Reduction of the Economic Risk by Adaptation Measures to Alleviate Heat Stress in Confined Buildings for Growing-Fattening Pigs Modelled by a Projection for Central Europe in 2030

Economic risks for livestock production are caused by volatile commodities and market conditions, but also by environmental drivers such as increasing uncertainties due to weather anomalies and global warming. These risks impact the gross margin of farmers and can stimulate investment decisions. For confined pig and poultry production, farmers can reduce the environmental impact by implementing specific adaptation measures (AMs) to reduce heat stress. A simulation model driven by meteorological data was used to calculate indoor climate for 1981 to 2017. This dataset was extrapolated for a projection in the year 2030. The heat stress was calculated for a business-as-usual livestock building and for several AMs. For 2030, the expected value of the reduction of the gross margin was calculated by EUR 3.98 a(-1) per animal place for the business-as-usual scenario. The results show that only energy-saving adaptation measures to reduce the inlet air temperature are appropriate to reduce the economic risk to the level of the year 1980 between EUR 0.03 a(-1) and EUR 1.02 a(-1) per animal place. The efficiency of other AMs to reduce heat stress is distinctly lower (between EUR 2.62 a(-1) and EUR 3.80 a(-1) per animal place). The results in this study can support the decision making of farmers concerning adaptation management and investments. It can inform agricultural policy design as well as technological development.

Automated summary

Economic risks in livestock production are caused by volatile commodities, market conditions, and environmental factors such as weather anomalies and global warming. This study examines the impact of specific adaptation measures on reducing heat stress and economic risks in confined pig and poultry production. The results show that energy-saving adaptation measures are most effective in reducing economic risks, while other measures have lower efficiency. This study has implications for farmers' decision making, agricultural policy design, and technological development.