1 / 20

Evaluating labour requirements within a multi-objective land use planning tool

Evaluating labour requirements within a multi-objective land use planning tool. Keith Matthews, Kevin Buchan, Andy Dalziel MODSIM 2003. Introduction. Multi-functional land management Roles for research and decision support systems (DSS) Resource Scheduling Tool (RST)

tesch
Download Presentation

Evaluating labour requirements within a multi-objective land use planning tool

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evaluating labour requirements within a multi-objective land use planning tool Keith Matthews, Kevin Buchan, Andy Dalziel MODSIM 2003

  2. Introduction Multi-functional land management Roles for research and decision support systems (DSS) Resource Scheduling Tool (RST) Importance of labour and capital equipment Financial viability of alternative land use strategies Social impacts – amount and quality of employment Social sustainability

  3. Pareto-optimality

  4. Comparing DSS with practitioner allocations F-2 (Diversity) AG-2 (Closest) E1-2 (Financial)

  5. Resource Scheduling Tool (RST) Schedules of resource use for land use plans Resources – labour and capital equipment Labour Full-, part-, seasonal- Normal-time, over-time, limits(?) Wage cost Skills determining tasks that can undertake Capital equipment Determines work rates Compatibility constraints Replacement lifespan, depreciation Repair, running and legal costs

  6. Resource Scheduling Tool (RST) Schedules of tasks performed by or using the resources Tasks – defined from the pattern of land use and management Magnitude Land area, weight of material or numbers of livestock Prerequisites Chaining tasks – e.g. preparation for arable crops Start-to-start relationships Resources required Part of the definition of the management regimen Can be all or part contracted Prioritised Animal welfare, high financial impacts, maintenance Time-windows Fixed start and completion dates, weather effects Earliest completion with normal-time

  7. RST Architecture

  8. RST operations Implemented as steps, transitions and transfers

  9. RST operations Tasks allocated resources in steps 2-7

  10. RST operations Tasks in ready queue – depend on the scheduler clock Clock steps by week Time taken – sub hour When within week – not determined Sub-hourly precision but weekly resolution Tasks that can be completed in the week allowing for inefficiency (%)

  11. RST operations Within the week tasks scheduled by priority Base and Variable Base from task type Variable – heuristics Tasks less complete Tasks closer to deadlines Variable is float – so no tie breaking

  12. RST operations Resources allocated to prioritised tasks - heuristics Labour with most unallocated time Prime movers of minimum size Implements with fastest work rates Maximum single allocation – parameter Minimum allocation other than to complete.

  13. RST operations Task blocking – through lack of resources for prerequisites Prerequisite cannot be completed, so partially contracted – at the earliest date The follow-on tasks are then be reconsidered For example a three man task may block a two man unnecessarily Rollback where resource constraints within windows can be problematical

  14. RST Raw Outputs WORK done by resources DateSub-scheduleJobIDUnits WrkdTotal UnitsCostResourceHrs WorkedRes CostNT/OT 01/01/2003Upland Sheep (Inside Feeding)Silage Feed Inside191716193.036193.0435.69Upland Sheep Silage 4.50NT 01/01/2003Upland Sheep (Inside Feeding)Silage Feed Inside191716193.036193.0435.69Full Time Shepherd4.535.69NT 01/01/2003Suckler Cattle (Spring Calving)Silage Feeding191717284.004284307.7975hp Tractor19.87150.22NT 01/01/2003Suckler Cattle (Spring Calving)Silage Feeding191717284.004284307.79Full Time Stockman19.87157.57NT 01/01/2003Suckler Cattle (Spring Calving)Silage Feeding191717284.004284307.79Loader (Attachment)19.870NT 01/01/2003Suckler Cattle (Spring Calving)Silage Feeding191717284.004284307.79Sucker Cattle Silage 19.870NT 01/01/2003Spring BarleyPloughing191718915.25899.4Full Time 30237.9NT 01/01/2003Spring BarleyPloughing191718915.25899.4Plough (2 furrow)30434.7NT 01/01/2003Spring BarleyPloughing191718915.25899.475hp Tractor30226.8NT 01/01/2003Spring BarleyPloughing1917196.25415.25625.09Full Time Shepherd20.85165.34NT 01/01/2003Spring BarleyPloughing1917196.25415.25625.09Plough (2 furrow)20.85302.12NT 01/01/2003Spring BarleyPloughing1917196.25415.25625.0975hp Tractor20.85157.63NT 08/01/2003Upland Sheep (Inside Feeding)Silage Feed Inside191720193.036193.0435.69Upland Sheep Silage 4.50NT 08/01/2003Upland Sheep (Inside Feeding)Silage Feed Inside191720193.036193.0435.69Full Time Stockman4.535.69NT 08/01/2003Suckler Cattle (Spring Calving)Silage Feeding191721284.004284307.79Sucker Cattle Silage 19.870NT 08/01/2003Suckler Cattle (Spring Calving)Silage Feeding191721284.004284307.79Loader (Attachment)19.870NT 08/01/2003Suckler Cattle (Spring Calving)Silage Feeding191721284.004284307.7975hp Tractor19.87150.22NT 08/01/2003Suckler Cattle (Spring Calving)Silage Feeding191721284.004284307.79Full Time 19.87157.57NT 08/01/2003Upland Sheep (General)Scanning191722193.036193.0447.1Full Time Shepherd5.9447.1NT 08/01/2003Upland Sheep (General)Scanning191722193.036193.0447.1Scanning Equipment5.940NT 15/01/2003Upland Sheep (Inside Feeding)Silage Feed Inside191723193.036193.0435.69Full Time Stockman4.535.69NT 15/01/2003Upland Sheep (Inside Feeding)Silage Feed Inside191723193.036193.0435.69Upland Sheep Silage 4.50NT 15/01/2003Suckler Cattle (Spring Calving)Silage Feeding191724284.004284307.7975hp Tractor19.87150.22NT 15/01/2003Suckler Cattle (Spring Calving)Silage Feeding191724284.004284307.79Full Time 19.87157.57NT 15/01/2003Suckler Cattle (Spring Calving)Silage Feeding191724284.004284307.79Loader (Attachment)19.870NT 15/01/2003Suckler Cattle (Spring Calving)Silage Feeding191724284.004284307.79Sucker Cattle Silage 19.870NT 15/01/2003Upland Sheep (General)Trimming191725193.036193.0451.07Upland Sheep Foot 6.440NT 15/01/2003Upland Sheep (General)Trimming191725193.036193.0451.07Full Time Shepherd6.4451.07NT

  15. RST Application Hartwood Farm – research station – N. Lanarkshire, Scotland. 350 cattle, 1200 sheep, 15 ha arable, 23 ha broadleaves

  16. RST Results Dominant demand by labour intensive cattle operations Front loading of schedule and conflict between cattle and sheep enterprises Low overall utilisation (60%) – but peaking Woodlands possibly significant Alternative cattle regimens

  17. Resource trade-offs – E1-2 – Estate Owner

  18. Resource trade-offs – BA1 – Bank Advisor

  19. Resource trade-offs – G1-2 - Extensification

  20. RST Conclusions Significant potential for RST especially when linked to multi- objective land use planning tools Roles in counter-factual analysis, social learning or conflict resolution Land use planning is highly multi-objective and any system should be able to evaluate the trade-off between objectives and present a range of alternatives Assessing the significant metrics can be difficult

More Related