The materials balance condition is a fundamental adding up condition, which essentially says that: ''what goes in must come out''. In this paper we argue that a number of the recently developed methods of incorporating pollution measures into standard productive efficiency models may be inconsistent with this fundamental condition. We propose an alternative method that involves the incorporation of the materials balance concept into the production model in a similar manner to which price information is normally incorporated. This produces a new environmental efficiency measure that can be decomposed into technical and allocative components, in a similar manner to the conventional cost efficiency decomposition. The approach is illustrated with the case of phosphorus emission on Belgian pig-finishing farms, using data envelopment analysis (DEA) methods. Our results indicate that a substantial proportion of nutrient pollution on these farms can be abated in a cost reducing manner.

ABSTRACT. Although the literature on sustainability assessment tools to support decision making in agriculture is rapidly growing, little attention has been paid to the actual tool choice. We focused on the choice of more complex integrated indicator-based tools at the farm level. The objective was to determine key characteristics as criteria for tool choice. This was done with an in-depth comparison of 2 cases: the Monitoring Tool for Integrated Farm Sustainability and the Public Goods Tool. They differ in characteristics that may influence tool choice: data, time, and budgetary requirements. With an enhanced framework, we derived 11 key characteristics to describe differences between the case tools. Based on the key characteristics, we defined 2 types of indicator-based tools: full sustainability assessment (FSA) and rapid sustainability assessment (RSA). RSA tools are more oriented toward communicating and learning. They are therefore more suitable for use by a larger group of farmers, can help to raise awareness, trigger farmers to become interested in sustainable farming, and highlight areas of good or bad performance. If and when farmers increase their commitment to on-farm sustainability, they can gain additional insight by using an FSA tool. Based on complementary and modular use of the tools, practical recommendations for the different end users, i.e., researchers, farmers, advisers, and so forth, have been suggested.

The importance of risk perception and risk attitude for understanding individual's risk behaviour are independently well described in literature, but rarely combined in an integrated approach. In this study, we propose a model assuming the choice to implement certain risk management strategies to be directly driven by both perceptions of risks and risk attitude. Other determinants influence the intention to apply different risk strategies mainly indirectly, mediated by risk perception and risk attitude. This conceptual model is empirically tested, using structural equation modelling, for understanding the intention of farmers to implement different common risk management strategies at their farms. Data are gathered in a survey completed by 500 farmers from the Flanders region in Belgium, investigating attitudes towards farming, perceived past exposure to risk, socio-demographic characteristics, farm size, perceptions of the major sources of farm business risk, risk attitudes and the intention to apply common risk management strategies. Our major findings are: (i) perception of major farm business risks have no significant impact on the intention of applying any of the risk strategies under study, (ii) risk attitude does have a significant impact. Therefore, rather than objective risk faced and the subjective interpretation thereof, it is the general risk attitude that influence intended risk strategies to be implemented. A distinction can be made between farmers willing to take risk, who are more inclined to apply ex-ante risk management strategies and risk averse farmers who are less inclined to implement ex-ante risk management strategies but rather cope with the consequences and diminish their effects ex-post when risks have occurred.

No abstract

No abstract

Due to increasing public health concerns that food animals could be reservoirs for antibiotic resistant organisms, calls for reduced current antibiotic use on farms are growing. Nevertheless, it is challenging for farmers to perform this reduction without negatively affecting technical and economic performance. As an alternative, improved management practices based on biosecurity and vaccinations have been proven useful to reduce antimicrobial use without lowering productivity, but issues with insufficient experimental design possibilities have hindered economic analysis. In the present study a quasi-experimental approach was used for assessing the economic impact of reduction of antimicrobial use coupled with improved management strategies, particularly biosecurity strategies. The research was performed on farrow-to-finish pig farms in Flanders (northern region of Belgium). First, to account for technological progress and to avoid selection bias, propensity score analysis was used to compare data on technical parameters. The treatment group (n=48) participated in an intervention study whose aim was to improve management practices to reduce the need for use of antimicrobials. Before and after the change in management, data were collected on the technical parameters, biosecurity status, antimicrobial use, and vaccinations. Treated farms were matched without replacement with control farms (n=69), obtained from the Farm Accountancy Data Network, to estimate the difference in differences (DID) of the technical parameters. Second, the technical parameters' DID, together with the estimated costs of the management intervention and the price volatility of the feed, meat of the finisher pigs, and piglets served as a basis for modelling the profit of 11 virtual farrow-to-finish pig farms representative of the Flemish sector. Costs incurred by new biosecurity measures (median +€3.96/sow/year), and new vaccinations (median €0.00/sow/year) did not exceed the cost reduction achieved by lowering the use of antimicrobials (median -€7.68/sow/year). No negative effect on technical parameters was observed and mortality of the finishers was significantly reduced by -1.1%. Even after a substantial reduction of the antimicrobial treatments, the difference of the enterprise profit increased by +€2.67/finisher pig/year after implementing the interventions. This result proved to be robust after stochastic modelling of input and output price volatility. The results of this study can be used by veterinarians and other stakeholders to incentivise managers of farrow-to-finish operations to use biosecurity practices as a cost-effective way to reduce antimicrobial use.

ABSTRACT. Adoption of sustainability assessment tools in agricultural practice is often disappointing. One of the critical success factors for adoption is the tool development process. Because scientific attention to these development processes and insights about them are rather limited, we aimed to foster the scientific debate on this topic. This was done by reflecting on the development process of a Flemish sustainability assessment tool, MOTIFS. MOTIFS was developed with the aim of becoming widely adopted by farmers and farm advisors, but this result was not achieved. Our reflection process showed success factors favoring and barriers hindering tool adoption. These were grouped into three clusters of lessons learned for sound tool development: (1) institutional embeddedness, (2) ownership, and (3) tool functions. This clustering allowed us to formulate actions for researchers on the following aspects: (1) learning from stakeholders and end users, (2) providing coaching for appropriate tool use, and (3) structuring development of different tool types and exploring spin-offs from existing tools. We hope these normative results evoke other researchers to feed a debate on understanding tool development.

Integrated sustainability assessment (ISA) models can trigger change towards sustainable agriculture. This paper reports the implementation of an existing ISA model in Flanders, MOTIFS (Monitoring Tool for Integrated Farm Sustainability), in two cases in dairy farming selected from private/public accountancy/consultancy networks. Interactive learning between model developers (scientists) and model users (farmers and advisers) is examined with two objectives: first, to identify critical success factors (CSFs) for implementation; and second, to suggest improvements for MOTIFS or ways to use MOTIFS. Through a qualitative research methodology, based on open coding of data collected in farmer discussion groups, 10 CSFs are derived that are linked to the various implementation steps. Sufficient attention should be paid to attitude of model users, compatibility, data availability and user-friendliness, particularly when an ISA model is used in existing networks. Improvements in the ISA model and its use are suggested, such as more focus on the organization of the discussion sessions. Training of advisers, enhancement of their facilitation skills, involvement of experts and a thorough planning of sessions are suggested for MOTIFS to become more effective in supporting learning and sustainable farm management