Skip to main content

A Generic Farming System Simulator

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Environmental and Agricultural Modelling

Abstract

The aim of this chapter is to present a bio-economic modelling framework established to provide insight into the complex nature of agricultural systems and to assess the impacts of agricultural and environmental policies and technological innovations. This framework consists of a Farm System Simulator (FSSIM) using mathematical programming that can be linked to a cropping system model to estimate at field level the engineering production and environmental functions. FSSIM includes a module for agricultural management (FSSIM-AM) and a mathematical programming model (FSSIM-MP). FSSIM-AM aims to define current and alternative activities and to quantify their input output coefficients (both yields and environmental effects) using a cropping system model, such as APES (Agricultural Production and Externalities Simulator) and other sources (expert knowledge, surveys, etc.). FSSIM-MP seeks to describe the behaviour of the farmer given a set of biophysical, socio-economic and policy constraints and to predict its reactions under new technologies, policy and market changes. The communication between these different tools and models is based on explicit definitions of spatial scales and software for model integration.

The bio-economic modelling framework was designed to be sufficiently generic and flexible in order to be applied for all relevant farming systems across the European Union, easily transferable between different geographic locations, and reusable for different applications. For this chapter, it was tested for a set of farms representing the arable farming systems in two European regions (Flevoland [Netherlands] and Midi-Pyrénées [France]) in order to analyse the current situation and anticipate the impact of new alternative scenarios.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The chosen value can vary from 0 to 1.65, as suggested by the literature.

  2. 2.

    Percent absolute deviation (%):

    $$ PAD{\text{ (\% )}} = \frac{{\sum\limits_{i = 1}^n {\left| {{{\hat X}_i} - {X_i}} \right|} }}{{\sum\limits_{i = 1}^n {{{\hat X}_i}} }}.100 $$

    where \( {\hat X_i} \) is the observed value of the variable i and Xi is the simulated value. The best calibration is reached when PAD is close to zero.

References

  • Alterra & INRA. (2005). New soil information for CGMS (Crop Growth Monitoring System) (SINFO). In Alterra - INRA (pp. 219-260). Wageningen: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, E., Elbersen, B., Godeschalk, F., & Verhoog, D. (2007). Farm management indicators and farm typologies as a basis for assessment in a changing policy environment. Journal of Environmental Management, 82, 353-362.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Antoniou, G., & van Harmelen, F. (2004). A semantic web primer. Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deybe, D., & Flichman, G. (1991). A regional agricultural model using a plant growth simulation program as activities generator. Agricultural Systems, 37, 369-385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dogliotti, S., Rossing, W. A. H., & van Ittersum, M. K. (2003). ROTAT, a tool for systematically generating crop rotations. European Journal of Agronomy, 19, 239-250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eurostat. (2007). Office statistique des Communautés européennes, juin 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falconer, K., & Hodge, I. (2000). Using economic incentives for pesticide usage reductions: Responsiveness to input taxation and agricultural systems. Agricultural Systems, 63, 175-194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • G20. (2005). G20 proposal on market access - October 12, 2005, from http://www.g-20.mre.gov.br/conteudo/proposals_marketaccess.pdf

  • Hazell, P. B. R., & Norton, R. D. (1986). Mathematical programing for economic analysis in agriculture (p. 400). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heckelei, T., & Wolff, H. (2003). Estimation of constrained optimisation models for agricultural supply analysis based on generalised maximum entropy. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 30(1), 27-50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hengsdijk, H., & van Ittersum, M. K. (2002). A goal-oriented approach to identify and engineer land use systems. Agricultural Systems, 71, 231-247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howitt, R. E. (1995). A calibration method for agricultural economic production models. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 46(2), 147-159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, S., Andersen, E., Athanasiadis, I., & Van Ittersum, M.K. (2009). A database for integrated assessment of European agricultural systems. Environmental Science and Policy, 12(5), 573-587.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, S., & Van Ittersum, M. K. (2007). Assessing farm innovations and responses to policies: A review of bio-economic farm models. Agricultural Systems, 94, 622-636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanellopoulos, A., Berentsen, P.B.M., Heckelei, T., Van Ittersum, M.K., Oude Lansink, A.G.J.M. (2010). Assessing the forecasting performance of a generic bio-economic farm model calibrated with two different PMP variants. Journal of Agricultural Economics, under review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruseman, G., & Bade, J. (1998). Agrarian policies for sustainable land use: Bio-economic modelling to assess the effectiveness of policy instruments. Agricultural Systems, 58, 465-481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Louhichi, K., Alary, V., & Grimaud, P. (2004). A dynamic model to analyse the bio-technical and socio-economic interactions in the dairy farming systems on the Réunion Island. Animal Research, 53, 1-19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, R. V., & Tindall, C. I. (2005). An overview of the open modelling interface and environment (the OpenMI). Environmental Science and Policy, 8, 279-286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez Domínguez, I., Bezlepkina, I., Heckelei, T., Romstad, E., Oude Lansink, A., & Kanellopoulos, A. (2009). Capturing market impacts of farm level policies: A statistical extrapolation approach using biophysical characteristics and farm resources. Environmental Science and Policy, 12(5), 588-600.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinds, G.J., & Van Lanen, H.A.J. (1992). Crop production potential of rural areas within the European Communities. II. A physical land evaluation procedure for annual crops and grass. In Publication of the Scientific Council for Government Policy. The Hague, The Netherlands: Scientific Council for Government Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röhm, O., & Dabbert, S. (2003). Integrating agri-environmental programs into regional production models: An extension of positive mathematical programming. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 85(1), 254-265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, G. (1990). Barley knowledge base. An agricultural information systems for the European Community. Brussels: Commission of the European Community.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, A. M. M. (1982). A farm-level model to evaluate the impacts of current energy policy options. Canterbury: Lincoln College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Ittersum, M. K., Ewert, F., Heckelei, T., Wery, J., Alkan Olsson, J., Andersen, E., et al. (2008). Integrated assessment of agricultural systems - A component-based framework for the European Union (SEAMLESS). Agricultural Systems, 96, 150-165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Ittersum, M. K., & Rabbinge, R. (1997). Concepts in production ecology for analysis and quantification of agricultural input-output combinations. Field Crops Research, 52, 197-208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, J., Boogaard, H.L., & Van Diepen, C.A. (2004). Evaluating crop data in CGMS system. Crop data for winter wheat and spring barley (MARSOP-2 Project Rep. No. 1). Wageningen: Alterra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wossink, G. A. A., De Koeijer, T. J., & Renkema, J. A. (1992). Environmental-economic policy assessment: A farm economic approach. Agricultural Systems, 39, 421-438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zander, P., Borkowski, N., Hecker, J.-M., Uthes, S., Stokstad, G., Rørstad, P.K., Bellocchi, G. (2009). Procedure to identify and assess current activities. SEAMLESS deliverable PD3.3.9, SEAMLESS Integrated Project, EU 6th Framework Programme, contract no. 010036-2, www.SEAMLESS-IP.org , 124p.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kamel Louhichi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Louhichi, K. et al. (2010). A Generic Farming System Simulator. In: Brouwer, F., Ittersum, M. (eds) Environmental and Agricultural Modelling. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3619-3_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics