IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v194y2021ics0308521x2100202x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

New standards in stochastic simulations of dairy cow disease modelling: Bio-economic dynamic optimization for rational health management decision-making

Author

Listed:
  • Ferchiou, Ahmed
  • Lhermie, Guillaume
  • Raboisson, Didier

Abstract

Bioeconomic models applied to animal health issues are now commonly observed in literature. This section of literature is very heterogeneous and the underlying methods are very diverse, from very simple methods (partial budgeting) to very complex ones. The objective of the present study is to build a new dynamic stochastic optimisation bioeconomic model applied to the dairy cow sector, that goes beyond some limitations usually found in methods used up to now. First, based on a critical literature review, we highlight four issues of bio-economic stochastic simulation models (BESSMs) applied to dairy cow diseases at the farm level. These models appear as partial (the farm system is not considered as a whole), unbalanced (between the economic and biological parts of the model), closed (to the farm environment) and only partially dynamic. To address these 4 main issues and improve the methodological standards in the microeconomics of dairy cow health management, we secondly develop a new bio-economic sequential optimization model (BESOM), called DairyHealthSim. DairyHealthSim aims to better consider both the context of decision-making and the farming system dynamics to define the best health management strategies in a given context. The biological part of the model simulates the complex dairy production cycle with a holistic approach. It is defined on a cow-week basis, and the weekly probabilities for all cow events, including production, reproduction and diseases, are simulated. The economic part of the model is a mean-variance optimization framework that dynamically represents the farmer's input allocation decision process under constraints. The biological and economic parts are closely integrated and the model is running with back and forth between the 2 parts of the bioeconomic model. Third, an application involving farmers' strategies related to biological risk management, labour willingness and market demand is proposed for dairy production and mastitis management. The results highlight the added value of the farming system-driven system coupled to economic optimization approach. DairyHealthSim identifies the optimal scenario for the entire ten-year simulation period or is based on yearly optimization (sequential modelling). The two different optimal solutions found show the usefulness of considering the dynamics and complexities of the actual field situation. The opportunity cost between the best and alternative solutions demonstrates that some solutions are economic equivalents. In conclusion, compared to approaches where the outcome is reduced to the monetary impact of diseases, DairyHealthSim is far more precise and appropriate for supporting decision-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Ferchiou, Ahmed & Lhermie, Guillaume & Raboisson, Didier, 2021. "New standards in stochastic simulations of dairy cow disease modelling: Bio-economic dynamic optimization for rational health management decision-making," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:194:y:2021:i:c:s0308521x2100202x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103249
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X2100202X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103249?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. Kristensen, Anders R., 1988. "Hierarchic Markov processes and their applications in replacement models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 207-215, May.
    2. Chavas, Jean-Paul & Holt, Matthew T, 1996. "Economic Behavior under Uncertainty: A Joint Analysis of Risk Preferences and Technology," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 78(2), pages 329-335, May.
    3. Tanure, Soraya & Nabinger, Carlos & Becker, João Luiz, 2013. "Bioeconomic model of decision support system for farm management. Part I: Systemic conceptual modeling," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 104-116.
    4. Warwick McKibbin & Alexandra Sidorenko, 2006. "Global Macroeconomic Consequences of Pandemic Influenza," CAMA Working Papers 2006-26, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    5. Narayana R. Kocherlakota, 1996. "Implications of Efficient Risk Sharing without Commitment," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 63(4), pages 595-609.
    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. Alexander Monge-Naranjo, 2009. "Entrepreneurship and firm heterogeneity with limited enforcement," Annals of Finance, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 465-494, June.
    2. Vlieghe, Gertjan W, 2007. "Imperfect credit markets: implications for monetary policy," MPRA Paper 12957, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Durmaz, Tunç, 2016. "Precautionary Storage in Electricity Markets," Discussion Papers 2016/5, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    4. Grochulski, Borys & Zhang, Yuzhe, 2011. "Optimal risk sharing and borrowing constraints in a continuous-time model with limited commitment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 146(6), pages 2356-2388.
    5. Alvarez, Fernando & Jermann, Urban J, 2001. "Quantitative Asset Pricing Implications of Endogenous Solvency Constraints," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 14(4), pages 1117-1151.
    6. Lancia, Francesco & Russo, Alessia & Worrall, Tim S, 2020. "Optimal Sustainable Intergenerational Insurance," CEPR Discussion Papers 15540, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Ethan Ligon & Jonathan P. Thomas & Tim Worrall, 2000. "Mutual Insurance, Individual Savings and Limited Commitment," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 3(2), pages 216-246, April.
    8. Margaret Chitiga‐Mabugu & Martin Henseler & Ramos Mabugu & Hélène Maisonnave, 2021. "Economic and Distributional Impact of COVID‐19: Evidence from Macro‐Micro Modelling of the South African Economy," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 89(1), pages 82-94, March.
    9. Burcu Duygan-Bump & Charles Grant, 2008. "Household debt repayment behaviour: what role do institutions play?," Supervisory Research and Analysis Working Papers QAU08-3, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
    10. Cheng Wang, 1995. "Dynamic Insurance with Private Information and Balanced Budgets," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 62(4), pages 577-595.
    11. Renaud Bourlès & Dominique Henriet, 2012. "Risk-sharing Contracts with Asymmetric Information," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 37(1), pages 27-56, March.
    12. Pierre Dubois & Bruno Jullien & Thierry Magnac, 2008. "Formal and Informal Risk Sharing in LDCs: Theory and Empirical Evidence," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(4), pages 679-725, July.
    13. Orazio Attanasio & Sonya Krutikova, 2020. "Consumption Insurance in Networks with Asymmetric Information," NBER Working Papers 27290, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Martina Bozzola & Robert Finger, 2021. "Stability of risk attitude, agricultural policies and production shocks: evidence from Italy," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 48(3), pages 477-501.
    15. David Martimort & Aggey Semenov & Lars Stole, 2017. "A Theory of Contracts with Limited Enforcement," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 84(2), pages 816-852.
    16. Di Bartolomeo, Giovanni & D'Imperio, Paolo & Felici, Francesco, 2022. "The fiscal response to the Italian COVID-19 crisis: A counterfactual analysis," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    17. Thomas Eichner & Rüdiger Pethig, 2015. "Efficient Management of Insecure Fossil Fuel Imports through Taxing Domestic Green Energy?," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 17(5), pages 724-751, October.
    18. Alvaro Aguirre, 2017. "Contracting Institutions and Economic Growth," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 24, pages 192-217, March.
    19. Wang, Cheng, 2011. "Termination of dynamic contracts in an equilibrium labor market model," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 146(1), pages 74-110, January.
    20. Miao, Jianjun & Zhang, Yuzhe, 2015. "A duality approach to continuous-time contracting problems with limited commitment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 159(PB), pages 929-988.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Optimization; Bio-economics; Animal health; Dairy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
    • D24 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Production; Cost; Capital; Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity; Capacity
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets

    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:eee:agisys:v:194:y:2021:i:c:s0308521x2100202x. 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.