'n Kritiese bestuursrekeningkundige evaluering van boerbokboerdery / Fourie W.A.S.
Fourie, Willem Abraham Stefanus
MetadataShow full item record
The aim of this study was firstly to perform, from the existing literature, a SWOT ("Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats") analysis of the boerbok industry. Secondly, to design a case study where a number of management accounting evaluation techniques (i.e. performance measurement (short–term focus), capital investment evaluation (long–term focus) and risk have been identified to compare the financial results of different scenarios between boerbok, sheep and cattle farming. In the case study, Scenarios 1, 2 and 3 assumed a farm size of 200 hectares and capital available of R200 000, R500 000 and R900 000, respectively. Scenarios 4, 5 and 6 assumed a farm size of 500 hectares, with the same capital as the above amounts, respectively; and Scenarios 7, 8 and 9 assumed a farm size of 900 hectares, with the same capital as the above amounts, respectively. The study concluded, from the SWOT analysis, that the boergoat inherently has the potential to be an important source of red meat in future markets. The sum total of the management accounting techniques indicated that the boerbok is in general financially the best specimen choice for farming, e.g. in seven of the nine scenarios it has the highest score. The recommendation is that the user must determine which of performance (short–term), return on capital (long–term) or risk are the most important considerations before a decision is made regarding to the choice of preferred specimen. The study's recommendation is to select boerbok farming in case both short–term financial performance and long–term return on capital are the most important factors. If risk is the major consideration, cattle farming should be selected. If the overall financial analysis outlined in the study is considered, boerbok farming should be selected, followed by sheep farming. Note that these recommendations are made for specific scenarios; therefore, the general recommendation is that each decision–maker should take his/her own unique situation's variables into account in this financial analysis. The limitations of the study, which arose because a number of assumptions were made, are as follows: The results of the investigation are only valid for the Potchefstroom and surrounding areas and, carrying capacity, based on this area's average, may even differ in the area; Dosage is based on the needs of the environment as in January 2011; Buying and selling prices are as at January 2011; The input costs for livestock handling infrastructure may differ, as farming practices and approaches differ; The physical shape of the farm could have a direct impact on the fencing expenditure; Lamb and calf growth percentages may vary as a result of different farming practices and approaches; and The combination of initial capital and farm size may influence the results. As a result of these constraints (assumptions), it is very risky to generalise, but the practical value of the study is that a Microsoft Excel programme was developed, which can be used for calculations, similar to calculations in this study, which is available at the following web address: http://sites.google.com/site/rooivleisvergelyking/. Therefore, variables such as farm size, capital available, carrying capacity, costs and prices can be changed for each unique scenario, and the results will be calculated accordingly. The contribution of this study is that it supports the decision regarding the choice between the types of red meat farming for several unique scenarios, because every land user can determine which of these species are recommended according to the different management accounting evaluation techniques. The value of the study is that it is the first attempt where the viability of three species of red meat farming is compared by means of a case study with different scenarios. The gap for further research that should be done is as follows: The number of evaluation techniques can be extended to give more substance to the results; The number of species in the comparison can be extended; An analysis of the behaviour of costs between the different scenarios can be done; and The optimal combination of farm size and capital available can be determined.
- ETD@PUK