The effect of lameness prevalence on technical efficiency at the dairy farm level: An adjusted data envelopment analysis approach

被引:42
作者
Barnes, A. P. [1 ]
Rutherford, K. M. D. [1 ]
Langford, F. M. [1 ]
Haskell, M. J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Scottish Agr Coll, Land Econ & Environm Grp, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, Midlothian, Scotland
关键词
categorical approach; nondiscretionary approach; data envelopment analysis; lameness prevalence; MILK-YIELD; CLINICAL LAMENESS; CATEGORICAL VARIABLES; RISK-FACTORS; MANAGEMENT; HERDS; DISEASE; COWS;
D O I
10.3168/jds.2011-4262
中图分类号
S8 [畜牧、 动物医学、狩猎、蚕、蜂];
学科分类号
0905 ;
摘要
A key indicator of resource use within farming is technical efficiency, which measures the amount of physical output attainable from a given set of inputs. The social aspects, in particular the treatment of animals, have generally been ignored within these measurement schemas. In addition, animal welfare will affect the production technology under which farms operate, and some allowance for this is needed within the measurement approach. This is the first paper to apply animal welfare as a discriminating technology within a technical efficiency framework. Using results from an animal welfare monitoring study coupled with resource usage data, it presents an adjusted measure of technical efficiency applied to a sample of British dairy farms and compares differences in lameness management strategies for herds. We employ both a categorical and nondiscretionary variant of the data envelopment analysis approach to measure technical efficiencies and adjust for various degrees of lameness prevalence among these farms. This paper finds that farms with low rates of lameness (below 10% of the cattle herd) tend to have significantly higher technical efficiencies than those with lameness rates of above 10% of the herd. Farms that have levels of lameness of between 10 to 20% of the herd and higher levels of lameness (above 20% of the herd) did not differ significantly. Furthermore, low lameness farms are inefficient in terms of labor and stocking density, but this is outweighed by the gain in milk yield obtained on these farms. Consequently, we argue for a whole-farm, rather than a partial indicator, approach to assessing efficiency when noneconomic factors such as lameness are accounted for. From a policy perspective, we support programs that encourage active lameness management.
引用
收藏
页码:5449 / 5457
页数:9
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], OP WELF DAIR COW
[2]   Lameness hi UK dairy cows: a review of the current status [J].
Archer, Simon ;
Bell, Nick ;
Huxley, Jon .
IN PRACTICE, 2010, 32 (10) :492-504
[3]   THE USE OF CATEGORICAL VARIABLES IN DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS [J].
BANKER, RD ;
MOREY, RC .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 1986, 32 (12) :1613-1627
[4]   Assessment of lameness prevalence and associated risk factors in dairy herds in England and Wales [J].
Barker, Z. E. ;
Leach, K. A. ;
Whay, H. R. ;
Bell, N. J. ;
Main, D. C. J. .
JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2010, 93 (03) :932-941
[5]   Does multi-functionality affect technical efficiency? A non-parametric analysis of the Scottish dairy industry [J].
Barnes, A. P. .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2006, 80 (04) :287-294
[6]   Technical efficiency estimates of Scottish agriculture: A note [J].
Barnes, Andrew .
JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 2008, 59 (02) :370-376
[7]   A metafrontier production function for estimation of technical efficiencies and technology gaps for firms operating under different technologies [J].
Battese, GE ;
Rao, DSP ;
O'Donnell, CJ .
JOURNAL OF PRODUCTIVITY ANALYSIS, 2004, 21 (01) :91-103
[8]   DAIRY FARM EFFICIENCY MEASUREMENT USING STOCHASTIC FRONTIERS AND NEOCLASSICAL DUALITY [J].
BRAVOURETA, BE ;
RIEGER, L .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 1991, 73 (02) :421-428
[9]   MEASURING EFFICIENCY OF DECISION-MAKING UNITS [J].
CHARNES, A ;
COOPER, WW ;
RHODES, E .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 1978, 2 (06) :429-444
[10]   RELATIVE TECHNICAL EFFICIENCY - DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS AND QUEBEC DAIRY FARMS [J].
CLOUTIER, LM ;
ROWLEY, R .
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS-REVUE CANADIENNE D ECONOMIE RURALE, 1993, 41 (02) :169-176