IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Simulations of plant productivity are affected by modelling approaches of farm management


  • Martin, G.
  • Duru, M.
  • Schellberg, J.
  • Ewert, F.


Despite their wide range of applications, process-based plant (crop and grassland) growth models often fail to reproduce yields, particularly at farm, regional and larger scales. This is largely due to inadequate information about field management activities needed as input to these models. A promising approach to overcome this limitation is to link plant growth models with farm management models which allow the simulation of management activities considering farmers’ aims and constraints. Different approaches to model farm management are available, but tangible results to justify the choice for a specific approach are lacking. The objective of this work was to compare the effects of different approaches of modelling farm management on the simulation of grassland mechanized harvest dates and yields. Simulations were run with each approach for two grassland-based beef farms and 3years and compared with available data over 156 harvest events. Our results show significant differences in the accuracy of simulated harvest dates depending on the approach to model farm management. Approaches using fixed dates or optimal phenological stages determined by expert knowledge performed less accurate than the one using calibrated phenological stages. Best results were achieved with a detailed farm management model. The accuracy of simulated yields was less affected by the chosen farm management modelling approach. However, this differed depending on the climate and the timing of harvest, allowing to rank approaches according to their ability to simulate harvest dates and yields. We conclude that further investigation is required to generalize these findings to other farm types including arable farming, and to support the analysis, modelling and calibration of farmers’ management decision processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin, G. & Duru, M. & Schellberg, J. & Ewert, F., 2012. "Simulations of plant productivity are affected by modelling approaches of farm management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 25-34.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:109:y:2012:i:c:p:25-34
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2012.02.002

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    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

    1. Chatelin, M. H. & Aubry, C. & Poussin, J. C. & Meynard, J. M. & Masse, J. & Verjux, N. & Gate, Ph. & Le Bris, X., 2005. "DeciBle, a software package for wheat crop management simulation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 77-99, January.
    2. Merot, A. & Bergez, J.-E. & Capillon, A. & Wery, J., 2008. "Analysing farming practices to develop a numerical, operational model of farmers' decision-making processes: An irrigated hay cropping system in France," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 98(2), pages 108-118, September.
    3. Aubry, C. & Papy, F. & Capillon, A., 1998. "Modelling decision-making processes for annual crop management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 45-65, January.
    4. repec:eee:ecomod:v:220:y:2009:i:2:p:209-225 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Reidsma, Pytrik & Ewert, Frank & Boogaard, Hendrik & Diepen, Kees van, 2009. "Regional crop modelling in Europe: The impact of climatic conditions and farm characteristics on maize yields," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 100(1-3), pages 51-60, April.
    6. Cacho, O. J. & Finlayson, J. D. & Bywater, A. C., 1995. "A simulation model of grazing sheep: II. Whole farm model," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 27-50.
    7. Cox, P. G., 1996. "Some issues in the design of agricultural decision support systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 52(2-3), pages 355-381.
    8. McCown, R. L., 2002. "Changing systems for supporting farmers' decisions: problems, paradigms, and prospects," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 179-220, October.
    9. Matthews, K.B. & Wright, I.A. & Buchan, K. & Davies, D.A. & Schwarz, G., 2006. "Assessing the options for upland livestock systems under CAP reform: Developing and applying a livestock systems model within whole-farm systems analysis," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 90(1-3), pages 32-61, October.
    10. Belhouchette, Hatem & Louhichi, Kamel & Therond, Olivier & Mouratiadou, Ioanna & Wery, Jacques & Ittersum, Martin van & Flichman, Guillermo, 2011. "Assessing the impact of the Nitrate Directive on farming systems using a bio-economic modelling chain," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 135-145, February.
    11. Papy, Francois & Attonaty, Jean-Marie & Laporte, Clotilde & Soler, Louis-Georges, 1988. "Work organization simulation as a basis for farm management advice (equipment and manpower, levels against climatic variability)," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 295-314.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Duru, M., 2013. "Combining agroecology and management science to design field tools under high agrosystem structural or process uncertainty: Lessons from two case studies of grassland management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 84-94.
    2. Nasca, J.A. & Feldkamp, C.R. & Arroquy, J.I. & Colombatto, D., 2015. "Efficiency and stability in subtropical beef cattle grazing systems in the northwest of Argentina," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 85-96.
    3. Yu, Qiangyi & Wu, Wenbin & Verburg, Peter H. & van Vliet, Jasper & Yang, Peng & Zhou, Qingbo & Tang, Huajun, 2013. "A survey-based exploration of land-system dynamics in an agricultural region of Northeast China," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 106-116.


    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:109:y:2012:i:c:p:25-34. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.