural Economics, Project TVSEP.
    7. Sterk, B. & van Ittersum, M.K. & Leeuwis, C. & Rossing, W.A.H. & van Keulen, H. & van de Ven, G.W.J., 2006. "Finding niches for whole-farm design models - contradictio in terminis?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 211-228, February.
    8. Domptail, Stéphanie & Nuppenau, Ernst-August, 2010. "The role of uncertainty and expectations in modeling (range)land use strategies: An application of dynamic optimization modeling with recursion," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2475-2485, October.
    9. Thysen, Iver & Detlefsen, Nina K., 2006. "Online decision support for irrigation for farmers," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(3), pages 269-276, December.
    10. Viaggi, Davide & Raggi, Meri & Gomez y Paloma, Sergio, 2010. "An integer programming dynamic farm-household model to evaluate the impact of agricultural policy reforms on farm investment behaviour," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(2), pages 1130-1139, December.
    11. Kanter, David R. & Musumba, Mark & Wood, Sylvia L.R. & Palm, Cheryl & Antle, John & Balvanera, Patricia & Dale, Virginia H. & Havlik, Petr & Kline, Keith L. & Scholes, R.J. & Thornton, Philip & Titton, 2018. "Evaluating agricultural trade-offs in the age of sustainable development," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 73-88.
    12. Robert, Marion & Thomas, Alban & Bergez, Jacques Eric, 2016. "Processes of adpatation in farm decision-making models. A review," TSE Working Papers 16-731, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    13. Emma Jakku & Peter Thorburn, 2009. "A Conceptual Framework for Guiding the Participatory Development of Agricultural Decision Support Systems," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2009-12, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    14. Dieguez Cameroni, F.J. & Terra, R. & Tabarez, S. & Bommel, P. & Corral, J. & Bartaburu, D. & Pereira, M. & Montes, E. & Duarte, E. & Morales Grosskopf, H., 2014. "Virtual experiments using a participatory model to explore interactions between climatic variability and management decisions in extensive grazing systems in the basaltic region of Uruguay," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 89-104.
    15. Dolinska, Aleksandra, 2017. "Bringing farmers into the game. Strengthening farmers' role in the innovation process through a simulation game, a case from Tunisia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 129-139.
    16. McCown, R. L. & Hochman, Z. & Carberry, P. S., 2002. "Probing the enigma of the decision support system for farmers: Learning from experience and from theory," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 1-10, October.
    17. Kragt, Marit Ellen & Llewellyn, Rick S., 2013. "Using choice experiments to improve the design of weed decision support tools," Working Papers 147031, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    18. Hochman, Z. & Carberry, P.S., 2011. "Emerging consensus on desirable characteristics of tools to support farmers' management of climate risk in Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(6), pages 441-450, July.
    19. Jakku, E. & Thorburn, P.J., 2010. "A conceptual framework for guiding the participatory development of agricultural decision support systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(9), pages 675-682, November.
    20. Plénet, Daniel & Giauque, Pierre & Navarro, Eric & Millan, Muriel & Hilaire, Christian & Hostalnou, Eric & Lyoussoufi, Abder & Samie, Jean-François, 2009. "Using on-field data to develop the EFI© information system to characterise agronomic productivity and labour efficiency in peach (Prunus persica L. Batsch) orchards in France," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 100(1-3), pages 1-10, April.

    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:101:y:2009:i:3:p:139-151. 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.