His justification for tipping off farmers before MAF visits doesn't stack up....but good to hear he realises the potential damage that Cowboy Crafar and farmers like him pose to our reputation.

Nice one, Bernard!

Good comments above. Let's not forget that this is NZ's biggest dairy farming operation (!) and it is a shambles. Fonterra chose to ignore clear warnings about Sanlu and this situation similarly needed watching.

The potential for damage to Fonterra's and NZ's brand image is obvious.

But lurking in the background is the mindset of this government, Federated Farmers and the NZ libertarians - get rid of burdensome regulation and all will be well.

The Minister's reaction parallels Fonterra's - essentially 'So what?' and 'These people are farmers, so she'll be right'. And calving is practically over, anyway.

So the answer to, "get David Carter for an interview and ask him what he is going to do about this and how it will be avoided again." Sounded a lot like, do what we've already done, do what we always do, but expect different results. Some have called this madness.

http://www.interest.co.nz/ratesblog/index.php/2009/09/28/exclusive-nzs-b...

It's a shame David Carter is demonstrating a lack of apprectiation (judgement) of the potential negative consequence of this reported incident, and possibly what the wider issues, have for the sector - but more importantly the negative impact on the NZ brand as a whole. It looks like weak leadership, again.

Maybe he thinks we as a nation are as isolated from the rest of the world as some think they are from NZ society as a whole:

http://www.interest.co.nz/ratesblog/index.php/2009/09/28/exclusive-nzs-b...

Hence a response that does not seem to evaluate and anticipate the risk others (here) have exposed and acknowledged.

Are we surprised?

What some need to realise is that some firms who are doing their best to export value-added product rely on NZ's collective brand integrity to help them, help us all. For instance one of he finalists featured on TV3 business news this morning as a finalist in NZTE's International Business Awards,

http://www.icecream.co.nz/

(Well done you guys.)

Why is David Carter and governmentnot NOT valuing the efforts of these Kiwi battlers enough to address the integrity of our national brand? These people can't hide behind the apron of Fonterra's brand and pr machine and have taken the risk of to doing what Fonterra has failed dismally (but not surprisingly) to do - add value to what we export.

This is important and urgent enough for a more interventional approach from government.

Get on with it and stop turning a systemic blind eye to your peers and sweeping yet more crap under the carpet.

I dread to think how you would cope with and f&m outbreak - oh, we'll turn a blind eye, cover it up and let the individual entities decide what to do.

You need to read, 'Government for Dummies', I believe Labour have a few spare copies - given back by those who couldn't even understand this little read pre-101 text.

Fontana
"""If any case of deliberate mistreatment of animals is proven by the authorities and appropriate remedial action is not taken, Fonterra will not hesitate to take the strongest action,..."
The Minister
""I think Fonterra needs to be far more proactive than it has been in the past," Carter said..."

Everyone is just passing the buck...
Hey if a few school boys get into a ruckus on the ruby Field, the Rugby union steps in...
If a sports player thumbs another, on or off the Field, they dont wait for a police prosecution..
If a school with basically volunteer trustees plays up or is incompetent, the MOE steps in.

Seems we have all the backbone in this country when it comes to dealing with lay people, but when it comes to high end incompetence, not just mistreatment of animals but numerous and continuing cases of pollution....no backbone.

The powers to be express serious concern as to damaging the Country and Company's repuation.....so serious that they just pass the buck....and doing so do even more damage to reutations...
They cant even come up with a PR spin
Political BS in its extreme.

So we want "nanny state" to intervene?Seems business practise would overcome these problems,"you have bad practise,you get bad returns,you go bust".Yes statutory authorities have to do their job,recidivist criminals get "special" attention from the police,whats the difference here?

Given that Crafar is under obvious financial stress - I wonder if he has had to lay off a few staff and that has contributed to the problem. He probably doesn't have the man power to tend to the animals while he waits for his stock to sell. He would probably be better to just shoot them straight away or leave them with their mothers for a few days. He might end up having to slaughter most his herd if nobody wants stock at the moment.

Falafulu, you certainly have some differing views.

How is Alan a wealth creator?

Essentially there are risks he has taken, whether through the lending from the banks, to the too big too fast situation, to the animal negligence problem, affect us all, ie international perception, systematic banking risk, basic desire to ensure animals arent suffering, that could cause my wealth destruction.

This is how the larger society is punished by the actions of this farm.

Falafulu, you seem to suggest that the Crafar farming empire has created something that wasn't already there? Surely most of this was existing farm land, the only difference being that they are now a conglomerate under one family business, rather than several family businesses. I'm not yet convinced that this conglomerate has added anything to N.Z. other than bidded up land values and associated higher leveraging. I could be wrong though.

Fran O'Sullivan has it right.

Fonterra has been negligant all the way through, in my view. It has been aware of the issues with Crafarms for a long time. It should have been able to assess the risk ( the big buzz occupation in Corporates these days. I would just use the term common sense ) of what could happen if Crafarms did not get it finances worked out. It then should have able to work out what effect this would have on the company's and industry "image". It should then have been getting in behind Allan Crafer behind the scenes to help him out --even if it cost the company abit. This help could have taken many forms --from farm management support , an orderly divestment of some or all of his farms etc. The farmer shareholders want to hold on to their Co-op model. Well they should act like a Co-op and help each other. I thought it was the big ugly Corporates that just let fellow industry participants "burn" so they could pick up the scraps !!

As Fran O'Sullivan says the bankers are showing their "true" colours now -- the going has got a little tough in rural lending , a threat to book values and they don't know what to do. ( or at least their PR spin guys don't know how to mitigate public perception)

First post:

Jacko, you have asked for an explanation and here is a summary that I have put together below. The subject is very complex, where some of the terms used have no way to simply them in English (it can be, but it requires a paragraph or more to explain a single term), so I leave those terms as they are in their scientific origins. However, you can google for those terms, which they're available on the internet. I give some brief comments on my next post, so as not to clutter this one. Some references are also listed (right at the end) as add-on to the list I cited yesterday, so that you can dig further for your self-education on the subject, since I am not here to be a private tutor for you, which means that I am not going to reply further to any comment from you on complexity, because I would view that as private coaching. If you're interested in the domain, then enrol in some Physics or Mathematics courses.

Note , those commentators who don't understand a thing about any topic that I bring up in the discussions here, the easiest for you is to skip the post rather than you trying to read something you don't have a clue about, then moan later that I have been wordsmithing.

===========Definition Summary============

Complexity science, a domain originated in physics when applied to economics is a distinct way of modelling the properties and behavior of socioeconomic systems.

This complexity approach to socioeconomic is a "˜population-level' one. That is it seeks to account for "˜global' or "˜collective' phenomena. It does so in a "˜bottom-up', "˜generative' manner: collective ("˜macroscopic') properties are viewed as the result of interactions at the level of the ("˜microscopic') constituents.

However, the aggregate and its elements are deemed to be of different kinds with causal lives of their own, the former (minimally) being supervenient on the latter.

The elements responsible for the (supervenient) economic properties and behaviour"”that is, the economic agents and their properties"”have strategy and foresight, and therefore respond to the unitary properties and behaviour they create together. This highlights quite starkly one of the reasons why a simple ("˜macro-to-micro' or "˜micro-to-macro') causal story cannot be told about events involving economic systems and economic agents (and complex systems and their parts more generally): the two form a co-evolving pair, updating their behaviour in the light of changes in the others' properties. In this way the "˜micro-macro' disconnect of traditional economic theory is overcome.

Some interesting cases (i.e. where there is complexity) arise in that the aggregate system's properties (and dynamics, laws, etc.) are said to be "˜emergent' in the sense that they are not reducible to some particular configuration of the constituents (and
their properties) despite the fact that some such configurations will be sufficient
for the generation of said properties"”hence, the particular configuration will be
sufficient but not necessary for the production of the emergent property. In other
words, the properties of the complex system are "˜multiply-realizable' by distinct
configurations (physicists labelled this latter property as "˜universality'). Statistical physics is a framework that allows systems consisting of many (possibly
heterogeneous) particles to be rigorously analyzed. In econophysics these techniques are applied to "˜economic particles', namely investors, traders, consumers,
and so on. Markets are then viewed as (macroscopic) complex systems with an
internal (microscopic) structure consisting of many of these "˜particles' interacting
so as to generate the systemic properties (the micro-structural components being
"˜reactive' in this case, as mentioned already, thus resulting in an adaptive complex
system).

By definition of whatever complexity may be, complex systems are supposed to possess some fundamental characteristics and a rough definition is said to be:

a system which is made up of a large number of parts that interact in a non-simple way. In such systems, the whole is more than the sum of its parts, not in an ultimate, metaphysical sense, but in the important pragmatic sense that, given the properties of the parts and the laws of their interaction, it is not a trivial matter to infer the properties of the whole

An economic system contains multiple agents, of different types (producers and consumers; risk averse and risk takers; firms and individuals, etc.), all competing for finite resources of some kind or another, and interacting in such a way as to generate the properties and dynamics of economic systems and subsystems where one finds, for example, scaling and universality, criticality, fractal patterns, and (candidates for) emergent properties.

Here are some necessary conditions for a system to be complex:

#1) A (unit) complex system must contain many subunits (arbitrary number). .
#2) These subunits must be interdependent (at least some of the time). .
#3) The interactions between the subunits must be nonlinear (at least some of the time). .

The properties of the (unit) complex system are understood to be generated by
or supervenient on the properties and interactions of the subunits that constitute
it: there is no difference in the unit system without a difference in the subunits
(though it is possible that a difference in the subunits does not manifest itself at the
unit level). These properties are said to be "˜emergent' when they amount to new
complex ("˜systemic') structure that, in some sense transcend[s] the simpler properties of [its] constituent parts. The subunits need not be identical, and the introduction of heterogeneity can also result in the emergence of higher-order properties of the unit system.

If it is an adaptive complex system then the following condition also applies:

#4) The individual subunits modify their properties and behaviour with respect
to a changing environment resulting in the generation of new systemic properties
that "˜reflect' the change that the environment has undergone. .

If the system is a self-organizing adaptive complex system then the following condition also applies:

#5) The individual subunits modify their own properties and behaviour with respect to the properties and behaviour of the unit system they jointly determine"” in other words, there is "˜downward causation' operating from the systemic properties to the subunits' properties.

========== End Summary ===========

References:

[Lux and Heitger, 2001] T. Lux and F. Heitger. Micro-simulations of financial markets and the stylized fcts. In H. Takayasu, editor, Empirical Science of Financial Fluctuations: The Advent of Econophysics, ages 123"“134. Springer-Verlag, 2001.
[Lux and Marchesi, 1999] T. Lux and M. Marchesi. Scaling and criticality in a stochastic multi-agent model of a financial market. Nature, 397:498"“500, 1999.
[Mantegna and Stanley, 2000] R. N. Mantegna and H.E. Stanley. Introduction to Econophysics: Correlations and Complexity in Finance. Cambridge University Press, 2000.
[Mantegna, 2005] R. N. Mantegna. The value of statistical laws in physics and social sciences. Quantitative Finance, 5(2):133"“140, 2005.
[McCauley, 2004] J. L. McCauley. Dynamics of Markets: Econophysics and Finance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004.
[Merton, 1973] R. Merton. Theory of rational option pricing. The Bell Journal of Economics and
Management Science, 4(1):141"“183, 1973.
[Mirowski, 1989] P. Mirowski. More Heat than Light: Economics as Social Physics, Physics as Nature's Economics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1989.
[Mitchell, 1913] W. N. Mitchell. Business Cycles. Berkeley, 1913.
[Newman, 2005] M. E. J. Newman. Power laws, pareto distributions, and zipf's law. Contemporary Physics, 46(5):323"“351, 2005.
[O'Connor and Wong, 2005] T. O'Connor and H. Y. Wong. The metaphysics of emergence. 39(4):658"“678, 2005.
[Pisarenko and Sornette, 2006] V. Pisarenko and D. Sornette. New statistic for financial return distributions: Power law or exponential? Physica A, 366:387"“400, 2006.
[Plerou et al., 2002] V. Plerou, P. Gopikrishnan, X. Gabaix, and H. E. Stanley. Quantifying stock-price response to demand fluctuations. Physical review E, 66:027104, 2002.
[Rickles, 2007] D. Rickles. Econophysics for philosophers. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 38(4):948"“978, 2007.
[Sober, 1980] E. Sober. Evolution, population thinking, and essentialism. Philosophy of Science,
47(3):350"“383, 1980.
[Sornette, 2003] D. Sornette. Why Stock Markets Crash: Critical Events in Complex Financial Systems. Princeton University Press, 2003.
[Stanley et al., 1996a] H. E. Stanley, V. Afanasyev, L. A. N. Amaral, S. V. Buldyrev, A. L. Goldberger, S. Havlin, H. Leschhorn, P. Maass, R. N. Mantegna, C. K. Peng, P. A. Prince, M. A. Salinger, M. H. R. Stanley, and G. M. Viswanathan. Anomalous fluctuations in the dynamics of complex systems: From dna and physiology to econophysics. Physica A, 224:302"“321, 1996.
[Stanley et al., 1999] H. E. Stanley, L. A. N. Amaral, D. Canning, P. Gopikrishnan, Y. Lee, and Y. Liu. Econophysics: Can physicists contribute to the science of economics? Physica A, 269:156"“169, 1999.
[Stanley et al., 2001] H. E. Stanley, L. A. N. Amaral, P. Gopikrishnan, V. Plerou, and B. Rosenow. Quantifying empirical economic fluctuations using the organizing principles of scale invariance and universality. In H. Takayasu, editor, Empirical Science of Financial Fluctuations: The Advent of Econophysics., pages 3"“11. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2001.
[Stanley et al., 2006] H. E. Stanley, X. Gabaix, P. Gopikrishnan, and V. Plerou. Economic fluctuations and statistical physics: The puzzle of large fluctuations. Nonlinear Dynamics, 44:329"“340, 2006.
[Stanley, 2003] H. E. Stanley. Statistical physics and economic fluctuations: Do outliers exist? Physica A, 318:279"“292, 2003.
[Tesfatsion and Judd, 2006] L. Tesfatsion and K. L. Judd. Handbook of Computational Economics, Volume 2: Agent-Based Computational Economics. North-Holland Publishing Company, 2006.
[Voit, 2005] J. Voit. The Statistical Mechanics of Financial Markets. Springer-Verlag, 2005.
[Zhang, 1998] Y-C Zhang. Evolving models of financial markets. Europhysics News, pages 51"“54, March/April 1998.
[Zhou and Sornette, 2006] W. X. Zhou and D. Sornette. Self-organizing ising model of financial markets. The European Physics Journal B, DOI: 10.1140/epjb/e2006-00391-6:1"“6, 2006.

If you're only cutting and pasting without understanding the content.......how does that count?

Falu = Copy and Paste. The whole board can see you for the idiot you are so please, stop wasting bandwidth and your employers time, and do some real work.

Andy Hamilton said...
yesterday with your intervention you managed to stop the irritating whining sound on the original Crafer's thread and now my computer is doing it again.

Please help.

Andy, I didn't respond yesterday because I have other things to do. Second, it discourages me to debate more since there is a huge gap of knowledge between me and those that would like to debate with me. If I use the proper terms whenever I debate in any of my posts, the likes of you will say that I am wordsmithing. Somehow, you view it that I use those words to shut you down from replying. Here is the issue, it is your shortfall rather than any wordsmithing from me that makes you incompetent to debate. I have debated on global warming issue at the RealClimate site, which is run by some scientists from NASA. Since we all talk in the same language , everyone is opened up to posting their opinions including evidence (for or against) from recent scientific research publications.

My point is , I feel welcome over there, because no one is jumping up and down and moan that some commentators are good at wordsmithing. We all read the same research journals , understand the same mathematical models, understand the same physics, etc,... So, when you debate with those who have a depth of knowledge, there is moaning at all. The only opinion that counts/weighs heavier in comparison to others is the ones that can pinpoint faults in models (inappropriate, inefficient), or new evidence in the literatures, etc. Debating here is different, since people use reason/logic that are too simple (that could be easily falsified - without them knowing) to stand-up to scrutiny, then some will revert to insulting (ie, eating dogs), etc... If you can't defend your position logically, then don't try and being pretentious.

FF to give you a little help> Don't worry, we know you have a high IQ- but that is by far no guarantee to be right all the time. It seems your heart and soul has taken over by your IQ and arrogant personality.

Wally to FF....come back down to earth. "you're a wealth-destroyer while Alan is a wealth creator" A shame you didn't think first before this rant, FF. Time for you to put down the physics 101 paperback and spend some time out on a farm where livestock take precident over profits.

Now it's getting pretty obvious that BH is actually a left wing loony in disguise. Chasing a story by trying to induce a visceral emotive response from the both public and politicians.

Bernard, is truly the Spanish Inquisitor scouring through the effluent in search of some muck that sticks!

What a disgrace you are BH!

And I thought you were a right winger with some common sense. Go join the Labour Party so that we can all truly abhor you!

@Falafulu Fisi, thanks for taking the time to answer my question:- "I note your points made about complex and whole systems on other threads and individual rights on this one. Individual rights to freedom, choice and liberty are important, sure. However, if actions and behaviour occurs emanating from an individual that could potentially, or does, negatively impact on the freedom, choice and liberty of the "˜whole', then how would you expect the "˜complex adaptive system' that we are part of, as a society/economy, to then behave?"

I'll study your answe in more depth at a later date. Anyway, your'e entitled to your opinion. Nice one dude. Anyway as to the crux of the question, "...how would you expect the "˜complex adaptive system' that we are part of, as a society/economy, to then behave?" I was thinking more along the lines of, well, as most people are on these associated blogs, that is, defending their jointly held collective rights to freedom, choice and liberty, as a whole. In particular the rights of the animals involved (they are part of the whole, oh yes they are,) and their rights to trade freely without their livelihood being negatively impacted by the errant behaviour of a peer, or peers in this case. Just as you'd expect a civilised, reasonable collection of peoples in the form of a society, to act. Simple really. Wasn't so complex was it?

So much rope dude, so much rope, and so illuminating.

Have a great day, Jacko.

@Fran O'Sullivan, well said, yet again.

Hamish said...
What latitude do you live at?

I am everywhere.

You have my sympathy.

You don't need to, since I am writing/developing an analytical software system that may help you in your derivative trading (currency options, etc...) if you're a farmer.

Falafulu Fisi,

Could you enlighten me as to whether or not HUMAN GREED or LACK OF SKILL or LACK OF COMMON SENSE figures anywhere in your complex mathematical models you explore? If yes, could you elaborate more on this aspect in those models?

This could of been done more quietly. New Zealand shoots their reputation in the foot by this publicity which if BH was serious about the welfare, should have approached the authorities first for action and then if no actiion was taken could have made it public. Do we need to know this if it is just an isolated incident?

@SA says "This could of been done more quietly. New Zealand shoots their reputation in the foot by this publicity which if BH was serious about the welfare, should have approached the authorities first for action and then if no actiion was taken could have made it public. Do we need to know this if it is just an isolated incident?"

I would have to disagree, if anything the delay in bringing this to light is a concern. Last thing New Zealand wants is 6-12 months down the track some headline reading "New Zealand Dairy Industry Involved in Animal Welfare Cover-up..."

The MAF have already demonstrated their incompetency in handling this case. While I do have concerns in "trial by media", I do believe it now has its place in that:
1.) It is a catalyst to ensure the appropriate authorities "buck their ideas up" and gets done what the public expects.
2.) Bad reputation by media is some cases will be a sufficient deterrent to ensure people don't cross that line into bad territory (info in media never goes away).
3.) Some people simply have no idea what's going on (while many of the comments are opinion, the photos are factual).

I will state my opinion, take it or leave it, but I believe "This incident with the dead and starving calves should never have occurred. The Crafar's history of environmental and animal welfare issues should have caused them to been banned from farming well before now."

Just so you don't miss out,

http://www.interest.co.nz/ratesblog/index.php/2009/09/28/exclusive-nzs-b...

apparently from the guy who gave Bernard the video.

@Falafulu Fisi, some advice - just stop digging dude.

Boston Celtics jerseys
Charlotte Bobcats jerseys

Guys : Can we get back on topic . Descending into personal attacks is not the game , here . Sluggo Spondre can attest to how this degenerates into mindless behaviour , as a victim of assault by Sam Webb , a Crafarm manager . Lack of respect occurred then , and is occurring in some comments here . And lack of respect led to 100+ bobby calves either starving , dehydrating , or ultimately to being bludgeoned to death . Lack of respect !

Interesting revelations from the farmer who spilled the beans.

@Falafulu Fisi, hey dude, I was just trying to be friendly, honest. I will read your stuff, in due course, although I very much doubt it will modify my own answer to the question I asked of you. However I've little doubt the info will be helpful in my quest for knowledge in that area of interest, and also in assisting me in the development my models for the same purpose - thanks, I mean that sincerely. (I'm not using a purlely deterministic method and think that my hydrid approach will be superior and account for the deficiencies caused by the usual assumptions, albeit with reduced accuracy outside specific envelopes of utilisation - know wot I mean?)

Anyway don't forget I've acknowledged your opinion - we, you, us all, are still entitled to expressing free, but respectful speech here.

Chill dude, don't lose it, it ain't worth it.

Thanks again for the info, have a good day, I mean it, Jacko.

Jacko, if you want to catch up for a chat and discussions over a beer about modeling, then perhaps I can pass my contact to Bryan Spondre to pass it to you. I assume that your domain of expertise (economics or market analysts) is somehow overlaps/intersects with what I do? Who knows, it may turn out that we can collaborate (ie, on projects either commercial/non-commercial or just perhaps for mutual interests). I live close to Bryan Spondre, so if you're keen then Bryan can connect us. Sorry for losing my temper, it shouldn't have been directed at you.

Cheers.

@Falafulu Fisi, thanks, but no thanks. On this particular project I'm content to work alone, in isolation, and want my work to remain secret, as I do my identity. G'day.

Like many other Fonterra suppliers for several years I have wished Alan Crafar would step up his game, use the advice services available within the dairy industry and improve systems on the farms he has instead of endlessly chasing land mass and cow numbers or that he would get out of dairying. However, I never wished him and his family the public hanging he's getting now.

If it truly was a farmer who took the video and sent it to BH then I understand the desperation to get authorities to take action but this most recent bobby calf campaign reeks of lobbyists we were warned about and the cynic in me asks is BH one of them or has even he been used by them? Has a trusted economic commentator himself been duped into damming NZ dairying internationally?

Alan Crafar is one out of the box. It is yet to be seen whether this latest round of "breaking the rules" will lead to behaviour changing consequences. No fine or humiliation has been sufficient to achieve change yet. You can bemoan Fonterra and MAF as slow and weak to act but get real, they both have limited authority, what they can do takes time, and they have both tried to help Crafars, not close them down! There is also the business's of Crafars sharemilkers, let alone staff and animals to consider.

Interestingly it is his debts, apparently now equalling his equity that will swiftly see him exit the industry. BH has bemoaned banks loaning to high debt ratios and I generally agree but this case is making me think again. Perhaps we should be encouraging banks to loan to this stage? Maybe it's the quickest way to rid the dairy industry of cowboys who refuse to comply with environmental best management practises. It seems they have the same cowboy attitude to all other farm management practises. Is it a case of give a cowboy a rope and he will hang himself?

Sad saga all round. Here's hoping international damage is not too bad. And oneday, should the penny ever drop for Alan Crafar and he sees the errors he made that ultimately befell him Fonterra could send him around the country to talk to the remaining ignorant & stubborn few who pull NZ's generally fantastic dairy industry down.

Is the carfar group a vehicle dealership off-shoot of the Crafar's then? Lord help us if they are now in the 2nd hand car market too......we should be told.

Andy - I like it, yes bit of a worry this car far group

ex Rural Banker - Hopefully Bank is just the surname