Stéphane Ingrand

Flexibility of Suckler Cattle Farms in the Face of Uncertainty within the Beef Industry: A Proposed Definition and an Illustration

Abstract The aim of this study, carried out in association with beef cattle producers, was to explore the capacity of farms to adapt, from a techno-conomic point of view, to both structural changes in consumer demand for beef products and market disruptions (sudden drop in beef consumption due partly to media coverage of bovine spongiform encephalopathy [BSE] and foot-and-mouth disease in the winter 2000/2001). The aim is to help farmers and advisors to find solutions to fit farmers’ management choices with their strategic objectives. The flexibility concept was adopted in order to examine how farms reacted to the winter 2000/2001 crisis, and was based on several technical, economic and sociological surveys. A series of variables was proposed and several hypotheses were formulated regarding their impact on farm flexibility. Four types of farm strategy were identified using different combinations of the degree of importance of these variables, with technical, economic and marketing flexibilities specific to each type. The results revealed the different combinations of flexibility-types possible (technical, economic, marketing) and explain why cattle farmers reacted as they did. Analysis of farm flexibility also revealed situations where these technical, economic and marketing flexibilities were either complementary or incompatible. For traditional livestock farmers, high flexibility (technical and economic) allowed them to minimize the impact of the crisis on their systems. In other cases, low flexibility either resulted in inertia, or led farmers to react by seeking solutions outside the cattle farming system. Development groups should take into account these parameters when interacting with farmers. We propose a framework to qualify the use of information resources by farmers, relative to their flexibility.

Participatory modelling with farmer groups to help them redesign their livestock farming systems

To improve sustainability, farmers may want to redesign their livestock farming systems in depth. Systemic modelling has proved an efficient tool to study complex issues regarding farming systems, but it remains inefficient to support farmers in their system redesign processes. This paper describes and discusses a novel method to model livestock farming systems with groups of farmers to help them redesign their own systems. Modelling livestock farming systems at the farm scale with farmer groups is an original approach in livestock farming system modelling. Following a constructivist approach, our method involves working with farmers already involved in redesign processes and building causal maps according to their own representations, without using models previously created by scientists. Applying the method, we built two causal maps of livestock farming system operation, each one built with a group of five farmers including both those converting and converted to organic farming. Converting to organic farming was considered as one example of a redesign process. On the basis of a subjective assessment by both the participating farmers and researchers, and an analysis of map structures, we assessed the method’s strengths and weaknesses. We considered that one of its main advantages lay in its collective dimension: sharing, comparing and questioning interested the participating farmers greatly; however, it requires good facilitation skills and suitable group composition. Furthermore, the formalising process identified, for example, vicious circles in system operation, which made the farmers think about solutions for breaking them. Finally, analysis of map structures identified similarities and differences between the two groups that were discussed with both of them during a final workshop; this activity continued farmers’ self-reflection about their systems, which may help lead to innovative and more sustainable livestock farming systems.

Understanding beef-cattle farming management strategies by identifying motivations behind farmers' priorities.

This study aimed to identify and better understand management strategies that help livestock farmers adapt to changes in their production contexts, a fundamental challenge. A total of nine beef-cattle farmers were interviewed three times over 1 year to discuss 13 dimensions of livestock farming (e.g. reproduction, feeding, sales, etc.). Characterisation of management strategies rested on three main factors: (i) ranking of the dimensions according to the degree to which farmers desired to control them, (ii) reasons for the ranking and (iii) management guidelines. Although farmers agreed upon the rank of certain dimensions, such as herd management, they differed on that of others, such as sales and administration/regulations. Four motivation categories were identified: risk, pleasure, efficiency and ability to control the dimension. Three management guidelines were identified, which indicated that farmers managed for future survival of their farms at different scales (animal/herd v. whole-farm), involving different resources (biological v. financial) and based on different animal categories (reproductive cows v. animals sold). These results improve understanding of individual livestock farmers and their current management strategies by integrating the motivations behind their strategies. For this reason, they constitute methodological elements that agricultural advisors can use to provide relevant information to farmers while accommodating differences in farm management.

Climate variability drives livestock farmers to modify their use of collective summer mountain pastures

It is essential for grass livestock farming to cope with climate variability and, particularly, drought. A potential solution is to use collective mountain pastures, which are colder and wetter, in the summer. However, there is little knowledge on such collective pasture management. Therefore, we surveyed three collective sheep summer mountain pastures and three small and one large cattle summer mountain pastures in 2012 in the Auvergne region, France. Farmers using and managing the pastures were interviewed. We also analysed regional statistics, an economic report and a shepherd journal. Our results show that drought has incited farmers to use collective pastures. Beginning and ending dates of the summer grazing season and animal transfers have been modified by collective decisions and individual farmer strategies. We conclude that collective summer mountain pastures is a unique source of flexibility for livestock farming.

SIMBAL: a herd simulator for beef cattle

A beef cattle herd simulator was designed and developed as a tool for testing the consequences of farm management practices on herd performance. This discrete-event simulator is stochastic and individually based. It integrates a detailed reproduction model together with parameter-settable practices. This article details the various core components of the simulator. We then used it on virtual experiments with a herd of 70 cows. The first virtual experiment compared an autumn calving system with a herd management system based on winter calving. Adapting the herd management rules made it possible for the two systems to give similar outputs. In order to show the importance of the number of mated cows and of the reproductive period length on the performance of the herd, two different strategies were tested in with two new virtual experiments. The first one consisted in reducing the number of mated cows while the second one deals with reducing the reproduction period when the bull is present. The first of these scenarios led to drop in herd size in proportion with the female reduction over the years, whereas under the second scenario, a gap is simulated and the herd was wiped out after 10 years. We also focused an in-depth analysis on the variability of the results. The model shows that an average result not only masks variations from replication to replication but also masks variations in performances from year to year.

Securing Sustainable Livestock Production Systems in an Uncertain Economic Climate: Nurturing Flexibility and Resilience

Resilience is one of the three core properties of social‐ecological systems, mixing adaptability and transformability. Flexibility can be defined in terms of diversity of procedures and the speed at which they can be mobilized by one organization. The analyses performed are presented in terms of levers that farmers can deploy to protect their management systems against market uncertainty. These levers differ depending on farmer standpoints, objectives, lessons learned, the collective organizations they work with, the standards and specifications they work to, etc. It is equally important to identify the interplays between overarching and underlying scale levels for the system studied and to hone in on the dynamics at work during periods of transition. Adaptive capacities of farm systems are closely linked to how the farmer perceives the situations to manage, according to his aims, to his behaviour face to risk and to his idea of what is his job. We propose to use different words to describe the properties of farming systems to cope with changes, according to the level within the system: “adaptive capacity” or “plasticity” for the animal level, “resilience” for the biotechnical level and “flexibility” for the whole system, including the manager. We think there is a real challenge working at each level on transition periods and processes, as farming systems will have more and more to adapt face to unpredic events.

Farm-scale models built with farmers converting and converted to organic farming

Intensive livestock farming has recently induced several cases threatening food security. Therefore, redesigning sustainable livestock farming systems is a major challenge for agricultural science. Specifically, farm-scale models that truly integrate different subsystems, viewpoints and time scales are needed. Up to now, however, no modelling approach has been able to meet these requirements. In previous work, we have designed a participatory modelling method based on causal mapping to help farmer groups redesign their livestock farming systems. Two causal maps have been built with two neighbouring groups of dairy farmers converting and converted to organic farming. It was the first time that consistent wholes had been made of elements cited by farmers faced with a redesign process. This article describes the content of the causal maps, with a focus on the current issue of integrating multiple subsystems, viewpoints and time scales within the same farm-scale model. We found that the maps included items at the whole farm scale and from a variety of disciplinary viewpoints and time scales. This finding indicates that these characteristics are useful in modelling approaches for redesigning farming systems. In addition, both maps closely linked herd operations to the forage system in a cluster centered on the feeding–health–production complex. This result suggests that the feeding–health–production complex requires particular attention for organic conversion of dairy farms. Lastly, novel relations were identified in the maps that linked work organisation and farm configuration to reproductive performance. This finding shows that analysing work organisation helps understanding how biotechnical performance evolves in a farming system.