Universität Osnabrück

Fachbereich Mathematik/Informatik





FARMSIM: A dynamic model for the simulation of yields, nutrient cycling and resource flows on Philippine small-scale farming systems


Diplomarbeit zur Erlangung des Grades eines Diplom-Systemwissenschaftlers

vorgelegt von

Jörg Schaber
Wesereschstr. 43
49084 Osnabrück

betreut von

Prof. Dr. M. Matthies, Institut für Umweltsystemforschung, Osnabrück
und
Prof. Dr. H. Bossel, Wissenschaftliches Zentrum für Umweltsystemforschung, Kassel


[ Homepage ] [ CHIEF-Projekt ] [ PIK ]

Contents

1 Introduction

1.1 The Necessity of Integrated Resource Management (IRM)
1.2 Aquaculture as an example for IRM
1.3 The Participatory Research Appraisal
1.4 Models of Integrated Farming Systems

2 Development of the Farm Model

2.0 The Modeling Procedure
2.1 The Conceptual Model
Introduction
Data and Methods
Results

2.2 The Rice Model
Introduction
Description of the Model
Verification and long-term stability
Sensitivity analysis
Validation
Discussion

2.3 The Fishpond Model
Introduction
Experiment design and data collection
Statistical Analysis
Results
Implementation
Verification and long-term stability
Sensitivity analysis
Validation
Discussion
2.4 Pigs and Chicken
Introduction
Description of the Model
Implementation
Verification and long-term stability
Sensitivity analysis
Data for calibration and validation
Calibration
Validation
Discussion
2.5 Buffalos and Bundweeds
Introduction
Data and Methods
Results
Buffalos
Verification and long-term stability
Sensitivity
Validation of the Bundweed Model
Discussion
2.6 Integration of the Submodels
Verification and long-term stability

3 Simulation of a Philippine small-scale Farm

3.1 Modeling three scenarios
Sensitivity analysis
3.2 Discussion

4 Conclusion

5 Outlook

6 Summary

Acknowledgments

7 Literature

8 Appendices

8.1 The STELLA user interface of FARMSIM
8.2 Alphabetical list of all acronyms of FARMSIM
8.3 Description of the raw data tables used and provided with the thesis
8.4 Complete STELLA - listing of FARMSIM


List of all figures and tables

Figures

  1. Fig.: Before and after Integration: bioresource flows between resource systems, Philippines.
    Source, ICLARM, Manila
  2. Fig.: Time series performance indicators by season, Philippines.
    Source:Lightfoot et al.1993).
  3. Fig.: Farming system performance indicators kites before and after integration, Philippines.
    Source:Lightfoot et al.(1993)
  4. Fig.: Overall global radiation use coefficient as a function of leaf nitrogen
  5. Fig.: Overall global radiation use coefficient as a function of incident radiation
  6. Fig.: Overall leaf nitrogen use coefficient as a function of leaf nitrogen
  7. Fig.: Overall leaf nitrogen use coefficient as a function of incident radiation
  8. Fig.: Fertilizer application scheme
  9. Fig.: The relation between max. Length and daily nitrogen input
  10. Fig.: max. Length in relation to average early morning water temperature
  11. Fig.: early morning water temperature throughout the year
  12. Fig.: Relation between max. Length, water temperature and N input into the pond
  13. Fig.: Simulated av. water temperatures versus measured average water temperatures
  14. Fig.: Simulated versus measured fish lengths
  15. Fig.: Ad Libitum feeding functions
  16. Fig.: Ad Libitum growth functions
  17. Fig.: The growth phase plane
  18. Fig.: Pig growth data
  19. Fig.: Pig growth data
  20. Fig.: Pig growth data
  21. Fig.: Fitting pig growth data to Parks model
  22. Fig.: Simulated and measured pig weights
  23. Fig.: Fitting pig growth data to the logistic function
  24. Fig.: Harvest of bundweeds throughout the year
  25. Fig.: Bundweed growth regression
  26. Fig.: Average daily temperature from 1990-1093
  27. Fig.: Simulated and measured weed growth of farm 1
  28. Fig.: Conceptual flow diagram of the simulated farm
  29. Fig.: Fertilizer application scheme
  30. Fig.: Fishpond fertilization parameters
  31. Fig.: Growth efficiency analysis of pigs
  32. Fig.: Illustration of integrating more enterprises and subsystems into FARMSIM
  33. Fig.: The FARMSIM user interface
Tables

  1. Tab.: As a first step towards formulating the conceptual model,
    the considered farm is defined in space. Also the main submodels are identified
  2. Tab.: The flows of the considered enterprises for an average small-scale farm
  3. Tab.: Sensitivity analysis of the rice model. For each level and
    each parameter only the larger sensitivity S of the two model runs is tabulated
  4. Tab.: Agroecological productivity for four different rice farms;
    measured and simulated results. Productivity data taken from Dalsgaard (1996)
  5. Tab.: The livestock-fish experiments considered in the regression analysis
  6. Tab.: Set of experiments and ponds that were used for analysis of the influence
    of environmental factors and management strategies on Tilapia growth performance
  7. Tab.: Comparison of the final parameters of formula 2.1 and the parameters using
    a slightly different data set in the regression analysis
  8. Tab.: Sensitivity analysis of the parameters of Eqn. 2.1 at two different
    reference values and two different levels
  9. Tab.: Sensitivity analysis for the pig and chicken model
  10. Tab.: Calibration results of fitting the pig growth model to the
    experimental data of Exp. 3-4, Exp. 5 and both
  11. Tab.: Aggregated bundweed data, taken from working notes and raw data
    from P. Dalsgaard and B. Oficial, collected on four different smallholder rice farms during WS 94 and DS 95
  12. Tab.: Average nitrogen contents as used in FARMSIM
  13. Tab.: Farm simulation Scenario 1. Monocultural rice farm with low diversity and no recycling
  14. Tab.: Farm simulation Scenario 2. Diversified farm
  15. Tab.: Farm simulation Scenario 3. Fully integrated farm with recycling all farm by-products
  16. Tab.: The combined effects of certain sections and parameters on overall nitrogen
    efficiency and selected state variables. The standard nitrogen efficiency value of scenario 1 is 13.59 %
  17. Tab.: The combined effects of number of pigs and feeding regime on
    nitrogen efficiency and pig production. Standard efficiency of scenario 2 is 18.73 %
  18. Tab.: The combined effects of different fishpond management
    strategies on the overall nitrogen efficiency and fish yields. Standard efficiency of scenario 3 is 21.57 %