Search

As farmers continue to face increasingly uncertain and often rapidly changing conditions related to markets, climate or the policy environment, people involved in agricultural research, development and extension (RD&E) are also challenged to consider how their work can contribute to supporting farmer resilience. Research from the social sciences conducted in the past decade has focussed on adaptability or adaptive capacity as a key attribute for individuals and groups to possess for managing resilience. It is, therefore, timely to ask the following: do current ways of doing and organising RD&E in the dairy sector in New Zealand and Australia contribute to supporting farm adaptability? This paper reports on results from an examination of case studies of challenges to resilience in the dairy sector in Australia and New Zealand (i.e. dairy farm conversion, climate-change adaptation, consent to farm) and the contribution of dairy RD&E in enhancing resilience of farmers, their farms and the broader industry. Drawing on concepts from resilience studies and considering an empowerment perspective, the analysis of these cases suggest that, currently, agricultural RD&E supports adaptability in general, but varies in the strength of its presence and level of activity in the areas known to enhance adaptability. This analysis is used to generate principles for dairy scientists and others in the RD&E system to consider in (1) research designs, (2) engaging different farmers in research and (3) presenting research results differently. This represents a significant shift for the science and advisory communities to move to methods that acknowledge uncertainty and facilitate learning. This paper describes how farmers can be empowered to meet increasing challenges of changing conditions related to markets, climate or the policy environment through better organised agricultural research, development and extension (RD&E). It reports on three case studies in the Australian and New Zealand dairy sector to reveal that, currently, RD&E supports adaptability of farmers in general, but varies in the strength of its presence and level of activity in the areas known to enhance adaptability. It identifies key principles for dairy scientists and others in the RD&E systems to consider in research design, engaging farmers in research and presenting research results differently to farmers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dairy feeding systems in Australia and New Zealand have seen an increase in the use of mixed rations to manage variability in climate and market conditions and enable a certain degree of resilience in the operating environment. In this review, resilience was defined as the ability of the farm system to respond to challenges, optimise productivity and profitability for a given set of circumstances, and persist over time. Specific attributes of a dairy system that contribute to resilience were considered as flexibility, consistency, adaptation, sustainability and profitability. A flexible forage base that uses water efficient forage species provides a consistent supply of nutrients from home-grown forages across the year and is a key driver of resilience. Consistent milk production from purchased concentrates adds value to the forage base and will ensure that the system is profitable in the long term. Appropriate investment in infrastructure and careful management of debt has a positive impact on technical and financial efficiency and improves overall economic performance and resilience of the system. Nutrients, feed wastage, cow comfort and welfare were also identified as key areas to focus on for improved sustainability. Future research investigating the interaction between forages and concentrates, and the subsequent milk production response will be important for the future resilience of mixed ration systems. Adaptive management at a tactical and strategic level across several technical areas will further underpin the resilience of a mixed ration dairy system, and minimise the impact of climate and price variability. This will have flow on benefits to animal welfare and resource sustainability, which will have a positive impact of the public perception of these systems within the Australian and New Zealand dairy industries. The use of mixed ration feeding systems in Australia and New Zealand has increased in the past decade in response to variable climate and market conditions and to enable dairy businesses to be more resilient. This paper reviews the attributes contributing to resilience, namely flexibility, consistency, adaptation, sustainability and profitability with a particular focus on the forage base, milk production responses, the production : cost base and resource management. Potential areas for future work to maintain the resilience of mixed ration systems are also considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Australasian dairy industry is facing the dual challenges of increasing productivity, while also reducing its emissions of the greenhouse gases (GHG) methane and nitrous oxide. Following the COP21 Paris Agreement, all sectors of the economy will be expected to contribute to GHG abatement. Enteric methane is the major source of GHG emissions from dairy production systems (>70%), followed by nitrous oxide (13%) and methane (12%) from animal waste, with nitrogen (N)-fertiliser use contributing ~3.5% of total on-farm non-carbon dioxide equivalent (non-CO2e) emissions. Research on reducing methane emissions from dairy cattle has focussed on feeding dietary supplements (e.g. tannins, dietary oils and wheat), rumen modification (e.g. vaccine, inhibitors), breeding and animal management. Research on reducing nitrous oxide emissions has focussed on improving N fertiliser efficiency and reducing urinary N loss. Profitable options for significant abatement on farm are still limited, with the industry focusing instead on improving production efficiency, while reducing emission intensity (t CO2e/t product). Absolute emission reduction will become an imperative as the world moves towards carbon neutrality by 2050 and, thus, a priority for research. However, even with implementation of best-practice abatement, it is likely that some residual emissions will remain in the foreseeable future. The soil organic carbon content of dairy soils under well fertilised, high-rainfall or irrigated permanent pastures are already high, therefore limiting the potential for further soil carbon sequestration as an offset against these residual emissions. The Australasian dairy industry will, therefore, also need to consider how these residual emissions will be offset through carbon sequestration mainly in trees and, to a more limited extent, increasing soil organic carbon. The Australasian dairy industry is facing the challenge of increasing productivity while also reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This paper reviews the most promising technologies, concluding that substantial GHG abatement is possible, but the industry will need to consider further offsets in trees to achieve carbon-neutral dairy farming in Australia and New Zealand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reviews current challenges in the Australian extension environment and provides a case for developing an adaptive extension platform for the dairy sector in Australia and New Zealand, to support evolving dairy farm systems. The variation in the public-sector engagement in extension, the diversity and number of extension providers and a relatively uncoordinated approach to define new extension roles, functions and professional requirements are current challenges for dairy extension across Australia. In the dairy sector, these challenges coincide with increasing demand for a responsive research, development, extension and education system in supporting the rapid evolution in dairy farming systems. Addressing these challenges is not an issue for extension alone; however, the required level of integration among research, development, extension and education in an environment where needs are changing and resources are scarce demands an engaged dairy-science profession. Drawing on international extension and agricultural innovation-system literature and earlier empirical research, the following three areas for development are proposed: (1) a professional development strategy that incorporates (i) an understanding of the new professional situations extension works within, (ii) leadership in cross-industry and cross-sector coordination concerning the nature of the changing client in research, development, extension and education system and (iii) clear priorities for extension; (2) a professional development plan that incorporates a workplace-learning approach; and (3) for extension specialists to be engaged in defining research priorities, the agenda for change and suitable pathways for change alongside other professional groups, including farming. This development agenda will, however, require an adaptive extension platform to advance these areas on behalf of farmers and public stakeholders. New thinking about the role of extension in supporting evolving dairy farm systems is required. This paper identifies significant changes and challenges impacting on the development of extension strategies in Australia and New Zealand. With increasing demand for a responsive research, development, extension and education system and declining resources, there is an imperative for dairy scientists to be active partners in addressing the challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Changes in the farm operating and policy environments and a need to remain profitable under a cost-price squeeze have contributed to dairy systems in Australia and New Zealand becoming more intensive and complex in recent decades. Farm systems in both countries are now diverse, varying from being based predominantly on pasture with little purchased supplements, to those dependent on high levels of feed supplements and even having zero grazing. Dairy farm performance (defined in this paper as production or technical performance), return (return on assets or profit) and risk (variation in economic performance over time), and intensity of dairy systems was examined using farm survey data, case studies and existing published studies. The level of single technical performance measures, such as milk production, feed conversion efficiency and pasture consumption, prevailing in a business are not guides to the operating profit and return on assets of a business. In addition, when survey data of farm performance was grouped by return on assets, few farms were in the top 25% in successive years. Farms that performed consistently well were characterised by good, but not extreme, technical performance in a range of key areas, which translated to favourable business return (return on asset and profit). The knowledge and skills of farm managers are critical, and means that many different dairy systems can perform well physically and financially and successfully meet farmer goals. The relation between risk and the intensity of dairy systems was also investigated. Options that intensified systems generally resulted in higher net wealth for the farm owner, but almost always at increased risk. The best system for any farmer to operate is one which best meets their multifaceted preferences and goals, regardless of system type. A need to remain profitable under fluctuating operating and climatic conditions has increased the intensity of dairy systems in Australia and New Zealand. This paper examined if farm technical performance, profit and risk were related to farm system intensity and complexity. Single technical performance measures were poor guides of profit, with profitable businesses being more about the skills of the farm operator, and less about the system being run. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]