A scattered structure of small pastures has negative effects on profitability in beef enterprises because small enclosures result in high labor costs per livestock unit. Moreover, larger enterprises distribute the costs across more livestock units and hence achieve lower operating costs. Creating larger coherent pastures makes it easier to increase herd size and yields positive effects due to economies of scale. This study on five Swedish organic cow-calf enterprises examined how profitability is affected by creating larger pastures from small scattered pastures and adjacent forest land. Additional income, additional costs, reduced income and reduced costs were taken into account using a partial budgeting technique. A change to larger coherent pastures was found to be profitable for all enterprises examined. Agri-environmental payments and supports were the most important benefit from creating larger pastures, followed by income increases and cost reductions resulting from economies of scale and improved consolidation. Income reductions due to premature final felling (clearcutting of forest land) and the opportunity cost of forest land did not have a major influence. To conclude, creating large coherent pasture-forest mosaics by merging small scattered enclosures is profitable for Swedish organic cow-calf enterprises.

This study compared the profitability when feeding silages of different grass species in enterprises with either dairy cows, beef breed bulls, or beef suckler cows. Traditional (TR) grasses timothy and meadow fescue was compared to the alternative wet-and-drought-resistant (WD) grasses tall fescue, festulolium, and reed canary grass in three different weather scenarios with either normal conditions (Ref), delayed late harvest time due to wet weather conditions (Wet), or decreased grass yield due to dry weather conditions (Dry). Contribution margin calculation was conducted for three geographical regions in Sweden. In the Ref and Wet scenarios, TR was more competitive than WD for dairy cows and beef bulls in all regions. Also in the Dry scenario, TR was more competitive than WD for dairy cows, as the lower production cost of the WD was outweighed by a lower milk yield of cows fed WD compared to cows fed TR. Contrary, for beef bulls, WD gave a higher contribution margin than TR did in the Dry scenario, where the break-even for WD being superior over TR occurred when more than every second year was dry. WD reed canary grass was always more competitive than TR and WD festulolium for beef cows.

Naturbetesmarkerna är en av Sveriges mest artrika miljöer och livsnödvändiga för en stor del av vår flora och fauna. Genom att öka lönsamheten för extensiv naturbetesbaserad djurhållning skulle en större andel av våra naturbetesmarker betas. Idag är skillnaden i lönsamhet mellan att föda upp en mjölkrastjur intensivt på stall och uppfödning av en extensiv stut på bete stor, betydligt större än vad dagens miljöersättningar väger upp. Gårdens naturliga förutsättningar sätter ramen för vilken typ av produktion som är bäst lämpad och påverkar lönsamheten i ungnötsproduktionen. En gård med mycket naturbetesmark med särskilda värden uppvisar en bättre lönsamhet än en gård med mindre andel särskilda värden, tack vare miljöersättningen. Besättningsstorleken är en annan faktor som påverkar lönsamheten, där större besättningar har fler djur att slå ut fasta kostnader på. Politiska beslut, marknadsåtgärder som certifieringar och en anpassning av uppfödningen behövs för att uppnå en lönsamhet i stutuppfödning som är i paritet med intensiva uppfödningsmodeller. Beräkningarna i denna studie visar att en ersättning till stutar på bete behöver ligga på i storleksordningen 3000 – 6000 kronor per djur. Med ett sådant styrmedel skulle utvecklingen kunna styras mot att fler vill föda upp mjölkproduktionens tjurkalvar till betesbaserade stutar.

Profitability in Swedish beef production is low, predominantly because of its small scale and the Nordic climate. The aim of this thesis was to find ways to improve profitability in Swedish beef production. The first study investigated the profitability of creating large pasture enclosures by including adjacent marginal fields and forest to pastureland. The second study examined, aside from different herd sizes, if either indoor bulls or grazing steers were the most profitable in different parts in Sweden. The third study focused on workload in beef cow operations. The fourth study compared profitability when feeding silage based on two different types of grasses to dairy cows, slaughter beef bulls, and beef cows during three different weather scenarios and in different parts of Sweden. The results show that there are economies of scale. Larger pasture enclosures decrease costs per animal. Although the restoration of pastures was expensive and timber production was lost, the action in all investigated cases was profitable overall. Depending on geographic area and natural conditions, bull or steer production were the most profitable. A more profitable steer needs larger incomes and/or less costs linked to the grazing period. Larger beef cow herds generally had a lower workload per cow and year, but there was a massive variation within herd size especially in smaller operations. The relative competitiveness of grass changes in response to more extreme weather conditions that are caused by climate change. Therefore it is important to choose the correct grass species. The results show that beef bulls were profitable with different grasses in different weather conditions. Contrary, profitability in dairy production was highest with traditional grasses under almost all studied weather conditions and profitability was highest with beef cows when their feed contained much fibre. Thereby, this thesis shows different ways to improve profitability in beef production.