Farming systems and production management

Permanent URI for this collectionhttp://elibrary2.sugarresearch.com.au/handle/11079/13844

Research outcomes: Growers and harvesters benefit from the ongoing research in productivity improvement, production management and agronomical techniques. Developed technologies and management practices that enhance productivity and demonstrate a high rate of return on investment.

Browse

Filters

20192

Advanced Search

Filter by

Settings

Has files: YesSubject: search.filters.subject.Economics

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Cost assessment of the adoption of harvesting best practice (HBP) : ASSCT peer-reviewed paper
    (ASSCT, 2019) Nothard, B; Thompson, M; Patane, P; Landers, G; Norris, CA; Poggio, M
    Using ground speeds and extractor fan speeds recommended by Harvesting Best Practice (HBP) will minimise cane loss and stool damage. While these benefits provide an incentive for growers to request contractors use HBP settings, little research based on trial data has examined the full impact on harvesting costs. Given that reduced ground speeds increase harvesting time, it is expected harvesting contractors would incur higher labour, fuel and machinery costs per tonne. To incentivise the move to HBP, additional compensation would need to be paid to harvesting contractors by growers. It is anticipated that providing growers and contractors with information about the harvesting cost implications from implementing HBP would enhance adoption. The difference in harvesting costs between conventional (standard) harvesting practice and HBP (recommended) are evaluated at nine harvesting-trial sites undertaken across Queensland in 2017 by Sugar Research Australia. The analysis draws upon the production and operational information collected during the trials along with detailed information collected from each of the nine harvesting operations. A customised economic spreadsheet was developed to model the difference in harvesting costs between standard practice and recommended settings. Harvesting costs per tonne were generally found to increase when using recommended settings, with the exception of trials that attained large reductions in cane losses due to the change in practice. The results showed that changing to recommended settings increased harvesting costs by between $11 and $101/ha. Changes per tonne showed far more variability at –67 c/t (saving) to 96 c/t (increase), where some cases showed cost increases offset by yield improvements. Moreover, harvesting costs varied among harvesting contractors due to differences in machinery-management strategies and labour-payment terms. Sensitivity analyses were also undertaken to investigate the response of harvesting costs to different scenarios.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Economic evaluation of sugarcane harvesting best practice (HBP) : ASSCT peer-reviewed paper
    (ASSCT, 2019) Thompson, M; Nothard, B; Patane, P; Landers, G; Norris, CA
    Mechanical sugarcane harvesting is commonly undertaken at ground speeds that exceed the cleaning capacity of modern harvesters, which is likely to increase extraneous matter (EM) levels in the cane supply. To attempt to reduce the higher EM levels, operators typically increase extractor fan speeds above recommendations, resulting in unintended cane loss. Past research indicates that using harvesting best practice (HBP) settings can minimise cane loss and stool damage. These benefits would increase grower revenue and be an incentive for growers to request harvesting contractors operate using HBP settings. Reduced ground speeds would, however, increase harvesting time and generate higher costs per hectare. The key issue remains as to whether the increased grower revenues outweigh the additional harvesting costs. Nine replicated and randomised trials undertaken by Sugar Research Australia in 2017 compared harvesting performance when using both conventional and HBP settings through identifying production and grower revenue differences. Detailed information was collected from each harvesting operation to identify harvesting costs under both conventional practice and HBP. This allowed the net benefit for the grower and harvesting operation from using HBP settings to be determined. On average over the nine trials, recommended harvesting settings generated more grower revenue than the added harvesting costs from reducing ground speeds and generated a net economic benefit of $163/ha (or $1.97/t). The trials show that, while growers would need to pay additional compensation for cane harvested using HBP settings, the compensation would be less than the additional revenue they received, increasing overall grower profitability.