Thompson Jake S, Hudson Chris D, Huxley Jon N, Kaler Jasmeet, Green Martin J
School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, University of Nottingham, Sutton Bonington, Leicestershire, United Kingdom.
School of Veterinary Science, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.
Front Vet Sci. 2024 Dec 5;11:1473696. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2024.1473696. eCollection 2024.
The housed environment for dairy cattle is of critical importance to their health, wellbeing, and productivity. Lack of space is an important factor for housing quality assessment due to links with increased likelihood of disease. A recently published randomized controlled trial identified that greater living space provision increased lying time, milk volume production, and also increased time to conception. However, despite probable improvements in cow welfare, the question remains as to whether offering increased living space is a cost-effective option for farmers. The costs associated with financing new housing facilities are escalating, and the industry urgently requires an evidence base for ensuring these investments are financially sustainable. This research used stochastic simulation modeling to explore theoretical net returns on infrastructure investment differences between two living space scenarios (3 m vs. 6.5 m). A cow entered a simulation at the point of first calving, and milk production, reproductive performance, and points of exit were stochastically determined over the cow's lifetime simultaneously based on living space scenario. This allowed for direct financial comparison over specified sets of parameter inputs. Where cows exited the herd within their second to fourth lactation, the median difference in financial return was observed to be +£87.61 per cow per year (mean + £86.74). The estimated return on investment to provide extra living space access varied dependent on provision method, interest rates, and loan repayment duration. Under the circumstances and contexts investigated, the results suggest that building for increased living space would be cost-effective. When building a new shed with a high living space versus control at a 4.00% interest rate, a median net return on infrastructure investment of +£23.00 per cow per year was identified (range -£25.91 to +£64.16 for 10th to 90th percentile). Since decreased living space is likely to lead to poorer welfare, it can be considered a negative production externality associated with current production systems, the cost of which should also be accounted for when analyzing the economics of housing. Further research is essential to gain a complete understanding of the cost-effectiveness of providing increased living space per cow under different management scenarios.
奶牛的圈舍环境对其健康、福祉和生产力至关重要。由于与疾病发生可能性增加有关,空间不足是圈舍质量评估的一个重要因素。最近发表的一项随机对照试验表明,提供更大的生活空间可增加躺卧时间、产奶量,并延长受孕时间。然而,尽管奶牛福利可能有所改善,但增加生活空间对农民来说是否是一个具有成本效益的选择仍是个问题。为新的住房设施融资的成本不断上升,该行业迫切需要一个证据基础,以确保这些投资在财务上是可持续的。本研究使用随机模拟模型来探讨两种生活空间情景(3米与6.5米)之间基础设施投资差异的理论净回报。一头奶牛在首次产犊时进入模拟,根据生活空间情景,在奶牛的一生中同时随机确定产奶量、繁殖性能和退出点。这使得能够在指定的参数输入集上进行直接的财务比较。当奶牛在第二至第四泌乳期内离开牛群时,观察到的财务回报中位数差异为每头奶牛每年+87.61英镑(平均+86.74英镑)。提供额外生活空间的估计投资回报率因提供方式、利率和贷款偿还期限而异。在所调查的情况和背景下,结果表明建造更大生活空间是具有成本效益的。当以4.00%的利率建造一个具有高生活空间的新牛舍与对照牛舍时,确定的基础设施投资中位数净回报为每头奶牛每年+23.00英镑(第10百分位数至第90百分位数的范围为-25.91英镑至+64.16英镑)。由于生活空间减少可能导致福利变差,它可被视为与当前生产系统相关的负面生产外部性,在分析住房经济时也应考虑其成本。进一步的研究对于全面了解在不同管理情景下为每头奶牛提供更大生活空间的成本效益至关重要。