Elisabeth Quendler, Assoc. Prof., Division of Agricultural Engineering, BOKU presented her research on Potential for Intergenerational learning to improve life situation in milking farms

1. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler11.04.2013 1
Potential for intergenerational learning
and innovation to improve life and
work quality on dairy farms in Austria
Elisabeth Quendler, Agnes Strauss, Werner Zollitisch
Wien, 5. Juni 2013

2. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler 2
 Introduction
 Material and method
 Results and discussion
 Conclusion
Content
@ Quendler

3. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
Introduction
 Austrian farms are small scaled family enterprises which grow
continuously
 Larger farms generate better incomes (fixed cost degression)
 Work load and management requirements increase with growth
(herd sizes) (Haidn & Schleicher, 2006, Over, 2009)
 Different generations work and life together on farms and share
work and living areas on one place
 Decrease in family size and family man power
 These different aspects influences work and life quality and
sustainability of farming
 Inclusion of social aspects in the sustainability assessment of
farms is least developed
3

4. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
Aim
Identification of
 suitable indicators
to describe some core elements of the social sustainability
of family-owned dairy farms at the farm level.
4

5. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
Material (I)
 Dairy farms: classification by criteria in 6 production systems (PS)
 31 farms  24 conventional und 7 organic farms
 61 interview partners, 28 women, 33 men
5
@ Strauss

6. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
Method (III): Farm visits
 Farm visits: February to April 2012
 Interviews with semi-standardized questionnaire: 2 actors on the
farm (farm manger, wife,..)
 Subjective assessment: likert scale, free-text responses and
estimates
7
@ Strauss

7. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
Method (II): Criteria, indicators for
life and work quality on a farm
11.04.2013 8
Criteria Indicators
Work satisfaction (AZ)
Work input und productivity
(quantitative)
- Internal, external work satisfaction
- Work input (MPh per year, MPh per
worker, MPh/cow and year)
- Work productivity (kg ECM/cow)
Stressors of life and work situation
(qualitative)
- Work, life, economic and political
related stressors
Health and work load - Body conditions (general state)
- Mental and physical strains (loads)
- Mechanisation level
Recovery und leisure time - Wealth of time
- Number of holiday days per year

8. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
Work satisfaction
(internal, external)
9
Ø 2,0 Ø 2,2 Ø 1,8 Ø 2,0 Ø 2,0 Ø 2,0
1... very satisfied 2... satisfied 3... partly 4...dissatisfied 5... very dissatisfied

9. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
2.8
2.5
2.5
2.3
2.2
2.2
1.9
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.4
0 1 2 3
Work volume (h/day) (n=61)
Physical strains (n=61)
Mental strains (n=60)
Income (n=61)
Work safety (n=61)
Difficulty of work (n=60)
Working environment (n=61)
Job choice, performance (n=61)
Recognition by family members (n=61)
Opportunities to extend their learning (n=61)
Present level of mechanization (n=61)
Ability to use skills / knowledge (n=61)
Management responsibility (n=61)
Mutual support (n=61)
Relationship to workers (n=61)
Occupational diversity (n=60)
1... very satisfied 2... satisfied 3... partly 4...dissatisfied 5... very dissatisfied
Work satisfaction, indicators
internal
10
16 Items of the work satisfaction related to the internal situation – mean values

10. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
Work satisfaction, indicators
external
11
7 Items to work satisfaction of the external situation – mean value (n=28)
3.1
2.2
2.0
2.0
1.9
1.8
1.6
0 1 2 3 4
Agricultural policy framework
Subsidy
Social benefits
Information policy of stakeholders
Support and recognition (professional…
Support by organisations
Job security
1... very satisfied 2... satisfied 3... partly 4... dissatisfied 5... very dissatisfied

11. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
Work satisfaction,
work related stressors
12
Work related stressors in % of men and women

12. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
30.3
21.2
18.2
12.1
9.1
9.1
0
0
25.0
21.4
7.1
14.3
14.3
14.3
3.6
0
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Generational conflicts
Illness
Shortage of time for partnership
Statement contained (no answers)
Familial differences (wife, kids,..)
Accident / death of a close person
Social isolation
Living situation
Women (n=28)
Men (n=33)
Life situation related stressors
14
Life situation related stressors in % of men and women

13. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
60.6
21,2
9,1
9,1
64.3
14.3
14.3
3.6
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Economic situation
Animal welfare and husbandry
requirements
Agricultural policy
Farm situation
Women (n=28)
Men (n=33)
Economic and political stressors
15
Economic and political situation related stressors in % of men and women

14. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
Indicators – work input
17
Indicators Alpine
farms
Ø 9‐
cows
Hilly
pasture
farms
Ø 20‐
cows
Hilly
arable
farms
Ø 30‐cows
Mountain
area –
intensive
farms
Ø 26‐cows
Favorable
area–
mixed farms
Ø 27‐cows
Favorable
area –
specialised
farms
Ø 49‐cows
Work input in dairy
production (MPh)
3912 3402 4410 3590 4073 4730
Work power (MP)* 2,5 2,0 2,7 1,9 2,3 2,4
MPh per worker 1557 1760 1635 1924 1791 2054
MPh male (for farm, total) 78 / 68 71 / 62 72 / 66 71 / 67 75 / 63 82 / 70
MPh female (farm, total) 79 / 46 78 / 25 76 / 35 68 / 30 76 / 33 88 / 45
Cows per MPh 4 11 11 15 11 20
Work productivity
(kg ECM /MPh)
15 38 52 62 50 82
Indicators to the work situation on farms
* 1WP = 2160 WPh

15. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
y = 49.678e-0.004x
R² = 0.7853
0
20
40
60
80
0 200 400 600 800
Cows
MPh / cow / year
Alpin
Hilly pasture
Hilly arable
Mountain intensive
Favorable area ‐ mixed
Favorable area ‐ specialised
Work input, herd size
18

16. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
Indicators Alpine
farms
Ø 9‐
cows
Hilly
pasture
farms
Ø 20‐
cows
Hilly
arable
farms
Ø 30‐
cows
Mountain
area –
intensive
farms
Ø 26‐cows
Favorable
area–
mixed
farms
Ø 27‐cows
Favorable
area –
specialised
farms
Ø 49‐cows
Scale
Body conditions1 2.3 1.9 2.1 2.4 2.4 2.2 1‐51
Physical strain (load)2 3.0 2.8 2.7 2.7 2.5 2.7 1‐51
Mental strain (load)3 2.0 3.2 2.1 2.7 2.6 2.8 1‐51
Mechanisation level4 1.6 (a) 2.5 (ac) 2.8 (bc) 2.6 (ac) 2.6 (ac) 3.0 (bc) 1‐42
Time of wealth5 1.9 2.8 2.3 2.7 2.7 2.7 1‐63
Holiday (off farm) 6 1.4 1.2 1.4 1.2 0.6 1.2 0‐54
Indicators – health, time of wealth
19
Indicators to health and wealth of time
Units:
1top fit to poorly
2 no to very strong
3 very low to very high
4 low to very high
5 true to not apply (next ot work is enough time for other life activities available)
6 0: no holidays, 1: < 1 week, 2: 1 week, 3: 2 weeks, 4: 3 weeks, 5: > 3 weeks

17. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
Cooperation forms
24
Cooperation types and their intensities on dairy farms (n=1-30)

18. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
Cooperation,
reasons for deficits (factors)
25
Reasons for cooperation deficits (n=31)

19. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
Innovation deficits
26
Innovation deficits mentioned (n=59)
40,7
28,8
15,3
10,2
5,1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Technology adaption
Automation
Work flow and management
Work organisation
Time management

20. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
Conclusions
27

21. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
Conclusion
 Results indicate that life and wok quality varies more within than between
production systems
 Tendencies show that there exist no relationships between farm size,
(ha AA, herd size), work satisfaction and health
 Main stressors: work volume, strains, generation conflicts, income, policy
 Farms with lower work productivity have a higher time of wealth (higher
workforce and lower MPh per worker)
 Cooperation deficits: higher in non-favorable areas (alpine areas)
 Innovation deficits: building and technology adaptations and automation
 Solutions: Strategies for conflict management (by dialog) between
generations and neighbours and implementation of new
technologies, especially affordable ones (ICT) required
28

22. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler
Projekt „Nachhaltige Milch“
 Projektinhalt des Forschungsprojektes (BMLFUW) (Prof.
Zollitsch):
„ Integrative Bewertung von Merkmalen der ökologischen,
ökonomischen und sozial-ethischen Nachhaltigkeit
landwirtschaftlicher Produktionssysteme am Beispiel
von Milchproduktionssystemen“
29

23. Institut für Landtechnik I Quendler11.04.2013 30
Universität für Bodenkultur Wien
Department für Nachhaltige Agrarsysteme
Institut für Landtechnik
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Elisabeth Quendler MSc
Agnes Strauss, Bakk.techn.
A.o. Prof. Dr. Werner Zollitsch
Peter-Jordan-Straße 82, A-1190 Wien
Tel.: +43 1 47654-3500, Fax: +43 1 47654-3527
http://www.nas.boku.ac.at
elisabeth.quendler@boku.ac.at