Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T18:52:56.077Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Opportunities for short rotation coppice production on free-range chicken farms in Flanders: farmers’ perceptions and cost-benefit analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 November 2018

Lisanne M Stadig Open the ORCID record for Lisanne M Stadig [Opens in a new window] ,
Frank A.M Tuyttens ,
T. Bas Rodenburg ,
Pieter Verdonckt ,
Erwin Wauters ,
Lieve Borremans  and
Bert Reubens
Lisanne M Stadig*
Affiliation:
Animal Sciences Unit, Flanders Research Institute for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (ILVO), Scheldeweg 68, 9090 Melle, Belgium Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820Merelbeke, Belgium
Frank A.M Tuyttens
Affiliation:
Animal Sciences Unit, Flanders Research Institute for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (ILVO), Scheldeweg 68, 9090 Melle, Belgium Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820Merelbeke, Belgium
T. Bas Rodenburg
Affiliation:
Behavioural Ecology Group, Wageningen University, De Elst 1, 6708 WD, Wageningen, The Netherlands Adaptation Physiology Group, Wageningen University, De Elst 1, 6708 WD, Wageningen, The Netherlands
Pieter Verdonckt
Affiliation:
Inagro, Ieperseweg 87, 8800 Rumbeke-Beitem, Belgium
Erwin Wauters
Affiliation:
Social Sciences Unit, Flanders Research Institute for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (ILVO), Burgemeester van Gansberghelaan 115, 9820Merelbeke, Belgium
Lieve Borremans
Affiliation:
Social Sciences Unit, Flanders Research Institute for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (ILVO), Burgemeester van Gansberghelaan 115, 9820Merelbeke, Belgium
Bert Reubens*
Affiliation:
Plant Sciences Unit, Flanders Research Institute for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (ILVO), Burgemeester van Gansberghelaan 109, 9820Merelbeke, Belgium
*
Authors for correspondence: Bert Reubens, Lisanne Stadig, E-mail: [email protected]
Authors for correspondence: Bert Reubens, Lisanne Stadig, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper focuses on systems producing short rotation coppice willows (SRCW) in chickens’ free-range areas. We aim to map chicken farmers’ motivation to implement SRCW, and to assess the economic viability of these systems. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 free-range chicken farmers. Farmers agreed that chickens would prefer SRCW over grassland, which could benefit chicken welfare. They expected establishing an SRCW system would be labor intensive, and doubted if it would be a profitable investment. Some concerns of farmers might be taken away by exchanging information with farmers with SRCW experience. A partial budget analysis was performed to calculate the net present value (NPV) of six different scenarios, differing in the type of chickens, in whether the produced biomass was sold or valorized on-farm and in harvest pattern, all over a 23-yr period. The NPV was positive but low for all scenarios. A sensitivity analysis showed that changes in biomass yield, wood chip price, a price premium for poultry products and current fuel price were most likely to influence the NPV. A risk analysis revealed that NPVs were positive in the majority of the modeled cases. Scenarios in which biomass was used for on-farm heat production showed the highest risk of a negative NPV. A price premium for poultry products may be most effective at increasing profitability, but may only be feasible for farms selling directly to consumers. Establishing a solid market for biomass energy, including guaranteed demand and availability of appropriate machinery for cultivation, may mitigate farmers’ concerns.

Keywords

Economic analysisfarmer opinionnet present valuepoultrywillowwood chips
Type
Research Paper
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 35 , Issue 3 , June 2020 , pp. 286 - 295
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baum, SA, Weih, MB, Busch, GC, Kroiher, FA and Bolte, AA (2009) The impact of short rotation coppice plantations on phytodiversity. Landbauforschung Volkenrode 59, 163–170. Available at http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-73349134320&partnerID=40&md5=238406f3a2d9591de882a3072166422c.Google Scholar
Bergen, D (2015) Potentieel voor Vlaamse meerwaardevleeskippen, met een blik op Nederland en Duitsland. Available at http://lv.vlaanderen.be/sites/default/files/attachments/potentieel_voor_vlaamse_meerwaardekippen_website.pdf (Accessed 31 July 2017).Google Scholar
Bestman, M (2015) Bomen voor Buitenkippen. Available at http://www.kiplekkeronderdewilgen.nl/pdf/LouisBolk_Bomen_voor_buitenkippen.pdf (Accessed 31 July 2017).Google Scholar
Bestman, MWP and Wagenaar, JP (2003) Farm level factors associated with feather pecking in organic laying hens. Livestock Production Science 80, 133–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bestman, M, de Jong, W, Wagenaar, J-P and Weerts, T (2017) Presence of avian influenza risk birds in and around poultry free-range areas in relation to range vegetation and openness of surrounding landscape. Agroforestry Systems 92, 1001–1008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
C.A.R.M.E.N. e.V (2016) Preisentwicklung bei Waldhackschnitzeln—der Energieholz-Index. Available at https://www.carmen-ev.de/infothek/preisindizes/hackschnitzel/jahresmittelwerte (Accessed 31 July 2017).Google Scholar
CIRCABC (2016) Laying hens by way of keeping. Available at http://www.eepa.info/Statistics.aspx (Accessed 31 July 2017).Google Scholar
Clothier, L, Langton, S, Boatman, N and Woodend, A (2008) Agricultural Specialisation—Defra Agricultural Change and Environment Observatory Research Report no. 11. Available at http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130315143000/http://:/www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/files/defra-stats-foodfarm-environ-obs-research-specialisation-report-jul08.pdf.Google Scholar
Daberkow, SG and McBride, WD (1998) Socioeconomic profiles of early adopters of precision agriculture technologies. Journal of Agribusiness 16, 151–168.Google Scholar
Daberkow, SG and McBride, WD (2003) Farm and operator characteristics affecting the awareness and adoption of precision agriculture technologies in the US. Precision Agriculture 4, 163–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dal Bosco, A, Mugnai, C, Rosati, A, Paoletti, A, Caporali, S and Castellini, C (2014) Effect of range enrichment on performance, behavior, and forage intake of free-range chickens. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 23, 137–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, MS, Cook, PA, Whittingham, MJ, Mansell, KA and Harper, AE (2003) What makes free-range broiler chickens range? In situ measurement of habitat preference. Animal Behaviour 66(August 2015), 151–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diederen, P, van Meijl, H, Wolters, A and Bijak, K (2003) Innovation adoption in agriculture: innovators, early adopters and laggards. Cahiers d’Économie et Sociologie Rurales 67, 30–50.Google Scholar
Dimitriou, I, Mola-Yudego, B, Aronsson, P and Eriksson, J (2012) Changes in organic carbon and trace elements in the soil of willow short-rotation coppice plantations. Bioenergy Research 5, 563–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
EFSA (2006) European Food Safety Authority-EFSA-Q-2005-243 Scientific Statement on Migratory birds and their possible role in the spread of highly pathogenic avian influenza EFSA-Q-2005-243 (April), pp. 1–30.Google Scholar
European Commission (2009) Directive 2009/28/EC of the European parliament and of the council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC.Google Scholar
Finger, R (2016) Assessment of uncertain returns from investment in short rotation coppice using risk adjusted discount rates. Biomass and Bioenergy 85, 320–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glithero, NJ, Wilson, P and Ramsden, SJ (2013) Prospects for arable farm uptake of short rotation coppice willow and miscanthus in England. Applied Energy 107, 209–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grogan, P and Matthews, R (2002) A modelling analysis of the potential for soil carbon sequestration under short rotation coppice willow bioenergy plantations. Soil Use and Management 18, 175–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanson, JD, Hendrickson, J and Archer, D (2008) Challenges for maintaining sustainable agricultural systems in the United States. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 23, 325–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauk, S, Knoke, T and Wittkopf, S (2014) Economic evaluation of short rotation coppice systems for energy from biomass—a review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 29, 435–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauk, S, Gandorfer, M, Wittkopf, S, Müller, UK and Knoke, T (2017) Ecological diversification is risk reducing and economically profitable—the case of biomass production with short rotation woody crops in south German land-use portfolios’. Biomass and Bioenergy 98, 142–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langeveld, H, Quist-Wessel, F, Dimitriou, I, Aronsson, P, Baum, C, Schulz, U, Bolte, A, Baum, S, Köhn, J, Weih, M, Gruss, H, Leinweber, P, Lamersdorf, N, Schmidt-Walter, P and Berndes, G (2012) Assessing environmental impacts of Short Rotation Coppice (SRC) expansion: model definition and preliminary results. Bioenergy Research 5, 621–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsen, SU, Jørgensen, U, Kjeldsen, JB and Lærke, PE (2014) Long-term yield effects of establishment method and weed control in willow for short rotation coppice (SRC). Biomass and Bioenergy 71, 266–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moberly, RL and White, PCL (2004) Mortality due to fox predation in free-range poultry flocks in Britain. The Veterinary Record 155, 48–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Musshoff, O (2012) Growing short rotation coppice on agricultural land in Germany: a real options approach. Biomass and Bioenergy 41, 73–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NOS (2017) Eiersector loopt flink wat geld mis met Pasen door vogelgriep. Available at http://nos.nl/artikel/2168352-eiersector-loopt-flink-wat-geld-mis-met-pasen-door-vogelgriep.html (Accessed 31 July 2017).Google Scholar
Peyraud, JL, Taboada, M and Delaby, L (2014) Integrated crop and livestock systems in Western Europe and South America: a review. European Journal of Agronomy 57, 31–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Probos (2017) Kiplekker onder de wilgen. Available at http://www.kiplekkeronderdewilgen.nl/ (Accessed 31 July 2017).Google Scholar
Rowe, RL, Hanley, ME, Goulson, D, Clarke, DJ, Doncaster, CP and Taylor, G (2011) Potential benefits of commercial willow Short Rotation Coppice (SRC) for farm-scale plant and invertebrate communities in the agri-environment. Biomass and Bioenergy 35, 325–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sage, RB (1999) Weed competition in willow coppice crops: the cause and extent of yield losses. Weed Research 39, 399–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samborski, V and Van Bellegem, L (2016) De biologische landbouw in Vlaanderen—stand van zaken 2015. Available at http://lv.vlaanderen.be/sites/default/files/attachments/biorapport_2015-website.def__0.pdf (Accessed 31 July 2017).Google Scholar
Sanderson, MA, Archer, D, Hendrickson, J, Kronberg, S, Liebig, M, Nichols, K, Schmer, M, Tanaka, D and Aguilar, J (2013) Diversification and ecosystem services for conservation agriculture: outcomes from pastures and integrated crop–livestock systems. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 28, 129–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherrington, C and Moran, D (2010) Modelling farmer uptake of perennial energy crops in the UK. Energy Policy 38, 3567–3578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherrington, C, Bartley, J and Moran, D (2008) Farm-level constraints on the domestic supply of perennial energy crops in the UK. Energy Policy 36, 2504–2512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stadig, LM, Rodenburg, TB, Reubens, B, Aerts, J, Duquenne, B and Tuyttens, FAM (2016) Effects of free-range access on production parameters and meat quality, composition and taste in slow-growing broiler chickens. Poultry Science 95, 2971–2978.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stadig, LM, Rodenburg, TB, Ampe, B, Reubens, B and Tuyttens, FAM (2017 a) Effects of free-range access, shelter type and weather conditions on free-range use and welfare of slow-growing broiler chickens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 192, 15–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stadig, LM, Rodenburg, TB, Ampe, B, Reubens, B and Tuyttens, FAM (2017 b) Effects of shelter type, early environmental enrichment and weather conditions on free-range behaviour of slow-growing broiler chickens. Animal: An International Journal of Animal Bioscience 11, 1046–1053.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stadig, LM, Rodenburg, TB, Reubens, B, Ampe, B and Tuyttens, FAM (2018) Effects of dark brooders and overhangs on free-range use and behaviour of slow-growing broilers. Animal: An International Journal of Animal Bioscience 12, 1621–1630.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Styles, D, Thorne, F and Jones, MB (2008) Energy crops in Ireland: an economic comparison of willow and Miscanthus production with conventional farming systems. Biomass and Bioenergy 32, 407–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanhonacker, F and Verbeke, W (2009) Buying higher welfare poultry products? Profiling Flemish consumers who do and do not. Poultry science 88, 2702–2711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanhonacker, F, van Poucke, E, Tuyttens, FAM and Verbeke, W (2010) Citizens’ views on farm animal welfare and related information provision: exploratory insights from Flanders, Belgium. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 23, 551–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Volkskrant, (2017) Kippenhouders hebben door dreiging vogelgriep alles behalve een vrolijk Pasen. Available at https://www.volkskrant.nl/binnenland/kippenhouders-hebben-door-dreiging-vogelgriep-alles-behalve-een-vrolijk-pasen~a4487646/ (Accessed 31 July 2017).Google Scholar
Wolbert-Haverkamp, M and Musshoff, O (2014) Is short rotation coppice economically interesting? An application to Germany. Agroforestry Systems 88, 413–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar