LSIRD NAPLIO CONFERENCE ABSTRACTS
On-farm processing of the products of livestock systems

Brian J. Revell & Martine François


The paper reports on an EU funded study into on-farm processing of milk and meat products in Belgium, France, Germany and the UK and into consumer attitudes and purchasing behaviour towards such products. The product ranges encompassed such items as pasteurised milk, yoghurts, cheeses, butter, cream, ice-cream, charcuterie, meat cuts, and smoked meats from cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, poultry and game species.

There have been many studies of farm diversification as a means of maintaining farm incomes and economic activity in remoter rural regions, but none hitherto specific to on-farm processing and adding value to the original raw material. The paper outlines the scale and distribution of on-farm processing of livestock products, the impact it can have on the farming business, household income and the contribution to rural employment it may make.

The number of farm businesses processing were small, and estimated to represent between only 1,5-2,0 percent of holdings in the UK and Germany. All surveyed farms which processed were larger than the national average in terms of utilisable agricultural area, with the largest in the UK, and most were in conventional agricultural production. Processing represented an important and generally growing share of household income (revenue), and ranged from 28 percent of total income in Belgium to 60 percent in France. Gross value added varied widely between countries and products, although not every processed product achieved high added value (or even any added value).With the exception of the UK, labour in processing was largely from household members and comprised 0.5-1.5 full time equivalents. The larger scale UK farm-processors employed an average of 6 full time equivalents in meat processing and 12 in dairy processing. On balance, most on-farm processors were relatively optimistic about their future although many had initially experienced start-up difficulties relating to sanitary and hygiene controls and finding market outlets.

Consumers were perhaps more aware of the market for on-farm processed products than might be expected a priori. Between one-third and 60 percent of consumers from representative samples in each study country had purchased on-farm processed products during the previous year, although only about 10 percent of consumers were regular purchasers. There is evidence from other consumer survey data that although small, the farm-processed food market is growing and the study revealed that the potential market for such products can be increased further given attention to strategies for pricing, promotion and distribution. Farm processors did face competition from industrial products with a farmhouse image. The artisanal image of such farm-processed products is thus fragile and may be exacerbated in many continental European countries if direct contact is lost between producer and consumer. This poses the question and dilemma as to whether farm-processed products can ever possess the potential for substantial market growth without moving to a larger scale in production and distribution, and thereby jeopardising the specialist farm-produced image.

B J Revell

Dept of Agricultural and Rural Economics,
Scottish Agricultural College,
581 King St,
Aberdeen , AB24 5UD. UK

M François

Group de Recherche et d'Echanges Technologiques,
211-213 rue La Fayette,
75010 Paris
France