31 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
PR - A CASE STUDY OF THE EVOLUTION OF SUCCESSION AND GOVERNANCE ON A NEW ZEALAND DAIRY FARM
Alderbrook Farm Ltd. (AFL) was established as a 50-50 sharemilking partnership in 1987. Since the initiation of operations, the business has grown to be a self-contained business of two farms and support blocks milking 1,200 cows on a farming area of 550 hectares near Christchurch, New Zealand (NZ). Previous publications have described the growth in dairying in Canterbury (Pangborn et al. 2015) and the growth of this business (Pangborn 2012). The process through which the farm established a succession plan and further developed a governance structure to oversee the operation is explored. It was clear that involving a facilitator at the onset to improve communication and give all family members a ‘voice’ was critical. After establishment, it was equally important to establish a plan that developed a purpose, mission and goals for the business. Further, a governance structure was adopted to oversee the plan. To date, the process has allowed the pursuit of the purpose of the plan; however, succession has come at a cost to the financial stability of the existing farm business
Recommended from our members
PR - Canterbury Dairying - A Study In Land Use Change And Increasing Production (p81-87)
The purpose of this research was to quantify the extent of the increase in dairy farming in Canterbury, New Zealand, and to examine factors that have led to the changes in land use and production. In this paper we present data on land use change, production and productivity, together with product price data for the alternative activities. Data were obtained from a variety of printed sources and personal communications. Between 1980 and 2009 the land used for dairying in Canterbury increased from about 20,000 ha to nearly 190,000 ha. Per cow and per hectare production also increased both in absolute terms and also relative to elsewhere in New Zealand. Total production increased about fifteen fold during this period. On a national basis Canterbury produced 15% of New Zealand’s milk in 2008-09 compared to 2% in 1982-83. Drivers of this land use change were the development of irrigation, lower land prices relative to elsewhere in New Zealand, the adoption of new technologies and reduced profitability of some aspects of traditional farming systems. It is suggested that, given the current price relativities and some further irrigation development, the Canterbury land area involved in dairy farming could double in the next 20 years
Development of a dairy industry in a new area ‐ land use change in Canterbury, New Zealand
Canterbury dairying increased from 20,000 ha in 1980-81 to 255,000 ha in 2013-14. During this time, Canterbury production increased from 2% of New Zealand’s milk to 19%. This paper examines factors that influenced this increase. The analysis draws on case studies of industry participants, a survey, and secondary data. There were three waves of development. Wave 1 (1980s) farmers were entrepreneurs who saw Canterbury as a desirable place to live with new economic opportunities related to dairying. Wave 2 (1990s) convertors were a mix of corporate entities and traditional sheep/crop farmers who aimed to increase farm profitability. Wave 3 (since 2000) convertors have included cropping farmers and expanding dairy farming businesses developing large, intensive farms. This wave included substantial investment from non-farmers, particularly through equity partnerships. The research identified growth factors that could be classified as enablers, drivers, and facilitators ‐ with some factors fitting into more than one classification. Enablers were necessary for growth but by themselves did not create the growth. In contrast, drivers were the fundamental determinants of growth. Facilitators were factors that did not either enable or drive growth, but did influence growth. Enablers included aspects of the political and economic environments. These included new institutional sources of finance. The prior existence of a local processing cooperative and an established vertically integrated supply chain were also of critical importance. Drivers of land change included changing levels of profitability between farming systems, the development of a new resource (irrigation) and the perceived potential to grow wealth through business growth and thereby fulfil personal objectives. Increased industry profitability then fuelled further development. New irrigation technologies were both enablers and facilitators. Extension, consulting and the development of input supply companies were all important facilitators
Demonstration farms and technology transfer: the case of the Lincoln University dairy farm
In 2001, Lincoln University and six commercial, education and research partners established a 161 hectare dairy farm (milking platform) and formed the South Island Dairy Development Centre (SIDDC) to demonstrate ‘best practice’ for South Island dairy farmers. In 2008, to assess the impact of the Lincoln University Dairy Farm (LUDF), a survey was sent to 622 farmers located in the LUDF extension catchment. Responses totalled 146 (24% response rate). The mean age of respondents was 45 years with 77% having some form of tertiary education. Respondents had higher milksolids production per cow (419 kg) and per hectare (1441 kg) than the Canterbury averages (381kg and 1224kg respectively). Most respondents (86%) identified themselves as using moderate levels of supplementary feeding (Systems 2, 3, 4).
Nearly 70% of respondents attended at least one focus day (field day) over a three year period. Most attended to learn about grazing and animal management, to benchmark against the LUDF from a production and financial standpoint, and to learn about environmental management. Focus day attendees had larger operations and higher levels of productivity than those who never attended. Over 68% of respondents visited the farm website each year, with some visiting more than 30 times, but mainly to view benchmarking data rather than to learn about new technologies
Of the technologies promoted by the LUDF, 82% of farmers had adopted low grazing residuals and 74% had re-grassed paddocks based on monitoring. Lower numbers had adopted synchronisation of heifers to calve a week before the main herd (29%), aggressive hormone intervention for non-cycling (42%) and a nil induction policy (36%). Over 70% felt that the adoption of some of the LUDF technologies had made their farm management easier. Twenty three farmers were willing to place an economic value on the adoption of LUDF practices. These ranged from NZ1,000,000 per year.
It is concluded that a demonstration farm with clearly defined extension messages can be effective at achieving farmer adoption that adoption is high for messages where farmers see clear economic advantages, and that farmers obtain information from a wide variety of sources
Recommended from our members
PR - Demonstration Farms And Technology Transfer---the Case Of The Lincoln University Dairy Farm (p166-171)
In 2001, Lincoln University and six commercial, education and research partners established a 161 hectare dairy farm (milking platform) and formed the South Island Dairy Development Centre (SIDDC) to demonstrate ‘best practice’ for South Island dairy farmers. In 2008, to assess the impact of the Lincoln University Dairy Farm (LUDF), a survey was sent to 622 farmers located in the LUDF extension catchment. Responses totalled 146 (24% response rate). The mean age of respondents was 45 years with 77% having some form of tertiary education. Respondents had higher milksolids production per cow (419 kg) and per hectare (1441 kg) than the Canterbury averages (381kg and 1224kg respectively). Most respondents (86%) identified themselves as using moderate levels of supplementary feeding (Systems 2, 3, 4). Nearly 70% of respondents attended at least one focus day (field day) over a three year period. Most attended to learn about grazing and animal management, to benchmark against the LUDF from a production and financial standpoint, and to learn about environmental management. Focus day attendees had larger operations and higher levels of productivity than those who never attended. Over 68% of respondents visited the farm website each year, with some visiting more than 30 times, but mainly to view benchmarking data rather than to learn about new technologies. Of the technologies promoted by the LUDF, 82% of farmers had adopted low grazing residuals and 74% had re-grassed paddocks based on monitoring. Lower numbers had adopted synchronisation of heifers to calve a week before the main herd (29%), aggressive hormone intervention for non-cycling (42%) and a nil induction policy (36%). Over 70% felt that the adoption of some of the LUDF technologies had made their farm management easier. Twenty three farmers were willing to place an economic value on the adoption of LUDF practices. These ranged from 1,000,000 per year. It is concluded that a demonstration farm with clearly defined extension messages can be effective at achieving farmer adoption, that adoption is high for messages where farmers see clear economic advantages, and that farmers obtain information from a wide variety of sources