IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v15y2025i7p719-d1622107.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparative Economic Analysis of Different Reproductive Management Strategies in Two Dairy Sheep Farms in Greece

Author

Listed:
  • Dimitra V. Liagka

    (Department of Animal Science, University of Thessaly, 41110 Larissa, Greece
    Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, Agricultural University of Athens, 11855 Athens, Greece
    Department of Animal Science, Agricultural University of Athens, 11855 Athens, Greece)

  • Antonis P. Politis

    (Veterinary Faculty, University of Thessaly, 43100 Karditsa, Greece)

  • Maria Spilioti

    (Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, Agricultural University of Athens, 11855 Athens, Greece)

  • Eleftherios Nellas

    (Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, Agricultural University of Athens, 11855 Athens, Greece)

  • Panagiotis Simitzis

    (Department of Animal Science, Agricultural University of Athens, 11855 Athens, Greece)

  • Konstantinos Tsiboukas

    (Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, Agricultural University of Athens, 11855 Athens, Greece)

Abstract

The aim of this study was the economic comparison of two equivalent sheep farms with different reproductive management systems. Financial data were selected from a farm that applied artificial insemination (AI) and from one that applied natural mating (NM). The main objective of the analysis was to estimate the cost of each farm’s products and then to calculate their economic indicators. The AI farm had higher production costs, as a result of higher labor and fixed capital costs. On the other hand, the invested capital for the equipment and buildings of the NM farm was lower. Furthermore, the invested livestock capital based on the genetic value of the animals was higher in the AI farm. The AI farm produced milk, replacement ewe lambs and replacement ram lambs as its primary products, whereas the NM farm produced only milk as its primary product. The production costs for milk were 0.08 EUR/kg lower in the AI farm compared with the NM farm. The AI farm had a higher gross revenue and net and gross profit, resulting from the higher genetic value of the AI farm’s livestock. As indicated, the breeding and sale of genetically improved animals can increase the financial results of a farm and offer alternative sources of income. In conclusion, AI results in more sustainable and economically efficient sheep farming. In this regard, training for farmers and governmental economic support could promote AI application. Finally, the fortification of farmer group initiatives that facilitate the trade of dairy sheep products can accelerate AI utilization in dairy sheep farms in Greece.

Suggested Citation

  • Dimitra V. Liagka & Antonis P. Politis & Maria Spilioti & Eleftherios Nellas & Panagiotis Simitzis & Konstantinos Tsiboukas, 2025. "A Comparative Economic Analysis of Different Reproductive Management Strategies in Two Dairy Sheep Farms in Greece," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-18, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:15:y:2025:i:7:p:719-:d:1622107
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/15/7/719/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/15/7/719/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yannick Buitenhuis & Jeroen Candel & Peter H. Feindt & Katrien Termeer & Erik Mathijs & Isabel Bardají & Jasmine Black & Anna Martikainen & Mertijn Moeyersons & Alessandro Sorrentino, 2020. "Improving the Resilience‐enabling Capacity of the Common Agricultural Policy: Policy Recommendations for More Resilient EU Farming Systems," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 19(2), pages 63-71, August.
    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. Maria Spilioti & Konstantinos Tousis & Georgios Papakonstantinou & Eleftherios Meletis & Alexis Manouras & Eleftherios Nellas & Garyfalia Economou & Vasileios G. Papatsiros & Konstantinos Tsiboukas, 2025. "Techno-Economic Analysis of Innovative Phytogenic-Based Supplements for Ruminant Health and Productivity," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-18, May.

    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. Thomas Slijper & Yann de Mey & P Marijn Poortvliet & Miranda P M Meuwissen, 2022. "Quantifying the resilience of European farms using FADN," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(1), pages 121-150.
    2. Meuwissen, Miranda P. M. & Feindt, Peter H. & Spiegel, Alisa & Paas, Wim & Soriano, Bárbara & Mathijs, Erik & Balmann, Alfons & Urquhart, Julie & Kopainsky, Birgit & Garrido, Alberto & Reidsma, Pytrik, 2022. "SURE-Farm approach to assess the resilience of European farming systems," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 1-17.
    3. Reidsma, Pytrik & Accatino, Francesco & Appel, Franziska & Gavrilescu, Camelia & Krupin, Vitaliy & Manevska Tasevska, Gordana & Meuwissen, Miranda P.M. & Peneva, Mariya & Severini, Simone & Soriano, B, 2023. "Alternative systems and strategies to improve future sustainability and resilience of farming systems across Europe: From adaptation to transformation," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 134, pages 1-1.
    4. Antonio Alberto Rodríguez Sousa & Carlos Parra-López & Samir Sayadi-Gmada & Jesús M. Barandica & Alejandro J. Rescia, 2021. "Impacts of Erosion on the Sustainability of Organic Olive Groves: A Case Study (Estepa Region, Southwestern Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-20, July.

    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:gam:jagris:v:15:y:2025:i:7:p:719-:d:1622107. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.