Advertisement

The Objectives and Priorities for the Azorean Dairy Farmers’ Decisions

  • Emiliana Silva
  • Ana Alexandra Marta-CostaEmail author
  • Julio Berbel
Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

The single objective—profit maximization—has been the classical and neoclassic model for farmer’s decision making. Nowadays, it is recognized that other and conflictual objectives are important concerns to the process, making the multi-criteria methodologies more suitable to the agricultural reality. This chapter aims to identify and find the objectives and priorities of the Azorean dairy farmer’s decision making. The proposed methodology is based on multi-criteria models, by simulation of the dairy farmers’ behavior through data of the Farm Accountancy Data Network. This allows to define a surrogate utility function for a dairy farm typology, regarding the different grazing systems. Five main objectives were previously considered: profit maximization, risk minimization, labor seasonality minimization, leisure maximization, and also deviations to the goal of total labor minimization. The results show that in any group of Azorean dairy farms, the decision making process seems to be influenced by three conflictual objectives: profit maximization, labor seasonality, and risk minimization. Also, the farms’ objectives depend on the intensity of grazing systems and by other socioeconomic factors. That is, farmers’ behavior is not always explained by profit (exception in the low intensity grazing systems), which is unusual under the traditional paradigm. Some explanations may be appointed for this situation and one is related to the dairy farms income that can be enough to maintain the farm and family income. If the economic objectives are satisfied, then the farmers can have other priorities.

Keywords

Utility Function Risk Minimization Dairy Farm Profit Maximization Aspiration Level 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Akkal-Corfini, N., López-Ridaura, S., Walter, C., Menasseri-Aubry, S., & Bissuel-Belaygue, C. (2007). Integrated analysis of vegetable farming systems. The case of Bretagne, West of France. In M. Donatelli, J. Hatfield, & A. Rizzoli (Eds.), Farming Systems Design 2007, International Symposium on Methodologies on Integrated Analysis on Farm Production Systems (pp. 131–132). 10–12 September 2007, Catania (Italy), Book 2 – Field-farm Scale Design and Improvement.Google Scholar
  2. Amador, F., Sumpsi, J., & Romero, C. (1998). A non-interactive methodology to assess farmer’s utility functions: An application to large farms in Andalusia, Spain. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 25, 92–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Antoine, J., Fischer, G., & Makowski, M. (1997). Multiple criteria land use analysis. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 83, 195–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bartlett, E. T., & Clawson, W. J. (1978). Profit, meat production or efficient use of energy in ranching. Journal of Animal Science, 46(3), 812–818.Google Scholar
  5. Bartolini, F., Bazzani, G. M., Gallerani, V., Raggi, M., & e Viaggi, D. (2007). The impact of water and agriculture policy scenarios on irrigated farming systems in Italy: An analysis based on farm level multi-attribute linear programming models. Agricultural Systems, 93, 90–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berbel, J., & Barros, M. (1993). Planificación Multicritério de Empresas Agroganaderas con Bovino de Leche de Islas Azores (Portugal). Invest. agr. Econ, 8(2), 197–208. (Multicriteria management of dairy farms in the Azores islands)Google Scholar
  7. Berbel, J., Cañas, J., Gómez-Limón, J., López, M., & Arriaza, M. (1999). Micromodelos de Gestión de Agua de Riego, análisis del Impacto socioeconómico y ambiental de una política de precios. Córdoba: Editorial Vistalegre, ISBN: 968-839-544-7 (Micromodels of water management, analysis of socioeconomics and environmental impacts of a prices policy).Google Scholar
  8. Berbel, J., & Rodríguez-Ocaña, A. (1998). An MCDM approach to production analysis: an application to irrigated farms in southern Spain. European Journal of Operational Research, 107, 108–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bergevoet, R., Ondersteijn, C., Saatkamp, H., Van Woerkum, C., & Huirne, R. (2004). Entrepreneurial behaviour of Dutch dairy farmers under a milk quota system: Goals, objectives and attitudes. Agricultural Systems, 80(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carvalho, N. S. (2006). Agricultura Sustentável em Regadio e o seu Planeamento Face aos Desafios Económicos, Sociais e Ambientais (O Caso da Futura Zona Irrigada de Intervenção de Alqueva). In Actas do 5° Congresso Ibérico “Gestão e Planeamento de Água”. 4–8 December 2006, University of Algarve - Faro, 10 p.Google Scholar
  11. Carvalho, N. S. (2007). O Planeamento Agrícola Face aos Actuais Desafios Ambientais, Sociais e Económicos (Uma Aplicação da Programação por Metas Lexicográficas ao Caso da Futura Zona de Regadio de Intervenção de Alqueva). In Actas do V Congresso Nacional da Associação Portuguesa de Economia Agrária “Globalização, Agricultura e Áreas Rurais”. 4–6 October 2007, UTAD - Vila Real, 10 p.Google Scholar
  12. Cohon, J. L. (1978). Multiobjective programming and planning (Mathematics in science and engineering, Vol. 140). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  13. Diaz-Balteiro, L., & Romero, C. (2004a). In search of a natural systems sustainability index. Ecological Economics, 49, 401–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Diaz-Balteiro, L., & Romero, C. (2004b). Sustainability of forest management plans: A discrete goal programming approach. Journal of Environmental Management, 71, 351–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dunn, E. G., Keller, J. M., & Marks, L. A. (1998). Integrated decision making for sustainability: A fuzzy MADM model for agriculture. In: S. A. El-Swaify & D. S. Yakowitz (Eds.), Multiple objective decision making for land, water, and environmental management. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Multiple Objective Decision Support Systems (MODSS) for Land, Water, and Environmental Management: Concepts, Approaches, and Applications (pp. 313–322). Florence, KY: Lewis Publishers.Google Scholar
  16. El-Gayar, O. F., & Leung, P. (2001). A multiple criteria decision making framework for regional aquaculture development. European Journal of Operational Research, 133, 462–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Flury, C., Gotsch, N., & Rieder, P. (2000). The effects of alternative direct payment regimes on ecological and socio-economic indicators: Results of a spatial linear programming model for a Swiss Alpine region. In Proceedings of Fourth International Conference on Chain Management in Agribusiness and the Food Industry, 24–26 May, Wageningen, 9 p.Google Scholar
  18. Gómez-Limón J., & Berbel J. (1995). Aplicación de una Metodología Multicritério para la Estimación de los Objetivos de los Agricultores del Regadío Cordobés. Invest. agr. Econ, 10(1), 103–123 (Application of a multicriteria methodology to estimate the objectives of Cordoba farmers).Google Scholar
  19. Gómez-Limón, J. A., & Berbel, J. (2000). Multicriteria analysis of derived water demand functions: A Spanish case study. Agricultural Systems, 63, 49–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Groot, J., Rossing, W., Jellema, A., Stobbelaar, D., Renting, H., & Van Ittersum, M. (2007). Exploring multi-scale trade-offs between nature conservation, agricultural profits and landscape quality – A methodology to support discussions on land-use perspectives. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 120, 58–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Heilman, P., Yakowitz, D. S., & Lane, L. J. (1997). Targeting farms to improve water quality. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 83, 173–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. IFAP (Instituto de Financiamento da Agricultura e Pescas). (2012). Regime de Imposição sobre os Excedentes no Leite (Quotas Leiteiras). Retrieved September 10, 2012 from http://www.ifap.min-agricultura.pt/portal/page/portal/ifap_publico/GC_quotleite
  23. INE (Instituto Nacional de Estatística). (2009). Estatísticas Agrícolas 2008. Retrieved September 17, 2012 from http://www.ine.pt/
  24. INE (Instituto Nacional de Estatística). (2011). Recenseamento Agrícola 2009. Análise dos principais resultados. Retrieved September 17, 2012 from: http://www.ine.pt/
  25. INRA (Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique). (1988). In R. Jarrige (Ed.), Alimentation des bovins, ovins & caprins. Paris: INRA; ISBN 2-7380-0021-5. (Feeding bovines, sheep and goat).Google Scholar
  26. Keeney, R., & Raiffa, H. (1976). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs. New York: Wiley. ISBN 0521438837.Google Scholar
  27. Köbrich, C., & Rehman, T. (1998). Sustainable agriculture and the MCDM paradigm: The development of compromise programming models with special reference to small-scale farmers in Chile’s VIth Region. In S. A. El-Swaify, & D. S. Yakowitz (Eds.), Multiple Objective decision making for land, water, and environmental management. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Multiple Objective Decision Support Systems (MODSS) for Land, Water, and Environmental Management: Concepts, Approaches, and Applications (pp. 557–569). Florence, KY: Lewis Publishers.Google Scholar
  28. Lakshminarayan, P. G., Johnson, S. R., & Bouzaher, A. (1995). A multi-objective approach to integrating agricultural economic and environmental policies. Journal of Environmental Management, 45, 365–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Latinopoulos, D. (2007). Multicriteria decision-making for efficient water and land resources allocation in irrigated agriculture. Environment, Development and Sustainability. doi: 10.1007/s10668-007-9115-2. Retrieved from: http://www.springerlink.com/content/v8j2h44j4w02g443.Google Scholar
  30. Mardle, S., Pascoe, S., Tamiz, M., & Jones, D. (2000). Resource allocation in the North Sea demersal fisheries: a goal programming approach. Annals of Operations Research, 94, 321–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Marta-Costa, A. (2008). A Tomada da Decisão no Planeamento da Exploração Agrária no Contexto da Sustentabilidade: o caso da Produção de Carne Bovina Maronesa. PhD Thesis, vol. I. UTAD: Vila Real.Google Scholar
  32. Marta-Costa, A. A. (2010). Application of decision support methods for sustainable agrarian systems. New Medit, IX(2), 42–49.Google Scholar
  33. Marta-Costa, A. A., Manso, F., Tibério, L., & Fonseca, C. (2013). Ecological-economic modelling for farming systems of Montemuro Mountain (Portugal). In: A. Marta-Costa, & E. Silva (Eds.), Methods and procedures for building sustainable farming systems: Application in the European context (Chapter 6, pp. 207–217). New York: Springer, ISBN 978-94-007-5003-6 (eBook); ISBN 978-94-007-5002-9 (Hardcover).Google Scholar
  34. Meyer-Aurich, A. (2005). Economic and environmental analysis of sustainable farming practices – A Bavarian case study. Agricultural Systems, 86, 190–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mimouni, M., Zekri, S., & Flichman, G. (2000). Modelling the trade-offs between farm income and the reduction of erosion and nitrate pollution. Annals of Operations Research, 94, 91–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Neely, W. P., North, R. M., & Fortson, J. C. (1977). An operational approach to multiple objective decision making for public water resources projects using integer goal programming. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 59(1), 198–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nibbering, J. W., & Van Rheenen, T. (1998). The development of a quantitative method for setting research priorities: A critical assessment. Agricultural Systems, 56(2), 145–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Poeta, A. (1994). A Tomada de Decisão no Planeamento da Exploração Agrícola num Contexto de Objectivos Múltiplos. PhD Thesis. UTAD: Vila Real.Google Scholar
  39. Prathapar, S. A., Meyer, W. S., & Madden, J. C. (1997). SWAGMAN options: A hierarchical multicriteria framework to identify profitable land uses that minimize water table rise and salinization. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 83, 217–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Raju, K. S., Duckstein, L., & Arondel, C. (2001). Multicriterion analysis for sustainable water resources planning: A case study in Spain. Water Resources Management, 14, 435–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Raju, K. S., & Vasan, A. (2007). Multi attribute utility theory for irrigation system evaluation. Water Resources Management, 21, 717–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rehman, T., & Romero, C. (1987). Goal programming with penalty functions and livestock ration formulation. Agricultural Systems, 23, 117–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Riesgo, L., & Goméz-Limón, J. A. (2006). Multi-criteria policy scenario analysis for public regulation of irrigated agriculture. Agricultural Systems, 91, 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rodríguez Ocaña, A. (1996). Propuesta Metodológica para el Análisis de la toma de Decisión de los Agricultores: Aplicación al caso de Regadío Extensivo Cordobés. PhD Thesis. Escuela Técnica Superior Ingenieros Agrónomos y Montes, Universidad de Córdoba.Google Scholar
  45. Romero, C. (1993). Teoria de la Decisión Multicriterio: Conceptos, Técnicas y Aplicaciones. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.Google Scholar
  46. Romero, C., & Rehman, T. (1989). Multiple criteria analysis for agricultural decisions (Developments in Agricultural Economics, Vol. 5). Amsterdam: Elsevier. ISBN 0-444-87408-9.Google Scholar
  47. Rozakis, S., Sourie, J.-C., & Vanderpooten, D. (2001). Integrated micro-economic modelling and multi-criteria methodology to support public decision-making: The case of liquid bio-fuels in France. Biomass and Bioenergy, 20, 385–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Shakya, K. M., & Leuschner, W. A. (1990). A multiple objective land use planning model for Nepalese hills farms. Agricultural Systems, 34, 133–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Silva, E. (2001). Análisis Multicriterio da la Eficiência Económica de las Explotaciones Agroganaderas de las Azores (Portugal). PhD Thesis. Universidad de Córdoba.Google Scholar
  50. Silva, E., & Berbel, J. (2004). A decision support model for dairy farms. Quality assurance, risk management and environmental control in agriculture and food supply networks (Vol. B, pp. 583–591). Bonn: Universitat Bonn-ILB.Google Scholar
  51. Silva, E., & Berbel, J. (2006). An Azorean farms typology. New Medit, VI(1), 51–54.Google Scholar
  52. Silvestri, N., Andreoli, M., & Bellocchi, G. (2007). Assessing Agricultural management via multi-criteria analysis: Case-study on maize systems. In: M. Donatelli, J. Hatfield, A. Rizzoli (Eds.), Farming systems design 2007, Int. Symposium on Methodologies on Integrated Analysis on Farm Production Systems. 10–12 September 2007, Catania (Italy), book 2 – Field-farm Scale Design and Improvement, pp. 189–190.Google Scholar
  53. Solano, C., León, H., Pérez, E., & Herrero, M. (2001). Characterising objective profiles of Costa Rican dairy farmers. Agricultural Systems, 67(1), 153–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sumpsi, J., Amador, F., & Romero, C. (1996). On farmer’s objectives: A multicriteria approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 96, 64–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tauer, L. (1995). Do New York dairy farmers maximize profits or minimize cost? American Journal Agricultural Economics, 77, 421–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Thankappan, S., Midmore, P., & Jenkins, T. (2006). Conserving energy in smallholder agriculture: A multi-objective programming case-study of Northeast India. Ecological Economics, 56, 190–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Tiwari, D. N., Loof, R., & Paudyal, G. N. (1999). Environmental-economic decision-making in lowland irrigated agriculture using multi-criteria analysis techniques. Agricultural Systems, 60, 99–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Van Huylenbroeck, G. (1997). Multicriteria tools for the trade-off analysis in rural planning between economic and environmental objectives. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 83, 261–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Willet, K., Zhang, T., Mcternan, W., Sharda, R., & Rossman, E. (1997). Regulation of pesticide discharge into surface and groundwater under uncertainty: A model for environmental risk-profitability tradeoffs and policy selection. Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 2, 211–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Zander, P., & Kächele, H. (1999). Modelling multiple objectives of land use for sustainable development. Agricultural Systems, 59, 311–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Zekri, S., & Romero, C. (1991). Influencia de las Preferências del Centro Decisor y de los Incentivos Economicos en la Reduccion de la Contaminación por Sales. Invest. Agr. Econ, 6(2), 223–239 (Influence of decision making preferences and economic incentives in reducing pollution).Google Scholar
  62. Zekri, S., & Romero, C. (1993). Public and private compromises in agricultural water management. Journal of Environmental Management, 37, 281–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Zeleny, M. (1982). Multiple criteria decision making (McGraw-Hill Series in Quantitative Methods for Management, 563 p.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  64. Zhang, Q., Maeda, S., & Kawachi, T. (2007). Stochastic multiobjective optimization model for allocating irrigation water to paddy fields. Paddy Water Environment, 5, 93–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emiliana Silva
    • 1
  • Ana Alexandra Marta-Costa
    • 2
    Email author
  • Julio Berbel
    • 3
  1. 1.Centre of Applied Economics Studies of the Atlantic (CEEAplA)Azores UniversityS. Pedro, Angra do HeroísmoPortugal
  2. 2.Centre for Transdisciplinary Development Studies (CETRAD)University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro (UTAD)Vila RealPortugal
  3. 3.Córdoba UniversityCórdobaSpain

Personalised recommendations

Cite chapter

Buy options