Michel Lherm

Productive, environmental and economic performances assessments of organic and conventional suckler cattle farming systems

Conversion to OF was simulated for four specialized suckler-beef systems by coupling an economic optimization model (“Opt’INRA”) with a model assessing non-renewable energy (NRE) consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (“PLANETE”). After adaptation of the production system, and based on average prices over 2004–2008, we analyzed the productive, environmental and economic impacts of the conversion process. The ban on chemical fertilizers led to a drop in farm area productivity. For these specialized farms, meat production decreased by 18% to 37% depending on initial level of intensification. The reduced use of inputs results in a 23% to 45% drop in NRE consumption/ha, 5–20% of which is a drop in NRE per ton of live weight produced. Its methane production makes cattle the biggest driver of GHG emissions. The shift to OF does not significantly affect gross GHG emissions per ton of live weight produced, but taking into account carbon sequestration in grasslands suggests net GHG emissions could be lower for OF systems. The lower productivity per hectare (less animals reared per hectares) allows a 26% to 34% reduction in net GHG emissions per hectare of farm area. Economically, the drop in productivity is not compensated by the gain in the meat selling price (+5% to +10%), gross farm product drops by 9% to 16%, and the lower use of inputs creates a strong −9% to −52% drop in operational costs. Farm income falls more than 20% (−7 to −46%).

Mitigation of enteric methane for French cattle: potential extent and cost of selected actions

The purpose of this study was (i) to select options for enteric methane abatement in French conditions, while maintaining production and changing practices but not systems, and (ii) to evaluate the extent of abatement and its cost from 2010 to 2030. Two options were selected: supplying unsaturated fats, and using nitrates as a dietary additive in the diet. Unsaturated fats resulted in a higher abatement, because a greater number of animals were concerned by the option, but incurred a higher total cost and a higher cost per ton of CO2-equivalent avoided. The results were sensitive to methodology, and to variations in the choice of fats and in the cost of ingredients, among other factors. Given their cost, evaluated in the frame of a marginal abatement cost curve, these options will require strong public policies for their application.

Win–win strategies for high beef quality, consumer satisfaction, and farm efficiency, low environmental impacts and improved animal welfare

Meat quality includes intrinsic qualities (the characteristics of the product itself) and extrinsic qualities (e.g. animal health and welfare, environmental impacts, price). There is still a high level of variability in beef palatability, which induces consumer dissatisfaction. We also observe a general trend towards an increasing importance of healthiness and safety (intrinsic) and environmental issues and animal welfare (extrinsic). Most grading systems describe carcasses using only animal traits (e.g. weight, conformation, fatness, animal age and sex). In North American and Asian countries, emphasis has been put on maturity and marbling. The European system is mainly based on yield estimation. The Meat Standards Australia grading scheme, which predicts beef palatability for each cut, proved to be effective in predicting beef palatability in many other countries. Some genetic markers are available to improve beef quality. In addition, gene and protein expression profiling of the bovine muscle revealed that the expression level of many genes and the abundance of many proteins may be potential indicators of muscle mass, tenderness, flavour or marbling of meat. The integration of all these parameters is likely to predict better beef palatability. The integration of extrinsic qualities in the prediction model increases the difficulty of achieving a global evaluation of overall meat quality. For instance, with respect to environmental issues, each feeding system has its own advantages and disadvantages. Despite this, win–win strategies have been identified. For example, animals that were less stressed at slaughter also produced more tender meat, and in some studies the most economically efficient farms had the lowest environmental impact. In other cases, there are trade-offs among and between intrinsic and extrinsic qualities. In any case, the combination of the different integrative approaches appears promising to improve the prediction of overall beef quality. A relevant combination of indicators related to sensory and nutritional quality, social and environmental considerations (such as e.g. carbon footprint, animal welfare, grassland biodiversity, rural development) and economic efficiency (income of farmers and of other stakeholders of the supply chain, etc.) will allow the prediction of the overall quality of beef mainly for consumers but also for any stakeholder in the supply chain.

On-Farm Weather Risk Management in Suckler Cow Farms: A Recursive Discrete Stochastic Programming Approach

The 4.3 million French suckler cows represent more than one third of all European suckler cows and supply around 60% of the beef production in France. They also participate in rural development, as few economic alternatives to livestock farming exist in these production areas and they help in maintaining large areas under grassland which favors biodiversity and limits pollution and erosion (Le Goffe 2003), even if their complete environmental impact should be taken into account (FAO 2006). However, these farms rely on grassland production which is very sensitive to weather conditions (Gateau et al. 2006). Currently the EU and France are thinking at introducing a risk management framework into their agricultural policy. Since farmers individual risk-management strategies can supplement or replace public compensation policies and private insurance, they have to be well understood. Farm risk management aims at profitably securing and improving farms potential of profit over time. It encompasses two stages. The first one, prior to the realisation of a random event, deals with the mitigation of future risks of loss. The second stage, subsequent to the realisation of this uncertain event, corresponds to decisions adjustments in order to take advantage or to limit damages caused by the random event. These two stages are interlinked since first stage decisions can reduce for instance farm exposure or increase adjustments capacity.

Productivity and technical efficiency of suckler beef production systems: trends for the period 1990 to 2012

Over the past 23 years (1990 to 2012), French beef cattle farms have expanded in size and increased labour productivity by over 60%, chiefly, though not exclusively, through capital intensification (labour-capital substitution) and simplifying herd feeding practices (more concentrates used). The technical efficiency of beef sector production systems, as measured by the ratio of the volume value (in constant euros) of farm output excluding aids to volume of intermediate consumption, has fallen by nearly 20% while income per worker has held stable thanks to subsidies and the labour productivity gains made. This aggregate technical efficiency of beef cattle systems is positively correlated to feed self-sufficiency, which is in turn negatively correlated to farm and herd size. While volume of farm output per hectare of agricultural area has not changed, forage feed self-sufficiency decreased by 6 percentage points. The continual increase in farm size and labour productivity has come at a cost of lower production-system efficiency - a loss of technical efficiency that 20 years of genetic, technical, technological and knowledge-driven progress has barely managed to offset.

Current situation and future prospects for beef production in Europe — A review

The European Union (EU) is the world’s third largest producer of beef. This contributes to the economy, rural development, social life, culture and gastronomy of Europe. The diversity of breeds, animal types (cows, bulls, steers, heifers) and farming systems (intensive, extensive on permanent or temporary pastures, mixed, breeders, feeders, etc) is a strength, and a weakness as the industry is often fragmented and poorly connected. There are also societal concerns regarding animal welfare and environmental issues, despite some positive environmental impacts of farming systems. The EU is amongst the most efficient for beef production as demonstrated by a relative low production of greenhouse gases. Due to regional differences in terms of climate, pasture availability, livestock practices and farms characteristics, productivity and incomes of beef producers vary widely across regions, being among the lowest of the agricultural systems. The beef industry is facing unprecedented challenges related to animal welfare, environmental impact, origin, authenticity, nutritional benefits and eating quality of beef. These may affect the whole industry, especially its farmers. It is therefore essential to bring the beef industry together to spread best practice and better exploit research to maintain and develop an economically viable and sustainable beef industry. Meeting consumers’ expectations may be achieved by a better prediction of beef palatability using a modelling approach, such as in Australia. There is a need for accurate information and dissemination on the benefits and issues of beef for human health and for environmental impact. A better objective description of goods and services derived from livestock farming is also required. Putting into practice “agroecology” and organic farming principles are other potential avenues for the future. Different future scenarios can be written depending on the major driving forces, notably meat consumption, climate change, environmental policies and future organization of the supply chain.

Converting Suckler Cattle Farming Systems to Organic Farming: A Method to Assess the Productive, Environmental and Economic Impacts

This chapter proposes a method for assessing the farming system adaptations required in converting to organic farming (OF) in three beef production systems employed in the Charolais area. The conversion to OF was simulated by coupling an economic optimisation model (“Opt’INRA”) with a model assessing non-renewable energy (NRE) consumption and greenhouse gas emissions (“PLANETE”). After adaptation of the production system, meat production decreased by 19–37%, depending on the initial level of intensification. The reduced use of inputs results in a 23–45% drop in non-renewable energy consumption per hectare and a 5–16% drop per ton of live weight produced. The shift to OF does significantly not affect gross GHG emissions per ton of live weight produced, but, taking into account carbon sequestration in grasslands, net GHG emissions could be lower for OF systems. Economically, the drop in productivity is not compensated by the gain in the meat selling price (+5% to +10%), gross farm product drops by 9–16%, and the lower use of inputs entails a strong drop in operational costs: −9% to −52%. Farm income falls more than 20% (−7% to −46%).