Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-8zxtt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T01:36:10.748Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

On the derivation of economic weights in livestock improvement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

C. Smith
Affiliation:
AFRC Animal Breeding Research Organisation, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
J. W. James
Affiliation:
School of Wool and Pastoral Sciences, University of New South Wales, Kensington, 2033, Australia
E. W. Brascamp
Affiliation:
Institute for Pig Research, Torenstraat 16, Postbus 83, 5240 AB, Rosmalen, The Netherlands
Get access

Abstract

The use of profit equations for deriving economic weights (the value per unit improvement in a trait) in the genetic improvement of livestock has led to anomalies both in theory and in practice. These anomalies can be removed by imposing two conditions. One is that any extra profit from genetic change that can be matched by rescaling the size of the production enterprise should not be counted since it can be achieved without any genetic change. Only savings in cost per unit of product value should be included. The second condition is that changes that correct previous inefficiency in the production enterprise should not be counted. Thus, it is assumed that resources are efficiently used, and changes in output will require proportional changes in input. This means that fixed costs, like variable costs, should be expressed per unit of output, rather than as a fixed total enterprise cost. Improvement effort spent on traits that redress current inefficiencies in a production enterprise is of local and temporary value and is at the opportunity cost of improvement of other traits that save costs per unit of product value and are of permanent and general value. Application of these two conditions is shown to give economic weights that are identical on different bases; scaled output value, input or profit; fixed output value, input or profit; and zero profit. They were also equivalent to economic weights derived as the cost per unit product value from an economic efficiency index. The dilemma of different economic weights for different perspectives in production (unit of product, animal, producer, investor, and consumer) is also resolved.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1986

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

REFERENCES

Brascamp, E. W., Smith, C. and Guy, D. R. 1985. Derivation of economic weights from profit equations. Animal Production 40: 175179.Google Scholar
Dickerson, G. 1970. Efficiency of animal production — molding the biological components. Journal of Animal Science 30: 849859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, V. R., Bichard, M. and Pease, A. 1976. Objectives in pig breeding. Animal Production 23: 365387.Google Scholar
James, J. W. 1980. Index selection for simultaneous improvement of several characters. Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of Genetics. Vol. 1, Book 2, pp. 221229. MIR Publishers, Moscow.Google Scholar
James, J. W. 1983. Economic aspects of developing breeding objectives: general considerations. In Future Developments in the Genetic Improvement of Animals (ed. Barker, J. S. F., Hammond, K. and McClintock, A. E.), pp. 107116. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Moav, R. 1973. Economic evaluation of genetic differences. In Agricultural Genetics (ed. Moav, R.), pp. 319352. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
Moav, R. and Hill, W. G. 1966. Specialised sire and dam lines. IV. Selection within lines. Animal Production 8: 375390.Google Scholar
Simmonds, N. W. 1974. Costs and benefits of an agricultural research institute. R and D Management 5: 2328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, C. 1983. Effects of changes in economic weights on the efficiency of index selection. Journal of Animal Science 56: 10571064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar