Publikasjoner
NIBIOs ansatte publiserer flere hundre vitenskapelige artikler og forskningsrapporter hvert år. Her finner du referanser og lenker til publikasjoner og andre forsknings- og formidlingsaktiviteter. Samlingen oppdateres løpende med både nytt og historisk materiale. For mer informasjon om NIBIOs publikasjoner, besøk NIBIOs bibliotek.
2024
Forfattere
Rasmus Bang Stine Samsonstuen Bjørn Gunnar Hansen Mario Guajardo Hanne Møller Jon Kristian Sommerseth Julio C. Goez Ola FlatenSammendrag
CONTEXT Researchers have identified numerous strategies to improve economic performance and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emission intensity in combined milk and beef production on dairy farms. However, there remains a need to better understand how the effectiveness of these strategies varies under different operational conditions. OBJECTIVE This study aims to examine how the economic and GHG emission intensity mitigation effectiveness of increased milk yield, extended longevity of dairy cows, reduced age at first calving, and intensified beef production from bulls depend on operational conditions in dual purpose cattle systems. METHOD We present a quantitative framework to (1) economically optimize production at farm level under various constraints and (2) calculate corresponding GHG emissions. The framework is tailored for Norwegian dual-purpose cattle systems and used to assess the economic and GHG emission intensity mitigation effects of incremental adjustments in relevant decisions. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS The results show that increased milk yield, extended productive life of dairy cows, reduced age at first calving, and lower slaughter age of bulls can lead to economic and climatic win-wins in terms of higher gross margins and reduced emissions per kg of protein produced. However, they may also result in lose-win and win-lose outcomes depending on the operational conditions. All four measures free up roughage production capacity, which, if used to maintain/increase milk and/or beef production, typically results in economic gains. However, if e.g., the available milk quota or space prevent this, economic losses may occur. The climate impact also depends on how the freed-up capacity is used: if it boosts production, the effects vary based on the scale and type of increase and the farm's initial setup, while unused capacity leads to reduced emission intensity. Conflicts typically arise when: 1) the extra capacity increases less climate-friendly production, raising emission intensity despite economic gains, or 2) extra capacity cannot be used, causing economic losses despite climate benefits. Our results also show that what can be labeled a win in climate terms, and to what extent, depends on the selected target metric(s). SIGNIFICANCE Governments and societies strive to balance food production with environmental goals. In this context, it is essential to identify farm-level economic and climatic win-win and lose-win scenarios, not only for farmers but also for policymakers and the broader society. This study could inform decision-making and policy development, potentially enhancing economic and climatic performance in combined milk and meat production.
Forfattere
Mario Guajardo Rasmus Bang Ola Flaten Julio C. Goez Bjørn Gunnar Hansen Hanne Møller Stine Samsonstuen Jon Kristian SommersethSammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Forfattere
Rasmus Bang Stine Samsonstuen Bjørn Gunnar Hansen Mario Guajardo Ola Flaten Hanne Møller Julio Cesar Goez Gutierrez Jon Kristian SommersethSammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
Housing and indoor feeding of sheep is required throughout the cold season, which can last more than half a year, in Nordic highlands and Alpine regions. This study aimed to examine and evaluate the housing costs, including labour requirements, according to type of sheep housing system and degree of mechanized feeding by investigating systems commonly used in Nordic and Alpine regions. Detailed cost data were obtained from 61 surveyed sheep farmers in Norway with sheep houses built between the years 2008 and 2015. Costs were calculated for a baseline scenario (2021-prices) as well as for five scenarios at low and high discount rates and opportunity cost of labour, and high energy prices. The median (interquartile range) flock size was 150 (100) winter-fed sheep. Houses with slatted floors were more expensive than deep-litter systems. Costs of bedding material and feed waste were however higher, and the net value of the manure were lower in houses with deeplitter systems. At the baseline assumptions, overall net housing costs per sheep was not statistically different among the main housing types studied. Multiple regression analyses showed that net housing costs per sheep were lower in larger flocks and for centrally located farms (control variables). Undertaking daily chores, such as feeding of roughages twice a day rather than once, resulted in significantly higher net housing costs. Mechanized feeding of roughages, and even more so for concentrates, were not economically justified since labour savings were not sufficient to pay for the additional capital costs. A round bale chopper lowered net housing costs, significantly at a high labour cost. None of the scenarios found slatted floors to be significantly more expensive than deep-litter systems. High costs of labour and capital favoured deep-litter systems, while slatted floor systems were more advantageous at rising prices of energy that resulted in increased values of organic manures and costs of feed wastes and bedding materials. The study was based on a decade old data from common Norwegian sheep house variants. Farmers that consider constructing a new sheep house today, still must compare these variants as their main alternatives. We encourage other researchers to include effects of housing systems and mechanized feeding on animal performance, health, and welfare. Moreover, future studies should preferably also be undertaken in other environmental or socio-economic settings to produce more general results.
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Forfattere
Annette Folkedal SchjøllSammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Forfattere
Anne Linn HykkerudSammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag