The impact of alternative feeding strategies on total factor productivity growth of pig farming: Empirical evidence from EU countries
Abstract
Aim of study: To investigate the impact of adopting new feeding precision technology on pig production.
Area of study: Four EU countries (Germany, France, Poland and Spain) during the period 2010–2015.
Material and methods: The Färe-Primont index was used to estimate total factor productivity change and its components, technological change and efficiency change.
Main results: German, French and Spanish farms experienced total factor productivity (TFP) progress, while Polish farms did not for both feeding strategies. Our empirical findings suggest a high impact on the productivity of ad libitum feeding technique compared to the restricted one for all countries.
Research highlights: Precision feeding strategies provide another avenue to more sustainable livestock production and further evidence that implementing individual ad libitum feeding systems for pigs could enhance farm’s productivity.
Downloads
References
Acosta A, De los Santos-Montero LA, 2019. What is driving livestock total factor productivity change? A persistent and transient efficiency analysis. Glob Food Sec 21: 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2019.06.001
Andretta I, Pomar C, Rivest J, Pomar J, Lovatto PA, Radünz Neto J, 2014. The impact of feeding growing-finishing pigs with daily tailored diets using precision feeding techniques on animal performance, nutrient utilization, and body and carcass composition1. J Anim Sci 92: 3925-3936. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2014-7643
Balcombe K, Davidova S, Latruffe L, 2008. The use of bootstrapped Malmquist indices to reassess productivity change findings: An application to a sample of Polish farms. Appl Econ 40: 2055-2061. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840600949264
Baráth L, Fertő I, 2017. Productivity and convergence in European agriculture. J Agr Econ 68: 228-248. https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.12157
Boddicker N, Gabler NK, Spurlock ME, Nettleton D, Dekkers JCM, 2011a. Effects of ad libitum and restricted feed intake on growth performance and body composition of Yorkshire pigs selected for reduced residual feed intake. J Anim Sci 89: 40-51. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2010-3106
Boddicker N, Gabler NK, Spurlock ME, Nettleton D, Dekkers JCM, 2011b. Effects of ad libitum and restricted feeding on early production performance and body composition of Yorkshire pigs selected for reduced residual feed intake. Animal 5: 1344-1353. https://doi.org/10.1017/S175173111100036X
Brümmer B, Glauben T, Thijssen G, 2002. Decomposition of productivity growth using distance functions: The case of dairy farms in three European countries. Am J Agric Econ 84: 628-644. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8276.00324
Cai W, Casey DS, Dekkers JCM, 2008. Selection response and genetic parameters for residual feed intake in Yorkshire swine. J Anim Sci 86: 287-298. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2007-0396
Čechura L, Grau A, Hockmann H, Kroupová Z, Levkovych I, 2014. Total factor productivity in European agricultural production. COMPETE, Working Paper No. 9. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lukas-Cechura/publication/301658733_Total_Factor_Productivity_in_European_Agricultural_Production/links/57207b9c08aead26e71b864c/Total-Factor-Productivity-in-European-Agricultural-Production.pdf
Chavas JP, 2018. Role of risk and uncertainty in agriculture. In: The Routledge Handbook of Agricultural Economics; Cramer GL, et al. (Ed.). Routledge, NY. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315623351-32
Coelli T, 1996. A guide to DEAP version 2.1: A data envelopment analysis (computer) program. Cent Effic Product Anal Univ New England.
Colpoys JD, Johnson AK, Gabler NK, 2016. Daily feeding regimen impacts pig growth and behavior. Physiol Behav 159: 27-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2016.03.003
Dakpo KH, Desjeux Y, Latruffe L, 2017. Productivity: indices of productivity and profitability using data envelopment analysis (DEA). R package version 1.0.0.
Dakpo KH, Desjeux Y, Jeanneaux P, Latruffe L, 2019. Productivity, technical efficiency and technological change in French agriculture during 2002-2015: A Färe-Primont index decomposition using group frontiers and meta-frontier. Appl Econ 51: 1166-1182. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2018.1524982
De Miguel Á, Hoekstra AY, García-Calvo E, 2015. Sustainability of the water footprint of the Spanish pork industry. Ecol Indic 57: 465-474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.05.023
Edan Y, Han S, Kondo N, 2009. Automation in agriculture. In: Handbook of automation, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78831-7_63
Eurostat, 2020. Agricultural production - Livestock and meat - Statistics explained. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Agricultural_production_-_livestock_and_meat&oldid=427096#Livestock_population (accessed 1.2.21).
Färe R, Grosskopf S, 1990. A distance function approach to price efficiency. J Public Econ 43: 123-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/0047-2727(90)90054-L
Färe R, Grosskopf S, Lovell CAK, 1994. Production frontiers. Cambridge Univ Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511551710
Färe R, Primont D, 1995. Multi-output production and duality: Theory and applications. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-0651-1
Finger R, Swinton SM, El Benni N, Walter A, 2019. Precision farming at the nexus of agricultural production and the environment. Annu Rev Resour Econ 11: 313-335. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-100518-093929
Fried HO, Lovell CAK, Schmidt SS, Schmidt SS, et al., 2008. The measurement of productive efficiency and productivity growth. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195183528.001.0001
Gaines AM, Peterson BA, Mendoza OF, 2012. Herd management factors that influence whole herd feed efficiency. In: Feed efficiency in swine. Wageningen Acad Publ. https://doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-756-1_1
Gardebroek C, Lansink AO, 2003. Estimating farm productivity differentials using panel data: The Hausman-Taylor approach. J Agr Econ 54: 397-415. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-9552.2003.tb00068.x
Gaspar P, Mesías FJ, Escribano M, Pulido F, 2009. Assessing the technical efficiency of extensive livestock farming systems in Extremadura, Spain. Livest Sci 121: 7-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2008.05.012
Greenwood J, Hercowitz Z, Krusell P, 1997. Long-run implications of investment-specific technological change. Am Econ Rev 87: 342-362.
Huffman WE, 2020. Human capital and adoption of innovations: policy implications. Appl Econ Perspect Policy 42: 92-99. https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13010
Jin S, Ma H, Huang J, Hu R, Rozelle S, 2010. Productivity, efficiency and technical change: Measuring the performance of China's transforming agriculture. J Product Anal 33: 191-207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11123-009-0145-7
Kleinhanss W, 2013. Development of productivity of dairy and pig farms in Germany. 19th Int Farm Manage Congr, Warsaw, Poland.
Klenow PJ, 1998. Learning curves and the cyclical behavior of manufacturing industries. Rev Econ Dyn 1: 531-550. https://doi.org/10.1006/redy.1998.0014
Lansink AO, Reinhard S, 2004. Investigating technical efficiency and potential technological change in Dutch pig farming. Agric Syst 79: 353-367. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-521X(03)00091-X
Larue S, Latruffe L, 2009. Agglomeration externalities and technical efficiency in French pig production. [University works] auto-saisine. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01462388/document
Latruffe L, Balcombe K, Davidova S, Zawalinska K, 2004. Determinants of technical efficiency of crop and livestock farms in Poland. Appl Econ 36: 1255-1263. https://doi.org/10.1080/0003684042000176793
Latruffe L, Fogarasi J, Desjeux Y, 2012. Efficiency, productivity and technology comparison for farms in Central and Western Europe: The case of field crop and dairy farming in Hungary and France. Econ Syst 36: 264-278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecosys.2011.07.002
Latruffe L, Desjeux Y, Bakucs Z, Ferto I, Fogarasi J, 2013. Environmental pressures and technical efficiency of pig farms in Hungary. Manag Decis Econ 34 (6): 409-416. https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.2600
Mukherjee AN, Kuroda Y, 2003. Productivity growth in Indian agriculture: Is there evidence of convergence across states? Agr Econ 29: 43-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2003.tb00146.x
Nasirahmadi A, Edwards SA, Sturm B, 2017. Implementation of machine vision for detecting behaviour of cattle and pigs. Livest Sci 202: 25-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2017.05.014
Newman RE, Downing JA, Thomson PC, Collins CL, Henman DJ, Wilkinson SJ, 2014. Insulin secretion, body composition and pig performance are altered by feeding pattern. Anim Prod Sci 54: 319-328. https://doi.org/10.1071/AN13120
Niemi JK, Sevón-Aimonen ML, Pietola K, Stalder KJ, 2010. The value of precision feeding technologies for grow-finish swine. Livest Sci 129: 13-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2009.12.006
O'Donnell CJ, 2008. An aggregate quantity-price framework for measuring and decomposing productivity and profitability change. CEPA Working Papers Series WP072008, School of Economics, Univ of Queensland, Australia.
O'Donnell CJ, 2010. Measuring and decomposing agricultural productivity and profitability change. Aust J Agr Resour Econ 54: 527-560. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8489.2010.00512.x
O'Donnell CJ, 2011. The sources of productivity change in the manufacturing sectors of the US economy. Centre for Efficiency and Productivity Analysis (CEPA).
O'Donnell CJ, 2012. Nonparametric estimates of the components of productivity and profitability change in U.S. agriculture. Am J Agr Econ 94: 873-890. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aas023
O'Donnell CJ, 2014. Econometric estimation of distance functions and associated measures of productivity and efficiency change. J Product Anal 41: 187-200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11123-012-0311-1
Orea L, Zofio JL, 2019. Common methodological choices in nonparametric and parametric analyses of firms' performance. In: The Palgrave handbook of economic performance analysis. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23727-1_12
Pakes A, Griliches Z, 1984. Estimating distributed lags in short panels with an application to the specification of depreciation patterns and capital stock constructs. Rev Econ Stud 51: 243-262. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297690
Piot-Lepetit I, Le Moing M, 2007. Productivity and environmental regulation: The effect of the nitrates directive in the French pig sector. Environ Resour Econ 38: 433-446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-007-9086-7
Pomar C, Hauschild L, Zhang GH, Pomar J, Lovatto PA, 2009. Applying precision feeding techniques in growing-finishing pig operations. Rev Bras Zootec 38: 226-237. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982009001300023
Pomar C, Kyriazakis I, Emmans G, Knap P, 2003. Modeling stochasticity: Dealing with populations rather than individual pigs. J Anim Sci 81: 178-186.
Rahman S, Salim R, 2013. Six decades of total factor productivity change and sources of growth in Bangladesh agriculture (1948-2008). J Agr Econ 64: 275-294. https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.12009
Rizov M, Pokrivcak J, Ciaian P, 2013. CAP subsidies and productivity of the EU farms. J Agr Econ 64: 537-557. https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.12030
Schneider JD, Tokach MD, Goodband RD, Nelssen JL, Dritz SS, DeRouchey JM, Sulabo RC, 2011. Effects of restricted feed intake on finishing pigs weighing between 68 and 114 kilograms fed twice or 6 times daily. J Anim Sci 89: 3326-3333. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2010-3154
Szeląg-Sikora A, Cupiał M, Niemiec M, 2015. Productivity of farms in the aspect of various activity forms. Agric Agric Sci Procedia 7: 94-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aaspro.2015.12.042
Thornton PK, 2010. Livestock production: Recent trends, future prospects. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 365 (1554): 2853-2867. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0134
Valverde C, 2015. Spain's swine and pork production report 2015. USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, Global Agricultural Information Network (GAIN), Madrid.
Van Grinsven HJM, van Dam JD, Lesschen JP, Timmers MHG, Velthof GL, Lassaletta L, 2018. Reducing external costs of nitrogen pollution by relocation of pig production between regions in the European Union. Reg Environ Chang 18: 2403-2415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-018-1335-5
Wathes CM, Kristensen HH, Aerts JM, Berckmans D, 2008. Is precision livestock farming an engineer's daydream or nightmare, an animal's friend or foe, and a farmer's panacea or pitfall? Comput Electron Agr 64: 2-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2008.05.005
Willems J, Van Grinsven HJM, Jacobsen BH, Jensen T, Dalgaard T, Westhoek H, Kristensen IS, 2016. Why Danish pig farms have far more land and pigs than Dutch farms? Implications for feed supply, manure recycling and production costs. Agric Syst 144: 122-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2016.02.002
Willock J, Deary IJ, Edwards-Jones G, Gibson GJ, McGregor MJ, Sutherland A, Dent JB, Morgan O, Grieve R, 1999. The role of attitudes and objectives in farmer decision making: Business and environmentally-oriented behaviour in Scotland. J Agr Econ 50: 286-303. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-9552.1999.tb00814.x
Woyengo TA, Beltranena E, Zijlstra RT, 2014. Nonruminant Nutrition Symposium: Controlling feed cost by including alternative ingredients into pig diets: A review 1,2. J Anim Sci 92: 1293-1305. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2013-7169
Yang H, Pollitt M, 2012. Incorporating undesirable outputs into Malmquist TFP indices with an unbalanced data panel of Chinese power plants. Appl Econ Lett 19: 277-283. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2011.572843
Zwicker B, Gygax L, Wechsler B, Weber R, 2013. Short- and long-term effects of eight enrichment materials on the behaviour of finishing pigs fed ad libitum or restrictively. Appl Anim Behav Sci 144: 31-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2012.11.007
© CSIC. Manuscripts published in both the printed and online versions of this Journal are the property of Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, and quoting this source is a requirement for any partial or full reproduction.
All contents of this electronic edition, except where otherwise noted, are distributed under a “Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International” (CC BY 4.0) License. You may read here the basic information and the legal text of the license. The indication of the CC BY 4.0 License must be expressly stated in this way when necessary.
Self-archiving in repositories, personal webpages or similar, of any version other than the published by the Editor, is not allowed.
