| dc.description.abstract |
The transition of an agricultural ecosystem from a less to a more sustainable or desirable state is dependent as much on the routes and tactics used to effect the transition, as it is on the management ideas and the biological components used. Against the background of the failure of farmers to take up an integrated "all grass wintering system" in the mountain lands of the South Island of New Zealand, we compared a wide range of transitional opportunities and evaluated them in economic terms over a 20 year period. Farm structure at the start of the transition was a rather obvious but key criterion for success of the transition. Transition from a farm structure where supplementary feeding cost NZ$90,000 per year into the new system, allowed a position better than the "do nothing" option to be achieved in as little as 8 to 9 years. Transitions from smaller farm structures of $60,000 and $30,000 took from 12 to more than 20 years to achieve a cash position better than the "do nothing" option. Herein lies the quandary for all farming systems which might aim to make transitions and to "do it better". We explore the sensitivity of these general results to the effects of product price and interest rates, wool growth and lambing rates, whether transition should be gradual or fast, and the incumbent debt levels that can be serviced in addition to the new development. In conclusion we note some essential components of any study of transition of pastoral systems. It is important that dynamic tools are used in any transition study since the route taken in the transition can be more important than the end point. The economic advantage offered by new pastoral technology is important, particularly the time it takes to become fully implemented. Sensitivity analyses should be undertaken for key production and price assumptions. It is helpful to present these analyses as three-dimensional diagrams to allow biological and economic risk to be assessed against each other. While increased animal numbers bring better economic returns, both industry attitudes and the management of ecological risk may require the maintenance of present animal numbers. Increased profitability will then rely on individual animal performance, and higher quality livestock products. |
|