Learning from the historical failure of farm management models to aid management practice. Part 1. The rise and demise of theoretical models of farm economics

2006 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 143 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. L. McCown ◽  
L. E. Brennan ◽  
K. A. Parton

A potential source of lessons for agricultural modellers aspiring to influence farm decision making is the historical experience of agricultural economists in the field, variously termed ‘Farm Management Research’ or ‘Farm Management’. Although the histories of Farm Management in the USA and in Australia differ significantly, in both cases the field was originally characterised by pragmatic on-farm research by agricultural scientists and later taken over by agricultural economists committed to theory-based economic analysis to enable rational planning and decision making. But in both countries, it became painfully evident to reflective participants that model-based Farm Management was not proving relevant to practical managers of farms. An insightful few went further to conclude not just that theoretical models of practice had not been relevant but that they could not be relevant, and since the late 1970s, the field has been in crisis. In this series of 2 papers, we seek insights that might explain this extraordinary ‘market’ failure of models that generate theoretical best practice as a basis for intervention. As an ‘experiment’, the history of Farm Management is enriched by the discontinuity between 2 ‘eras’ characterised by 2 contrasting intervention approaches, an ‘early’ interactive and pragmatic era and a ‘late’ academic and theoretical era. In this first paper, after a brief history of the early pragmatic era and the ‘take-over’ by economic theorists, we analyse the ‘crisis of relevance’ that led to demise, relying heavily on the remarkable intellectual journey of John Dillon, the first Professor of Farm Management in Australia who turned from being elder economic theoretician to pioneer philosopher of pragmatic Farming Systems Research. The significant turn to Farming Systems Research by disillusioned Farm Management economists in the 1980s was preceded by a turn to another systems approach 2 decades earlier, that of agricultural systems modelling. Learning from the autecology of these significant systems efforts to influence the management of farms is the aim of the second paper in this series.

2006 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 157 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. L. McCown ◽  
K. A. Parton

Part 1 analysed the difficulties experienced in the field of academic Farm Management in making complex theoretical models relevant to farming. This paper highlights the important connections developed between the field of Farm Management economics and 3 key ‘systems’ ideas and tools in agricultural science in response to difficulties and opportunities. The first systems approach reviewed is the 20-year experiment by agricultural economists in using crop and animal production simulation models in management analyses. The second systems approach reviewed is Farming Systems Research (FSR), an approach characterised by on-farm experimentation with a management orientation. Many pioneers of FSR were Farm Management economists disenchanted by the inapplicability of economic theory to farm management. The FSR that emerged is interpreted as a scion of the early era of Farm Management prior to the coup by economics theorists in the 1940s. A third systems approach reviewed is a ‘soft’ intervention to facilitate farmer learning. Although evolving from FSR, this approach has surprising similarities to the ‘goal adjusting’ consulting performed by the legendary Australian Farm Management consultant cum academic, Jack Makeham. The paper concludes with discussion of a recent innovation that combines these 3 approaches. It uses a soft intervention approach that features farmers shaping their goals and expectations by ‘experimenting’ in a local, but virtual, environment provided by simulation of the production system using ‘hard’ models.


1987 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 365-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. P. Collinson

SUMMARYProcedures for better decision making in agricultural research are considered. Fanning Systems Adaptive Research (FSAR) has evolved to complement the more traditional research approach, allowing better decisions to be made on recommendations to fanners and on priorities for technical research. This is done through the identification of research results most relevant to the development of specific farming systems; the testing of these results by experiments in farmers' fields; and the identification of factors limiting productivity in local farming systems.FSAR involves interdisciplinary cooperation between production agronomists, farm economists and, where appropriate, animal production scientists, in close cooperation with other production specialists and with farmers.


Author(s):  
A.F. Mcrae

Farmers' objectives, their circumstances and the constraints they face are central to any consideration of ways and means of improving farming systems. The management, research and extension, and policy needs of the farmers attending this workshop were diverse. This appeared to be linked with the (unexpected) degree of diversity in the business objectives and management structures on these farms. More formal research on these issues across the spectrum of farmers is required to ensure that research and technology transfer meet the industry's needs. Keywords farming systems, research, technology transfer, objectives


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document