Este estudo identificou um conjunto de razões que limita o uso de técnicas de gestão nas empresas agropecuárias. Analisando como os produtores rurais administram os seus negócios, e em acordo com a teoria da administração, estas razões foram discutidas através de uma matriz de atividades administrativas. Essa matriz relaciona as funções de planejamento, organização, direção e controle, exercidas no nível estratégico e operacional da empresa agropecuária, com as áreas administrativas de produção, finanças, comercialização e pessoal. Isso possibilitou uma identificação mais precisa dos fatores limitantes à gestão da empresa agropecuária e suas relações com a competência administrativa, composta pelas variáveis conhecimento, habilidades e atitudes. Os principais motivos que justificam o baixo envolvimento dos profissionais da assistência técnica com a gestão da propriedade rural também foram identificados. A coleta de dados primários envolveu duas fases. Na primeira, a investigação valeu-se da técnica de grupos focais, que permitiu reunir informações qualitativas sobre o assunto, em 8 sessões focais com agricultores, pecuaristas e os técnicos que os assistem. Na segunda fase, o assunto foi abordado de forma quantitativa, através da aplicação de 494 questionários junto ao mesmo público alvo, em vários estados do país. Os dados quantitativos foram analisados estatisticamente e os resultados se mostraram altamente significativos (P<0,05). Em linhas gerais, as principais conclusões do estudo foram: (1) a natureza familiar predominante na empresa agropecuária lhe confere uma forma própria de gestão; (2) há significativas diferenças na opinião e percepção de técnicos e produtores sobre a melhor forma de se gerenciar as empresas agropecuárias; (3) os produtores rurais não alteram, contínua e sistematicamente, seu planejamento estratégico de produção, em função das incertezas de mercado e dos custos associados à alteração do processo produtivo; (4) no planejamento financeiro, os produtores rurais normalmente direcionam seus recursos para serem aplicados em estoques ou ativos fixos; (5) na organização da infraestrutura e do pessoal, há uma tendência dos produtores em superdimensionar a disponibilidade desses fatores de produção, visando uma redução dos riscos operacionais inerentes à produção; (6) na organização das finanças, normalmente há um descompasso entre o detalhamento dos registros e a real capacidade de implementá-los com eficiência na empresa; (7) a estrutura funcional dos recursos humanos é ineficiente e centralizada, com acúmulo de responsabilidades no produtor rural; (8) a direção operacional da produção ocupa o maior tempo de trabalho do produtor, gerando ineficiências na direção das demais áreas administrativas; (9) as principais dificuldades no controle são a coleta de dados a campo, resultado do baixo nível de conhecimento, habilidades e atitudes de seus funcionários; e (10) a formulação de recomendações para o gerenciamento da empresa agropecuária deve considerar as características da empresa e do empresário rural, ao invés de serem estabelecidas a priori sem o conhecimento da situação particular de cada caso. Por fim, considerando a importância relativa das diferentes atividades administrativas em empresas agropecuárias referenciais e os fatores limitantes à gestão nessas empresas, fez-se recomendações para a melhoria do processo de aconselhamento administrativo aos produtores rurais. / The study identified some reasons that explain the limited use of scientific management tools by Brazilian farmers. A matrix of management activities was built to classify these reasons. The matrix crosses the management functions of planning, organizing, directing, and controlling, considered both in the strategic and operational levels, with the production, financial, commercial, and human resource administrative areas. This classification allowed a more precise identification of factors that are limiting the use of scientific management tools and their relationship to the farmer’s competence as given by their knowledge, abilities and attitudes. The study also identified some of the major reasons that explain why extension agents were not fully involved with counseling farmers on their management activities. Primary data used in the study were collected during two phases. During the first, 8 focus group manned by cash crop farmers, beef cattle farmers, and extension agents and counselors, were used to produce qualitative information. During the second phase, quantitative information were collected via a survey with 494 individual questionnaires applied to the same public covered by phase one. For the statistical tests performed 95% of significance was required. Some conclusions of the study are: (1) the family farm predominant nature requires an specific form of management; (2) farmers differ significantly from extension agents or counselors on farm management subjects; (3) farmers do not alter their strategic production plans in response to price changes or other signals perceived as short or mid term movements due to costs of changes in their production processes; (4) in managing their cash flow, farmers tend to immobilize their resources as fixed assets, therefore dangerously reducing their liquidity ratios; (5) in organizing their human resources structure farms tend to concentrate into their hands amounts of responsibilities larger than they can handle; (6) in organizing their financial flows there is a large gap between the desired level of details and their abilities to collect the data; (7) in organizing farm’s production infrastructure and human resource base there is a tendency to overestimate their needs in order to reduce productive or operational risks; (8) directing the productive process requires most of the time of the farmer, therefore reducing the amount of time dedicated to other areas of the administrative process; (9) the major difficulties faced in the function of controlling are linked with problems of collecting data. This is due to low levels of formal education that characterize the farm hired labor; and (10) counseling rules should not be formulated as general rules but the farm and the farmer individual characteristics must be considered in counseling for management purposes. Finally, the relative relevancy of the managerial activities in the “referential farms” were considered, together with their limiting managerial factors, in recommending improvements in the process of managerial counseling to farmers.

No description available.

No description available.

Les systèmes de production agricole sont exposés au changement climatique des lors qu’ils mobilisent des ressources dépendantes du climat. L’enjeu pour la communauté scientifique est de produire des connaissances permettant aux praticiens d’anticiper les effets du changement climatique sur leur système, et d’élaborer des méthodes et outils pour s’y adapter. Les systèmes d’élevage herbagers sont particulièrement concernes par le changement climatique étant donné qu’ils dépendent de la ressource fourragère, dont la saisonnalité et la productivité sont fortement liées au climat. Leur adaptation au changement climatique nécessite d’anticiper les tendances et la variabilité interannuelle. L’objectif de la thèse est de proposer une analyse de la vulnérabilité des systèmes d’élevage herbagers au changement et à la variabilité climatique, ainsi qu’une méthode de conception de ces systèmes. La thèse repose sur la spécification et l’application du cadre de la vulnérabilité à l’échelle de l’exploitation d’élevage, et la mise en œuvre d’une méthode de conception participative. La démarche d’ensemble articule la représentation de l’exposition au climat en lien avec les contraintes de gestion des élevages, l’analyse rétrospective des dynamiques des élevages et la construction participative de systèmes d’élevage moins vulnérables au changement et a la variabilité climatiques. Nous avons mis en œuvre cette démarche sur les élevages du Sud-Ouest de la France. Nous avons mis en évidence que ces élevages, bien qu’exposes a l’évolution de la saisonnalité de la production herbagère et des types d’années fourragères les plus fréquents, disposent de capacités d’adaptation structurelles et organisationnelles suffisantes pour faire face au changement climatique a horizon 2085. Nous avons également identifie les caractéristiques des exploitations les plus sensibles et les adaptations les plus efficaces face a la variabilité climatique. Outre son intérêt pour comprendre et réduire la vulnérabilité des élevages herbagers à la variabilité et au changement climatique, cette méthodologie a la fois réflexive et interactive pourrait être utilisée pour communiquer auprès des éleveurs et des organismes de développement agricole sur le changement climatique, ses effets et les adaptations possibles des élevages. / Agricultural systems are exposed to climate change since they use climate-dependent resources. The current challenge for research is to produce knowledge, methods and tools to help farmers to anticipate and to cope with the effects of climate change on their systems. Climate change influences fodder production in seasonality and productivity and thus grassland-based livestock systems. The adaptation of those systems to climate change requires anticipating trends and inter-annual variability. The aim of this thesis is to propose a vulnerability assessment of grassland-based livestock systems to climate variability and climate change, and a method to design such systems. The thesis specifies and implements the vulnerability framework to livestock systems and develops a participatory design method. The whole approach articulates the representation of climate exposure in relation with management constraints of livestock systems, the retrospective analysis of livestock farms dynamics and the participatory design of grassland-based livestock systems that are less vulnerable to climate variability and change. We implemented this approach on cattle systems in South-West France. We have demonstrated that those cattle systems will be exposed to a change in the seasonality of grassland production and in the most frequent forage years. However, they have enough structural and organizational capacities to cope with climate change by 2085. We also identified sensitivity sources to extreme climatic events and the most efficient adaptations to cope with it. This approach helps to understand and reduce the vulnerability of grassland-based livestock systems to climate variability and change. In addition, this interactive and reflexive approach is an opportunity to make farmers and rural development actors aware of climate change, its consequences and the possible adaptations of livestock systems.

Thesis (M. Dev.) -- University of Limpopo, 2017. / Recent changes in South Africa have exerted a lot of pressure on the government to redress the past injustices on the land redistribution among its citizens. The community of Hoedspruit is not excluded from the above challenges, hence the study on the effect of management of land tenure in Hoedspruit. The management of land tenure in Hoedspruit was fraught with challenges such as lack of clarity on policies, managerial skills, resources, institutional support, inadequate training programmes, lack of financial support, alternative strategy, monitoring and evaluation. This study also seeks to investigate the factors that hinder the effective management of land tenure. Data was obtained by means of questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. These were used to have a deeper understanding of the challenges that were encountered by the new land owners in the area of the study. The main findings of the study confirmed that there were challenges associated with the management of land tenure. Lack of financial support and relevant training were regarded as the main problems that hinder the management of land tenure in Hoedspruit. In conclusion, the study also suggested some strategies and recommendations that can enhance the effective management of land tenure in Hoedspruit.

The Sustainable Restitution Support – South Africa (SRS-SA) program aimed at the development of a post-settlement support model that could be used to support beneficiaries of land reform in South Africa, especially those who received the land through restitution. The two land restitution claims were identified namely Mashishimale in the Limpopo Province and Nkumbuleni in KwaZulu Natal Province in South Africa. The main objective of the study is to determine the essential elements of two post-settlement support models to successfully implement and manage land reform projects in a sustainable manner namely: Mashishimale Farm Management Model (FMM) and Nkumbuleni Strategic Partnership Model (SPM). The data was collected through meetings and interviews with different stakeholders or role players. “Farm management can be described as the rational decision-making to achieve the objectives of the particular farming enterprise” (Van Reenen and Marais, 1992: 2). The Community Property Association (CPA) with the support of the Mashishimale community and the Tribal Authority decided to manage the farm by themselves and appointed a knowledgeable and skillful CEO and managers to manage the farm. The Mashishimale Farm Management Model has a definite management structure that is responsible for various activities on the farm. The management structure consists of a CEO, six (6) managers and two (2) assistant managers. Three steering committees were established to help in the decision-making processes. The Oxford dictionary (1979) defines partner as “person associated with others in business of which he shares risks and profits.” Nkumbuleni Community Trust (CT) has appointed a Strategic Partner and form the Nkumbuleni Strategic Partnership Model. Nkumbileni CT together with the Strategic Partner formed a company consisting of five (5) Directors aimed to manage the farm as a business. The Mashishimale CPA and Nkumbuleni CT were assisted by specialists from the University of Pretoria to develop the Interim Business Plan for the farms. The specialists from the University of Pretoria together with the Strategic Partner, CT and Project facilitator/coordinator developed a Financial Plan for Nkumbuleni CT. The specialists, the CPA and Project facilitator/coordinator further developed a Financial Plan for Mashishimale CPA. No funds were available for the FMM to manage the farm. At the SPM, the Strategic Partner made funds available to manage the farm. Both farming enterprises applied for financial assistance from CASP but didn’t receive anything. FMM and SPM received training that was developed by the SRS-SA specialists and facilitated by Project facilitator/coordinator. The Limpopo Department of Agriculture is not visible at Mashishimale and as such the roles of local municipality and extension officers are non-existence. There is no a single extension officer that the CPA knows at this juncture. The Nkumbuleni CT members are uncertain about the role of the division of Agricultural extension (Provincial Department of Agriculture and Conservation, KwaZulu Natal) can play to support them because they only attend meetings but there is nothing from them or from their Department. Both FMM (CPA) and SPM (CT) are getting advisory and other support from the private sector and other stakeholders. The Transvaal Suiker Beperk (TSB) entered into a partnership with the Trusts of Siphumelele Community and Ingwenyama Community (separately) through its Agricultural services company known as Shubombo Agricultural Services (Chiyoka, 2009). Strategic Partnership Model has a definite management structure. Extension services are rendered in a joint venture whereby the TSB extension officials and the Provincial Department of Agriculture, Rural Development and Land Administration extension officials work together to assist farmers. The South African Sugar Association is providing technical advices on production and other relevant aspects such as market trends, etc. TSB provides training on leadership, conflict resolution management and finance management, while extension managers and production managers provide mentorship to the trustees. The Business Plans, Financial Plans and Work Skills Plans were developed by TSB (TSB, 2009). Training is regarded as part of a developmental program that is aiming at building capacity on trustees and other beneficiaries. There is well developed communication policy which outlines the possible communication strategy. A comparison of the two models discloses several similarities namely according to FMM and SPM structures and their responsibilities to manage, control of farm assets on behalf of the communities; they use the same communication channel systems to communicate with the community and other stakeholders and the appointment of the project facilitator/coordinator to facilitate and coordinate the activities. The most important differences between the two models are: <ul> <li> A scientific company was formed by the SPM to manage the farm as a business while the CPA kept that responsibility to itself in the FMM.</li> <li> The Traditional Authority at the FMM attend all CPA meetings while at the SPM do not attend all the CT meetings.</li> </ul> The study reveals that the following actions are essential for the successful post-settlement to restitution farms: <ul> <li> The execution of baseline study (survey) to determine the socio-economic situation in a community (beneficiaries).</li> <li> The appointment of an independent Project facilitator/coordinator to ensure effective and efficient communication.</li> <li> A well defined management structure and the appointment of a knowledgeable, skilful and experienced farm manager(s) or Strategic Partner.</li> <li> The development of a business plan for the farm with the support of professional agriculturist.</li> <li> The identification of qualified professional extension advisor to provide advice and guidance to the manager(s) or Strategic Partner.</li> <li> Appointment of a mentor to guide, advice and train the manager(s) or Strategic Partner.</li> <li> Financial support to manage the farm (Grants; Comprehensive Agricultural Support Program; financial institutions and specifically the Land Bank)</li></ul>. / Dissertation (MSc (Agric))--University of Pretoria, 2012. / Agricultural Economics, Extension and Rural Development / unrestricted

A study of soil erosion in the United States, especially in Texas, which brings attention to the causes of soil erosion under the existing system of farm management. The material gathered and compiled and arranged under certail main heading. Two chapters deal with present and immediate causes of erosions and their results. One full chapter takes up the history of the conservation movement and attempts to show how slow Texans have been in comparison with some of the other states of the United States. The study calls for further research, teaching of better land-use, raising awareness of soil erosion causes and conditions.

Includes bibliography. / This is an exploratory study which investigates changes introduced by management on farms in Elgin and explores the perceptions of some of those involved in the changes. The initiatives and activities of the Rural Foundation for Community Development (Rural Foundation) and its involvement in these changes forms a crucial part of the exploration. Three questions direct the study. 1. What are the changes that have been introduced? 2. Why were they introduced? 3. What is the social meaning of the changes? The study is based on a case study of four farms. Documentary material was collected from a variety of sources including the Rural Foundation, the South African Government, as well as other agencies operating in the field. Interviews with various actors were conducted, including management and a selection of workers on each of the four farms, Rural Foundation officials as well as other actors connected to the developments on the farms. The study is informed by historical materialist theory and draws from certain labour process theories. Important for the study was the discussion raised in these theories around the effect that workers' motivation has on their productivity. The study is located in the context of the national historical development of capitalist agriculture since the Second World War. More specifically it is situated locally in terms of changes that occurred on Elgin farms more generally prior to the 1980's as well as the present general circumstances in the area. Three fields of change are identified on the four farms: (i) training of workers, (ii) new incentives and pay structures, and (iii) community development. It is asserted that these changes are measures introduced by management in an attempt to, firstly, decrease production costs by employing greater numbers of women and migrant workers and paying them less. Secondly, they are aimed at increasing the productivity of workers through measures designed to improve the 'quality' and stability of workers and to develop a new authority structure on the farms. Four trends are thus identified as occurring on the farms: 1. Increasing use of women and migrant workers. 2. An improvement in workers' living conditions and standards. 3. An increasing emphasis on improving workers' productivity. 4. A shift in the emphasis on control towards developing workers' consent.

Farm enterprise diversification is an important tool for agricultural producers with respect to risk management. As agricultural producers in Virginia look to prepare their farm businesses for the new millennium, they are increasingly considering non-traditional enterprises and activities for their farms. As producers add new enterprises, they encounter challenges to develop new skills and gather adequate information for their new activities. Virginia Cooperative Extension has the task of providing producers with timely and useful research-based information. As both producers and Virginia Cooperative Extension agents and specialists prepare for the challenges of the changing face of agriculture in Virginia in the next generation, a mutual understanding of the key factors and motivations for enterprise diversification is necessary. This study investigates the key factors, motivations, and information needs of seven diversified farms in Virginia. The implications for producers and Cooperative Extension are outlined, and recommendations are made for Virginia Cooperative Extension, lenders, and agribusiness. / Master of Science

<p dir="ltr">Strategic risks are characterized by exogenous market shocks which create a misalignment between a business’s current strategy, business resources, and capabilities. These risks come from a variety of sources including changes in government policies, unprecedented shifts in weather patterns, labor shortages, evolving consumer preferences, and geopolitical conflicts. Each source of risk presents unique threats to farming operations yet are similar in that they lack off-the-shelf risk management tools. Rather, producers must build operational resilience to accommodate for these risks, where resilience encompasses a farm’s ability to weather through, adapt to and recover from strategic risks.</p><p dir="ltr">This study uses survey data from 403 commercial producers within the United States to assess farm resilience to strategic risks. Prior to this research, there have been no estimates of resilience for U.S. agricultural producers. Our results are critical in bridging this gap by providing an assessment of resilience to strategic risk for commercial farms within the United States. Correlations, regression analysis, and cluster analysis are used to analyze how farm level characteristics relate to a producer’s resilience to strategic risk. Results suggest that resilience is positively related to management practices, producer sentiment, farm growth expectations, risk preference, and adoption of precision agriculture technologies. </p><p dir="ltr">Conclusions of this study detail an ongoing need for improvements to farm resilience to strategic risk and related educational resources. With projected increases in stressors to U.S. agricultural systems via population growth, weather uncertainties, pest prevalence, and unpredictable market shocks, improving farm resilience should be a primary focus for producers in the years ahead. By identifying key farm characteristics associated with resilience, we provide a path for producers to improve resilience and mitigate impacts of strategic risk.</p>