Influence of decision-making upon the productive manner of ovine in São Sepé – RS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2236130810823Keywords:
Sheep, Decision-making, Productive managementAbstract
For a sheep production to be effective, they must apply the basic technical criteria of production, i.e. identify the type of product being produced, define the goals, the race to be created, number of animals depending on the size of the area, and the management practices appropriate to the production system chosen by the producer. The objective of this study is to analyze what are the factors that the sheep producers of São Sepé-RS use as decision-making in the sheep industry. Initially, a literature review was performed in order to characterize the agents and processes involved. Subsequently, we analyzed statistical data of sheep production in the city of São Sepé-RS. With this information, semi-structured forms have been applied in locu a sample of eight participating agents in productive chain, on 31 January and February 1, 2012. The results show that the management and accounting control of property are fundamental to assist in decision-making, both of agro-industrial organisations and rural properties, involving the production processes and their control. It is therefore concluded that the decision at the time of application of some kind of management requires knowledge and decision power.Downloads
References
CHAVES, R. Q. de. Tomada de decisão e empreendedorismo rural: um caso da exploração comercial de ovinos de leite. Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Desenvolvimento Regional, v. 6, n. 3, p. 3-21, setdez/2010, Taubaté, SP, Brasil.
DRIVER, M. J.; BROUSSEAU, K. R.; HUNSAKER, P. L. HOONEY, G. The dynamic decision-maker: five decision styles for executive and business success. New York: Harper and Row, 1990. 264p.
DUTRA, A. S.; MACHADO, J. A. D.; RATHMANN, R. O Processo decisório de implantação de estrutura de armazenagem de soja ao nível de propriedade rural na região de Santo Ângelo/RS. ZLVI SOBER – Rio Branco – AC, Jul-2008.
DUTRA, A. S.; MACHADO, J. A. D.; RATHMANN, R. Alianças estratégicas e visão baseada em recursos: Um enfoque sistêmico do processo de tomada de decisão nas propriedades rurais. ZLVI SOBER – Rio Branco – AC, Jul-2008.
FAOSTAT. FAO Statistics Division, 2010. Disponível em: http://faostat.fao.org/site/573/DesktopDefault.aspx PageID=573#ancor. Acesso em: fevereiro de 2012.
LAZZARINI, S. G. Estudo de caso para fins de pesquisa: aplicabilidade e aplicações do método. In: FARINA, M. M. Q. (Coord.). Estudos de caso em agribusiness. São Paulo: Pioneira, 1997. p. 9-23.
LEIBENSTEIN, H. Beyond economic man. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1976.
OLIVEIRA, L. M.; MACHADO, J. A. D.; SHNORREMBERGER, A. A informação e o processo decisório do produtor rural. LVI SOBER – Londrina-PR, Jul-2007.
RATHMANN, R. et al. Uma proposta de estrutura analítica sistêmica para o estudo da decisão nos agronegócios. XLV SOBER – Londrina – PR, Jul 2007.
SIMON, H. A. Administrative behavior. New York: MacMillam, 1945.
SIMON, H. A. Models of discovery. Dordrecht: Holland, D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1977.
SIMON, H. A. Comportamento administrativo: estudo dos processos decisórios nas organizações administrativas. Rio de Janeiro: Fundação Getúlio Vargas, 1970.
VAZ, C.M.S.L.; KALIL, R.G.; VILLARROEL, A.S. Sistema de Criação de Ovinos nos Ambientes Ecológicos do Sul do Rio Grande Do Sul. Embrapa Pecuária Sul Sistema de Produção. Versão Eletrônica. 2008. Disponível em: http://sistemasdeproducao.cnptia.embrapa.br/FontesHTML/Ovinos/CriacaoOvinosAmbientesEcologicosSulRioGrandeSul/racas.htm#topo. Acesso em: 15 jan. 2012.
YIN, Robert K. Estudo de Caso, planejamento e métodos. 2.ed. São Paulo: Bookman, 2001.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Ethical guidelines for journal publication
The REMOA is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
