Gordon King, Animal Science, University of Guelph
Producer Concerns
Livestock production systems change in response to economics, technological innovations and
consumer demands. In the past land and labor represent a substantial proportion of production
costs for most farms throughout the world. More recently, farm labor became scarce and
expensive in the more developed countries, fostering greater reliance on mechanized equipment
with the accompanying increased capital investment. Thus, economic necessity stimulates
abundant use of agrochemicals, which are relatively inexpensive, to increase yield per land unit
and livestock feed efficiency. A recently added dimension, that should have even greater impact
on future production systems, is concern about potential ecological damage caused by
domesticated animals and their possible role in preserving or improving our environment.
Throughout the industrialized world today, livestock producers' major concerns now relate to
both economic and ecological uncertainties. More specific areas of concerns might be
summarized as follows:Production Risks:
Farming is a biological process so
risk is present always. Some people
fail to accept or even to consider
this so may have unrealistic
expectations.- Some fear competition from other
producers or commodities.
- Land, equipment and labor are
expensive, resulting in pressure to
reduce inputs while increasing
outputs.
- Governments operate protection
programs to minimize chances of
financial disaster, but some of these
may be poorly constructed to meet
today's needs.
- As indicated in the accompanying figure, production shifts, often in response to market forces
and also to initiatives by regional or central governments. Although an industry might move
relatively quickly, farmers may not be in position to follow it.
New Technologies:
- The major modifier of agricultural practices in the industrialized countries today is
development of new or modification of existing technologies.
- The application of this technology is usually labor saving but capital intensive and demanding
of greater management expertise.
Marketing Systems:
- In regions with regulated production or supply management, should the current system
continue as is, be modified or disbanded completely?
- How will GATT or other free trade agreements affect current marketing options?
Land Use:
- Will prime farm land be preserved, paved, converted to recreational use, transformed for
wildlife habitat or remain available for animal production?
- Are their current farming practices making the best use of available land and other resources.
Socio-economic conditions:
- Producers desire some assurances that their right to farm will be preserved .
- Most would like firm guidelines for ecological preservation or improvement and firm penalties
for offenders.
- They also wish for guaranteed protection from harassment so long as they comply with
reasonable standards.
- Farm families want the same opportunities and access to education, health, recreation and
other services available to urbanites.
Consumer Preferences:
The per capita consumption of meat remained reasonably stable over the past two decades but the
proportions accounted for by various commodities changed considerably (see following table).
The number of eggs marketed per person fluctuated somewhat from year to year but the trend
was for a gradual increase.
In contrast to the situation with meat or eggs, per capita intake of fluid milk decreased. However,
because of population growth, the total amount marketed showed little change. Dairy product
consumption also remained stable but increases in cheese, yogurt and other specialty products
were offset by reductions in butter.
Per Capita Consumption of Livestock Products
|
Total
meat,
kg |
Beef
kg |
Pork
kg |
Poultry
kg |
Eggs
dozen |
Fluid
milk, L |
Dairy
pro-
ducts,
kg |
| 1975 |
97.8 |
46.8 |
25.9 |
21 |
13.1 |
100 |
34.3 |
| 1977 |
97.4 |
46.6 |
25.8 |
21.3 |
12.5 |
100 |
34.1 |
| 1979 |
95.7 |
39.9 |
29.0 |
22.8 |
13.0 |
105 |
32.0 |
| 1981 |
97.1 |
40.9 |
30.3 |
22.6 |
12.8 |
104 |
34.1 |
| 1983 |
95.5 |
40.2 |
28.9 |
23.1 |
12.4 |
105 |
34.9 |
| 1985 |
97.2 |
38.9 |
28.9 |
25.3 |
11.6 |
102 |
35.1 |
| 1987 |
98.3 |
38.2 |
27.9 |
27.7 |
11.5 |
104 |
36.1 |
| 1989 |
99.5 |
35.2 |
28.6 |
27.0 |
15.2 |
98 |
36.5 |
| 1991 |
92.0 |
33.2 |
26.6 |
28.2 |
15.0 |
96 |
33.6 |
| 1993 |
90.5 |
30.8 |
27.4 |
29.0 |
14.5 |
91 |
33.2 |
| 1995 |
91.9 |
31.4 |
27.7 |
30.4 |
14.4 |
89 |
33.4 |
Government Intervention:
Economic uncertainties plague any enterprise that depends on the weather and on a free
marketplace. Incomes fluctuate considerably from year to year for most commodities. Farmers
seek government assistance continuously to minimize the inherent risks associated with their
chosen occupation.
Many countries respond by providing various subsides, safety-nets or other income support
programs. Unfortunately, many of the current agricultural subsidy programs contribute to
commodity surpluses with associated prices depressions. They may also perpetuate inefficient
production and inhibit entrepreneurs. Some Canadian farm groups argue that continued subsidies
or protection are the only alternative that will allow our producers to survive in a global market.
Others propose limited subsidy, suggesting that it is in the public interest to support many smaller
or medium sized farms rather than fewer larger units. Their contention is that support should be
adequate for single family farms (maximum $25,000 per one family and $50,000 per multifamily
operation) with all programs having a social as well as an economic rationale. This group does
not oppose farms getting larger but maintains that if they do expand beyond a reasonable family
unit size, they should carry the full risk involved. A somewhat smaller segment of farmers might
support the total elimination of all government support for agriculture in conjunction with
unhindered access to global markets. The latter approach might, in theory, lead to the best use of
resources throughout the world but, to be effective, requires fair as well as free trade.