IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v159y2018icp21-31.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Yield gap analysis of feed-crop livestock systems: The case of grass-based beef production in France

Author

Listed:
  • van der Linden, Aart
  • Oosting, Simon J.
  • van de Ven, Gerrie W.J.
  • Veysset, Patrick
  • de Boer, Imke J.M.
  • van Ittersum, Martin K.

Abstract

Sustainable intensification is a strategy contributing to global food security. The scope for sustainable intensification in crop sciences can be assessed through yield gap analysis, using crop growth models based on concepts of production ecology. Recently, an analogous cattle production model named LiGAPS-Beef (Livestock simulator for Generic analysis of Animal Production Systems – Beef cattle) was developed, which allows yield gap analysis in beef production systems. This paper is the first to assess yield gaps of integrated feed-crop livestock systems, to analyse underlying causes of yield gaps, and to identify feasible improvement options. We used grass-based beef production in the Charolais area of France as a case study. To this end, we combined LiGAPS-Beef with crop growth models that simulate grass production (fresh grass under grazing, grass silage, hay) and wheat production (concentrate). Feed crop and cattle production were integrated to simulate potential and resource-limited live weight (LW) production per hectare. Potential production is defined as the theoretical maximum LW production per ha, in the absence of resource or management limitations. Resource-limited production is determined by availability of one or several resources: water and nutrients for crops, and feed quality and quantity for animals. Potential production of a cattle herd with an ad libitum diet of grass silage was 2380kgLWha−1year−1 and resource-limited production was 664kgLWha−1year−1. Actual LW production (354kgLWha−1year−1) was 15% of the potential production, implying a relative yield gap of 85%, and 53% of the resource-limited production, implying a relative yield gap of 47%. Applying yield gap analysis disentangled the major biophysical causes of these yield gaps: feeding diets other than the ad libitum grass silage diet, water-limitation in feed crops, and sub-optimal management. These yield gaps suggest scope to intensify beef production. We demonstrate, however, that yield gap mitigation decreased the operational profit per kg LW under the European regulations for bovine and grassland premiums operational in 2014. Hence, as expected, the premiums aiming to support farmers' income and to promote sustainable agriculture and rural development were not conducive to narrow yield gaps at the same time. The current common agricultural policy (CAP, 2015–2020) provides more scope for intensification, such as increasing stocking density via better grassland management.

Suggested Citation

  • van der Linden, Aart & Oosting, Simon J. & van de Ven, Gerrie W.J. & Veysset, Patrick & de Boer, Imke J.M. & van Ittersum, Martin K., 2018. "Yield gap analysis of feed-crop livestock systems: The case of grass-based beef production in France," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 21-31.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:159:y:2018:i:c:p:21-31
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2017.09.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X16308150
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2017.09.006?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
    ---><---

    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. Smit, H.J. & Metzger, M.J. & Ewert, F., 2008. "Spatial distribution of grassland productivity and land use in Europe," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 98(3), pages 208-219, October.
    2. Veysset, P. & Bebin, D. & Lherm, M., 2005. "Adaptation to Agenda 2000 (CAP reform) and optimisation of the farming system of French suckler cattle farms in the Charolais area: a model-based study," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 179-202, February.
    3. van Dijk, Michiel & Morley, Tom & Jongeneel, Roel & van Ittersum, Martin & Reidsma, Pytrik & Ruben, Ruerd, 2017. "Disentangling agronomic and economic yield gaps: An integrated framework and application," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 90-99.
    4. de Koeijer, T. J. & Wossink, G. A. A. & van Ittersum, M. K. & Struik, P. C. & Renkema, J. A., 1999. "A conceptual model for analysing input-output coefficients in arable farming systems: from diagnosis towards design," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 33-44, July.
    5. van der Linden, Aart & Oosting, Simon J. & van de Ven, Gerrie W.J. & de Boer, Imke J.M. & van Ittersum, Martin K., 2015. "A framework for quantitative analysis of livestock systems using theoretical concepts of production ecology," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 100-109.
    6. van de Ven, G. W. J. & de Ridder, N. & van Keulen, H. & van Ittersum, M. K., 2003. "Concepts in production ecology for analysis and design of animal and plant-animal production systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 507-525, May.
    7. Bouman, B. A. M. & van Keulen, H. & van Laar, H. H. & Rabbinge, R., 1996. "The `School of de Wit' crop growth simulation models: A pedigree and historical overview," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 52(2-3), pages 171-198.
    8. Morel, Kevin & Farrié, Jean-Pierre & Renon, Julien & Manneville, Vincent & Agabriel, Jacques & Devun, Jean, 2016. "Environmental impacts of cow-calf beef systems with contrasted grassland management and animal production strategies in the Massif Central, France," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 133-143.
    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. van der Linden, Aart & Oosting, Simon J. & van de Ven, Gerrie W.J. & de Boer, Imke J.M. & van Ittersum, Martin K., 2015. "A framework for quantitative analysis of livestock systems using theoretical concepts of production ecology," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 100-109.
    2. Mosnier, Claire & Duclos, Anne & Agabriel, Jacques & Gac, Armelle, 2017. "Orfee: A bio-economic model to simulate integrated and intensive management of mixed crop-livestock farms and their greenhouse gas emissions," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 202-215.
    3. 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.
    4. van der Linden, Aart & de Olde, Evelien M. & Mostert, Pim F. & de Boer, Imke J.M., 2020. "A review of European models to assess the sustainability performance of livestock production systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    5. Viet-Ngu Hoang, 2011. "Analysis of Productive Performance of Crop and Animal Production Systems: An Integrated Analytical Framework," School of Economics and Finance Discussion Papers and Working Papers Series 268, School of Economics and Finance, Queensland University of Technology.
    6. Chopin, Pierre & Blazy, Jean-Marc & Guindé, Loïc & Wery, Jacques & Doré, Thierry, 2017. "A framework for designing multi-functional agricultural landscapes: Application to Guadeloupe Island," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 316-329.
    7. Hengsdijk, H. & Bouman, B. A. M. & Nieuwenhuyse, A. & Jansen, H. G. P., 1999. "Quantification of land use systems using technical coefficient generators: a case study for the Northern Atlantic zone of Costa Rica," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 109-121, August.
    8. Farnaz Pourzand & Mohammad Bakhshoodeh, 2014. "Technical effici ency and agricultural sustainability–technology gap of maize producers in Fars province of Iran," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 671-688, June.
    9. Ridier, Aude & Ben El Ghali, Mohamed & Nguyen, G. & Kephaliacos, Charilaos, 2013. "The role of risk aversion and labor constraints in the adoption of low input practices supported by the CAP green payments in cash crop farms," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 94(2).
    10. Sauer, Johannes & Wossink, Ada, 2011. "Evaluating Agri-Environmental Schemes – The Marginal Costs of Ecosystem Services," 122nd Seminar, February 17-18, 2011, Ancona, Italy 99425, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Rozakis, Stelios & Sintori, Alexandra & Tsiboukas, Konstantinos, 2012. "Estimating utility functions of Greek dairy sheep farmers: A multicriteria mathematical programming approach," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 13(1), pages 1-10.
    12. Hampf, Anna C. & Carauta, Marcelo & Latynskiy, Evgeny & Libera, Affonso A.D. & Monteiro, Leonardo & Sentelhas, Paulo & Troost, Christian & Berger, Thomas & Nendel, Claas, 2018. "The biophysical and socio-economic dimension of yield gaps in the southern Amazon – A bio-economic modelling approach," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-13.
    13. Ashfield, A. & Crosson, P. & Wallace, M., 2013. "Simulation modelling of temperate grassland based dairy calf to beef production systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 41-50.
    14. Liu, S. & Yang, J.Y. & Zhang, X.Y. & Drury, C.F. & Reynolds, W.D. & Hoogenboom, G., 2013. "Modelling crop yield, soil water content and soil temperature for a soybean–maize rotation under conventional and conservation tillage systems in Northeast China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 32-44.
    15. Adam, M. & Wery, J. & Leffelaar, P.A. & Ewert, F. & Corbeels, M. & Van Keulen, H., 2013. "A systematic approach for re-assembly of crop models: An example to simulate pea growth from wheat growth," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 250(C), pages 258-268.
    16. Confalonieri, Roberto & Acutis, Marco & Bellocchi, Gianni & Donatelli, Marcello, 2009. "Multi-metric evaluation of the models WARM, CropSyst, and WOFOST for rice," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(11), pages 1395-1410.
    17. Hall, Stephen J.G., 2018. "A novel agroecosystem: Beef production in abandoned farmland as a multifunctional alternative to rewilding," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 10-16.
    18. Lu, Yang & Chibarabada, Tendai P. & Ziliani, Matteo G. & Onema, Jean-Marie Kileshye & McCabe, Matthew F. & Sheffield, Justin, 2021. "Assimilation of soil moisture and canopy cover data improves maize simulation using an under-calibrated crop model," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 252(C).
    19. Havlik, Petr & Bamiére, Laure & Jacquet, Florence & Millet, Guy, 2008. "Spatially explicit farming system modelling for an efficient agri-environmental policy design," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44172, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. van Leeuwen Eveline & Strijker Dirk & Terluin Ida, 2010. "Regional Concentration and Specialisation in Agricultural Activities in EU-9 Regions (1950-2000)," European Spatial Research and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 17(1), pages 23-39, June.

    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:159:y:2018:i:c:p:21-31. 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: . General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

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