Abstract
The objective of this study was to analyze the development dynamic of the Uruguayan dairy farms in the last decade integrating country, experimental and commercial databases. A large commercial dairy farm database was segmented into four groups according to productivity and growth rate (PGR) during the fiscal years 2015/2016 to 2021/2022. Productivity growth rate was calculated as: PGR = (P2122/P1516)1/6-1, where: P2122 = productivity fiscal year 2021/22, and P1516 = productivity fiscal year 2015/2016. The PGR groups were defined as: negative (NPGR; PGR < 0% per year), low (LPGR; 0 ≤ PGR < 3%), medium (MPGR; 3 ≤ PGR ≤ 6%) and high productivity growth rate (HPGR; PGR ≥ 6%). A mixed model was used to evaluate productivity slope heterogeneity with fiscal year as a continuous variable, PGR group as categorical and their interaction. Farms that were able to increase productivity (M and H PGR) had higher mean productivity, pasture DMI and margin over feed cost vs. the less dynamic systems (N and L PGR). Larger changes in productivity (+64 and +27% for H and M PGR, respectively) were likely primarily due to changes in stocking rate (+20 to 30%) and in individual cow milk production (+10 to 20%). Production systems that increased productivity relied on increasing stocking rate and individual milk production based on more home-grown forage consumption. However, higher PGR was linked to lower initial values of productivity, which suggests decreasing returns as the dairy farms reached higher milk yields and forage DMI.
Publisher
Universidad de la República, Facultad de Agronomía
Reference21 articles.
1. Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences. Dairy [Internet]. Canberra: ABARES; 2023 [cited 2023 Nov 26]. Available from: https://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/research-topics/agricultural-outlook/dairy#daff-page-main
2. Chilibroste P, Battegazzore G. Dinámica bio-económica de los sistemas de producción de leche: Proyecto Producción Competitiva 2013 – 2018. Montevideo: Conaprole; 2019. 40p.
3. Clark DA, Caradus JR, Monaghan RM, Sharp P, Thorrold BS. Issues and options for future dairy farming in New Zealand. New Zeal J Agric Res. 2007;50:203-21. Doi: 10.1080/00288230709510291.
4. Durán H. Validacion de un sistema lechero de alta produccion por vaca y por ha de siembra directa. In: Siembra Directa para producción de leche. Montevideo: INIA; 2003. p. 38-47.
5. Durán H, La Manna A, Acosta Y, Mieres J. Propuestas validadas de INIA sobre alternativas para incrementar la producción de leche y/o sólidos por hectárea en forma rentable. Agrociencia. 2010;14(3):96-100. Doi: 10.31285/AGRO.14.710.