• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Abstract
 Table of Contents
 Main
 Appendix






Group Title: Economic information report
Title: The economic impact of the sugar industry in South Florida
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00026504/00001
 Material Information
Title: The economic impact of the sugar industry in South Florida
Series Title: Economic information report - University of Florida. Food and Resource Economics Dept. ; 173
Physical Description: ii, 23 p. : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Mulkey, W. David
Gordon, John R.
Publisher: Food & Resource Economics Dept., Agricultural Experiment Stations and Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville Fla
Publication Date: November, 1982
Copyright Date: 1982
 Subjects
Subject: Sugarcane industry -- Economic aspects -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Sugar trade -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: W. David Mulkey, John R. Gordon.
General Note: Cover title.
General Note: "November 1982"
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00026504
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: notis - AHF8752
alephbibnum - 001545234
oclc - 18650104

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Title Page
    Abstract
        Page i
    Table of Contents
        Page ii
    Main
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
    Appendix
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
Full Text

W. David Mulkey Economic Information

John R. Gordon AY Report 173




The Economic Impact of the
Sugar Industry in South Florida
























Food t Resource Economics Department
Agricultural Experiment Stations and November 1982
Cooperative Extension Service
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida, Gainesville 32611















ABSTRACT


An input-out-put study of the economic impact of the sugar industry is
presented for the Glades, Hendry, Martin and Palm Beach County sugar produc-
ing area of South Florida. Estimates of the impact of the sugar industry on
employment, income and gross sales are presented for the four-county area.

Key words: sugar, input-output, economic impact, multipliers.



































i
















TABLE OF CONTENTS


PAGE

ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . ... ....... i

SUMMARY. . . . . . . . . ... ......... 1.

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . ... . . . . 2

SUGARCANE PRODUCTION . . . . . . . . ... . .. 3

DIRECT ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF SUGARCANE PRODUCTION AND PROCESSING 3

GROSS SALES: DIRECT, INDIRECT AND INDUCED IMPACTS . . . 8

EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME: DIRECT, INDIRECT AND INDUCED IMPACTS 12

LOCAL IMPACT OF OFFSHORE WORKERS . . . . . . .... .15

APPENDIX . . . . . . . . ... ......... .17





















ii













THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE SUGAR INDUSTRY IN SOUTH FLORIDA1

David Mulkey and John Gordon

SUMMARY


Over the period 1978-1980 cash receipts for sugarcane increased from

over $168 million to more than $234 million, and in 1980, represented 6.2

percent of the value of farm commodities produced in Florida. In the sugar

producing area of Glades, Hendry, Martin and Palm Beach Counties the relative

importance of sugarcane is more pronounced. In 1979 sugarcane accounted

for more than 30 percent of cash receipts in Glades and Palm Beach Counties,

more than 20 percent inHendry County, and 4 percent in Martin County.

Beyond its relatively large contribution to cash receipts in the four-

county sugar productionarea, the production of sugarcane and associated sugar

milling operations make a significant contribution to the local economy.

Sugarcane producing and sugar milling operations provided the equivalent of

over 10 thousand jobs in the four-county area and together produced products

valued at more than $870 million in 1980. More importantly, the sugar

processing sector produced products for sale outside the region which were

valued at more than $507 million. The sales multiplier for sugar is 2.33,

or for each one dollar in sugar sales outside the area, an additional $1.33



This study was financed by a grant from the Florida Sugar Cane League,
Inc., Clewiston, Florida.


DAVID MULKEY is associate professor of food and resource economics.
JOHN GORDON is professor of food and resource economics.


1






2


in sales are generated locally. Thus the local impact of the sugar industry

on gross sales in the four-county area exceeds $1.1 billion (7.2 percent of

total gross sales in the area).

The sugar industry also has a multiplier effect on local employment and

income. Through direct, indirect and induced activity the sugar industry

generates the equivalent of over 16 thousand local jobs (6.5 percent of local

employment). In terms of income the sugar processing sector generates income

directly in excess of $45 million. With a local income multiplier of 3.00

this amounts to more than $137 million in local income. This includes income

generated in sugarcane production and in other local businesses which provide

services to the sugar industry or its employees.


INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this paper is to provide information on the economic

impact of the sugar industry in the four-county sugar producing area of South

Florida (Glades, Hendry, Martin and Palm Beach Counties). The results update

an earlier study of the economic role of the sugar industry completed in

1979 and based on 1976 data.2 Results reported here are based on 1980 data.

In terms of cash receipts the sugar industry is compared to other agricultural

commodities in the state of Florida and in the four-county sugar producing

area. Also, input-output multipliers are used to assess the total economic

impact (direct, indirect and induced) of sugarcane and raw sugar production

in the four-county area.



David Mulkey and John' Gordon, "The Economic Importance of the Sugar
Industry in South Florida," Staff Paper 117, Food and Resource Economics
Department,.IFAS, University of Florida, February 1979.






3



SUGARCANE PRODUCTION


Tables 1 and 2 allow an assessment of the relative importance of sugar-

cane as an agricultural commodity. Table 1 presents data on cash receipts

at the farm level for eleven separate commodity groups in Florida for the

three-year period 1978-1980. Over this period, the value of sugarcane

increased from $168 million to $234.2 million and in 1980 represented 6.2

percent of the total value of agricultural commodities produced in the

state.

Table 2 provides data on cash receipts for the same 11 commodity

groups in Glades, Hendry, Martin and Palm Beach Counties for 1979. Here

the relative contribution of sugarcane is more pronounced. Sugarcane is a

major crop in three of the four counties representing, respectively, 30, 22

and 31 percent of total cash receipts in Glades, Hendry and Palm Beach Counties.

The overall contribution in the four counties represents in excess of 26

percent of cash receipts. Thus, sugarcane is a major agricultural commodity

both in the sugar producing region and in the state as a whole. Total economic

impacts, however, extend far beyond the farm level values reported in Tables

1 and 2. Additional economic activity is generated by the processing and

production of raw sugar and by sugar industry purchases of labor and other

inputs in the local economy. These impacts are considered in the following

sections.


DIRECT ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF SUGARCANE PRODUCTION AND PROCESSING


The direct impact of sugarcane and sugar production and the relative

importance of this impact can be evaluated by examining employment and output








Table l.--Agricultural cash receipts by commodities in Florida, 1978-1930



1978 1979 1980

Percent Percent Percent
of of of
Commodity Value Total Value Total Value Total

($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000)

1. Cattle and Calves 357,850 10.4 423,721 11.0 347.705 9.1

2. Dairy Products 247,261 7.2 286,822 7.4 318,203 8.4

3. Poultry and Poultry Products 184,222 5.4 213,340 5.5 214,235 5.6

4. Other Livestock 60,225 1.8 77,837 2.0 75,794 2 0

5. Nursery and Greenhouse 321,407 9.3 348,445 9.0 339,095 8.9

6. Tomatoes 182,901 5.3 241,543 6.3 229,064 6.0

7. Other Vegetables 433,535 12.6 524,967 13.6 521,241 13.7

8. Sugarcane 168,909 4.9 197,071 5.1 234,235 6.2

9. Oranges 1,045,266 30.4 1,029,111 26.7 935,647 24.6

10. Grapefruit and Other Citrus 192,802 5.6 245,322 6.3 309,251 8,1

11. Other Crops 243,418 7.1 272,135 7.1 279,805 7.4

Total 3,437,796 100.0 3,860,314 100.0 3,804,275 100.0


Source: Economic Indicators of the Farm Sector: State Income and Balance Sheet Statistics, 1979,
USDA March, 1981.







5




Table 2.--Value of agricultural sales by commodity, Glades, Hendry,
Martin, and Palm Beach Counties, 1979 ($1,000)



Crop Glades Hendry Martin Palm Beach

Cattle 12,654 27,789 6,532 20,198

Dairy Products 6,828 224 4,575 11,526

Poultry 25 58 4 201

Other Livestock 183 355 827 755

Nursery 0 1,201 7,399 49,424

Tomatoes 0 20,424 0 18,693

Other Vegetables 3,767 21,145 3,448 213,379

Sugarcanea 11,704 34,302 3,138 147,927

Oranges 3,246 40,180 36,720 13,274

Other Citrus 206 10,070 7,401 6,602

Other Crops 0 5 60 2,410

Total 38,613 155,753 70,104 484,389



Percentages of total accounted for by sugarcane are, respectively,
30 percent, 22 percent, 4 percent and 31 percent. Percentage-of total
cash receipts for the four counties is 26.3 percent.

Source: County estimates of cash receipts prepared by members of
the Food and Resource Economics Department, University of Florida.






6


data for the four-county area. These data are presented in Table 3 for

14 sectors of the four-county economy. Gross output (sales) are estimated

to exceed $17 billion with a total employment in excess of 266 thousand jobs.

Of this, sugarcane production and processing together account for more than

10 thousand jobs and in excess of $870 million in gross output. Data

reported in Table 3 come from a variety of sources, and in some cases final

figures are only estimates. Thus some discussion of the sources of data

used in this report is in order at this point,

Data on output for the agricultural sectors are from county estimates

based on state farm income statistics (see source notes Tables 1 and 2).

Employment data for agricultural sectors are generally not available and

must be estimated. The estimation procedure for agricultural employment

was based on national reports of man hours required and cash receipts by

crop (Agricultural Statistics 1981), Two thousand hours were considered the

equivalent of a full-time employee and national output per worker coefficients

were derived for each agricultural sector in the nation. These coefficients

were then used with output data to estimate full-time equivalent agricultural

employment in the four-county study area. Again, it is important to note

that agricultural employment data represent estimates of full-time equivalent

employees and as such, are not an actual count of the number of workers

involved in agricultural production.

Employment data for the nonagricultural sectors are based on Florida

Department of Labor and Employment Security data (provided by the Bureau of

Economics and Business Research, University of Florida). Output for these

sectors was estimated using:local employment data and national output per






7


Table 3.--Estimates of employment and gross output, by sector
Glades, Hendry, Martin and Palm Beach Counties, 1980


Sector Employmenta Gross Output


1. Livestock 932 83,846,199

2. Sugarcane 5,824 234,234,000

3. Fruits and Vegetables 14,229 449,289,546

4. Forestry and Fishery 28b 355,174

5. Agricultural Forestry,
Fishery Service 4,778 162,331,412

6. Mining 64 7,721,260

7. Construction 24,466 1,413,072,440

8. Food Products 696 69,019,165

9. Sugar 5,017 636,389,600

10. Other Manufacturing 12,148 625,479,816

11. Transportation,
Communication and Utilities 9,521 580,773,459

12. Trade 43,052 1,033,205,453

13. Services and Government 145,489 4,792,619,974

14. Households -- 6,948,000,000c


266,244 17,065,363,243


aData for the agricultural sectors represent full-time equiv-
alent employment estimated using national data on manpower require-
ments and output for the agricultural sectors.
Data here do not reflect employment in commercial fisheries in
Palm Beach County. The omission is not large enough to change the
results of the input-output study.
CTotal personal income.






8


worker coefficients for each industry.3 For the sugar processing sector

output values were provided by officials of the Florida sugar industry.

Output values for the manufacturing and service sectors represent the

dollar value of goods and services produced. For the trade and transporta-

tion sectors output represents the value of the appropriate margins, and in

the government sectors, output values represent the value of expenditures.

Output value for the household sector is equivalent to total personal income

and is considered a sale of labor service.

GROSS SALES: DIRECT, INDIRECT AND INDUCED IMPACTS

Data presented in the previous section allow only a limited comparison

of the direct impact of local industries. This section looks beyond direct

impacts at the total impact of an industry on the local economy. Included

are the direct sales activity of the industry in question, sales associated

with the purchase of inputs and labor by the industry and sales associated

with the spending of employee income in the local area.

To measure total economic impact, input-output multipliers are estimated

for each industry in the local economy.4 These multipliers for gross sales

(output) are reported in Table 3 for 47 sectors in the Glades, Hendry,

Martin and Palm Beach area economy. Each multiplier measures the total

local sales associated with a one dollar sale outside the local economy by

the given industry. For example, the multiplier for sugar processing is 2.33.



3Employment and output data were estimated for 52 sectors in the four-
county area. These data are aggregated for reporting purposes in Table
3. See Appendix Table 1 for a complete listing of sectors.

4Details of the estimation procedure are available from the authors.







9


Table 4:--Gross sales multipliers, by sector, for the economic
region of Glades, Hendry, Martin & Palm Beach Counties,
1980


Sector Multiplier


1. Cattle and Other Livestock 1.91
2. Poultry and Production 1.50
3. Dairy Farm Production 1.72
4. Vegetables 1.92
5. Fruits 1.91
6. Sugar and Syrup Crops 1.50
7. Greenhouse and Nursery Production 2.01
8. Other Crops 1.93
9. Fishery Products 1.69
10. Agricultural Forestry, and Fishery Services 2.38
11. Mining 2.00
12. Construction 2.36
13. Dairy Production 1.88
14. Canned and Frozen Foods 2.08
15. Bakery Products 2.11
16. Sugar and Confectionery Products 2.33
17. Beverages 2.14
18. Other Food Production 1.76
19. Textiles and Apparel 1.91
20. Lumber and Wood Products 2.03
21. Furniture and Fixtures 2.19
22. Printing and Publishing 2.50
23. Chemical Products 2.07
24. Rubber and Plastic Products 2.07
25. Glass, Stone and Clay Products 2.28
26. Primary Metal Industries 1.97
27. Fabricated Metal Products 2.04
28. Nonelectric Machinery 2.15






10


Table 4:--Gross sales multipliers, by sector, for the economic
region of Glades, Hendry, Martin and Palm Beach Counties,
1980 (continued)


Sector Multiplier


29. Electric and Electronic Equipment 2.42
30. Instruments and Related Products 2.30
31. Other Manufacturing 1.70
32. Transportation and Warehousing 2.47
33. Communication 2.35
34. Electric, Gas and Sanitary Services 1.89
35. Wholesale and Retail Trade 2.42
36. Finance and Insurance 2.70
37. Real Estate and Rental 1.67
38. Hotels, Personal and Repair Services 2.41
39. Business Services 2.51
40. Eating and Drinking Places 2.16
41. Auto Repair and Services 1.99
42. Movies and Amusement 2.73
43. Medical Services 2.55
44. Other Services 2.89
45. Government Enterprises 2.88
46. Special Industries 3.15
47. Households 2.15


Source: Estimated from an input-output model of Glades, Hendry,
Martin and Palm Beach Counties, 1980.







11


This means that a one dollar sale of raw sugar outside the four-county area

generates an additional $1.33 of sales in the area. This includes purchases

of labor, purchases of cane and other inputs, and economic activity generated

by the expenditure of employee income. Other local multipliers range from

a low of 1.50 to a high of 3.15 for the government expenditures category

(Special Industries). For each industry the size of the multiplier depends

on the percentage of required inputs which are purchased locally.5

Multipliers from Table 4 may be used to estimate the total impact on

gross sales of each industry in the four-county area. Results of this

analysis are aggregated to 14 sectors and reported in Table 5. The column

headed "External Sales" is an estimate of the dollar value of sales outside

the four-county area by each of the 14 groups of economic activities.

External sales may take the form of a product exported from the region or

in the case of the service industries a local purchase by someone from out-

sidethe local area (i.e.; sales to tourists). For the household sector,

external sales consist of income not earned in the local area (i.e.; retire-

ment pensions).

Multiplying the value of exports for a particular sector by the appro-

priate multiplier (from Table 4) provides an estimate of the total impact

of that sector on gross sales in the local area. These data are reported

in column 2 of Table 5 for the 14 aggregated sectors. The sugar processing

sector has external sales in excess of $507 million and generates a total

local impact exceeding $1.8 billion, more than 7 percent of total sales

in the area. The contribution of the sugar industry is exceeded only



5Local purchase coefficients for the two sugar sectors and estimates of
total requirements per dollar of external sales are presented in Appendix
Tables 2 and 3.







12



Table 5.--Export sales and gross sales attributable, by sector, Glades, Hendry,
Martin, and Palm Beach Counties, 1980



External
Sectors Sales Gross Sales Attributable


1. Livestock 63,006,934 116,645,775 (.70)a

2. Sugarcane 0 0 0

3. Fruits and Other 382,179,741 735,551,244 (4.4)

4. Forestry and Fishery 0 0 0

5. Agricultural Forestry, and
Fishery Service 131,302,304 312,432,008 (1.9)

6. Mining 5,795,544 11,620,172 (.07)

7. Construction 1,170,792,448 2,763,706,218 (16.7)

8. Food Products 1,284,029 2,261,578 (.01)

9. Sugar Processing 507,716,096 1,185,387,028 (7.2)

10. Other Manufacturing 161,981,385 359,923,036 (2.2)

11. Transportation,
Communication and Uttiities 84,710,032 185,524,123 (1.1)

12. Trade 0 0 0

13. Services and Government 1,546,042,060 3,115,476,379 (18.8)

14. Households 3,627,996,928 7,799,717,402 '(47.0)

aNumbers in parentheses are percentages.

Source: Calculated from an input-output analysis of the Glades, Hendry,
Martin, and Palm Beach County area.







13


by construction (16.7 percent), by the combined service and government

activities (18.8 percent) and by the household sector (47.0 percent). The

latter reflects the importance of tourism and retirement activities in the

area. Note that no sales are attributed to sugarcane and other sectors

which supply only local needs.6


EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME: DIRECT, INDIRECT AND INDUCED IMPACTS



Input-output analysis also allows the calculation of income and employ-

ment multipliers. Employment multipliers examine the total impact of each

exporting industry on the local economy. The procedure is the same as the

one used earlier for gross sales. External sales of each sector are

multiplied by the employment multiplier (a measure of total employment

requirements per dollar of external sales). Table 6 reports the results of

this analysis.

The sugar industry generates a total employment impact in excess of

16,000full-time equivalent jobs (6.5 percent of local employment). As with

gross sales, this contribution is exceeded by construction, services and

government, and households and also by the combined sector including fruits

and vegetables.

Income provides another measure of the indirect and induced impacts of

a local industry. The household element in the total requirements column

for sugar processing (0.2715, Appendix Table 3) indicates that one dollar

in external sales by the sugar sector generates total local income of

slightly over 27 cents. The sugar industry with more than $507 million in

sales external to the region then generates more than $137 million in local


6This conclusion does not apply to fisheries due to the data problem
mentioned earlier.






14



Table 6.--Employment attributable, by sector, Glades, Hendry, Martin and Palm
Beach Counties, 1980


Sector Employment Attributablea


1. Livestock and Livestock Products 1436 (0.58)b

2. Sugarcane Production 0 (0)

3. Fruits, Vegetables, and Other Crops 17,705 (7.2)

4. Forestry and Fisheries Products 0 (0)

5. Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries Services 6751 (2.7)

6. Mining 126 (0.05)

7. Construction 45,305 (18.4)

8. Food Processing 25 (0.01)

9. Sugar Processing 16.017 (6.5)

10. Other Manufacturing 5954 (2.4)

11. Transportation, Communication, and Utilities 2679 (1.1)

12. Wholesale and Retail Trade 0 (0)

13. Services and Government 55,823 (22.6)

14. Households 94,931 (38.5)

Total 246,751


aAll employment figures reflect full-time equivalent employment and do not
fully account for offshore workers employed in harvesting sugarcane.
bNumbers in parentheses are percentages.

Source: Calculated from an input-output analysis of the Glades, Hendry,
Martin, and Palm Beach County area.






15


income (507.7162 X .2715 = 137.84).

The input-output analysis estimated that income generated directly in

sugar processing was $45.980 million. Thus, the sugar industry generates

an additional indirect and induced income impact of $91.9 million (137.45 -

45.980 = 91.865). Or stated differently, for each dollar of direct income

in sugar processing there is a total income impact locally of $3.00. That

is, the income multiplier for sugar processing is 3.00. The additional

$2.00 in income accrues to sugarcane producers, workers, other input

suppliers, and local retail and service businesses.

Two considerations are important in using the income data above. First,

the data do not include any income associated with payment to foreign workers

who harvest local cane. Second, the data source for payments to households

by the sugar processing and sugarcane producing sectors reflected only

payments for wages and salaries and did not adequately measure profits which

accrue to households as a result of sugar production. For these two reasons,

the income estimates above must be taken as conservative estimates of the

income impact of the sugar industry.

LOCAL IMPACT OF OFFSHORE WORKERS

As noted, the income estimates for sugar production reported in the

previous section do not include local impacts of offshore (foreign) workers

employed for cutting sugarcane. However, to the extent that offshore workers

spend part of their income locally, additional retail sales and income are

generated in the local economy.

Data on the amount of :local spending and on items purchased are not

available for foreign workers so no impact estimates are possible. Such

amounts may, however, be substantial. Discussions with sugar industry






16


officials provide estimates of local spending by foreign workers ranging

from 30-50 percent of total wage payments. Thus, a payroll for foreign

workers which averaged $28 million over the 1979-80 and 1980-81 crop years

would generate local retail sales of $8-14 million per year.7 This impact

could obviously be off in either direction depending on the accuracy of

the informal estimates, and detailed studies to establish exact spending

patterns would be required to precisely convert these estimates to local

income impacts.






























Payroll data provided by officials of the Florida Sugar Cane League,
Inc., Clewiston, Florida.



























APPENDIX






18



Table l.--Sectors included in an input-output analysis of the economy of
Glades, Hendry, Martin and Palm Beach Counties


Sectors


Cattle and Other Livestock
Poultry and Products
Dairy Farm Products
Vegetables
Fruits
Sugar and Syrup Crops
Greenhouse and Nursery Products
Other Crops
Forestry Products
Fishery Products
Agricultural, Forestry and Fishery Services
hii ning
construction
Ordnance and Accessories
Heat Products
Dairy Products
Canned and Frozen Foods
Bakery Products
Sugar and Confectionery Products
Beverages
Other Food Products
textiless and Apparel
Lumber and Wood Products
Furniture and Fixtures
Paper Products
Printing and Publishing
chemicall Products
Rubber and Plastic Products
Glass, Stone and Clay Products
Primary Metal Industries







19



Appendix Table l.--Sectors included in an input-output analysis of
Glades, Hendry, Martin and Palm Beach Counties (continued).


Sectors


Fabricated Metal Products
Nonelectric Machinery
Electric and Electronic Equipment
"Transportation Equipment
Instruments and Related Products
Other Manufacturing
transportationn and Warehousing
communication n
Electric, Gas and Sanitary Services
Wholesale and Retail Trade
Finance and Insurance
Real Estate and Rental
Hotels, Personal and Repair Services
Business Services
Fating and Drinking Places
Auto Repair and Services
Movies and Amusement
Medical Services
Other Services
government Enterprises
Special Industries
Households






20



Appendix Table 2.--Direct local input requirements per dollar of output for sugarcane
production and processing


Sectors Sugarcane Production Sugar Processing


1. Cattle and Other Livestock 0.0 0.0
2. Poultry and Products 0.0 0.0
3. Dairy Farm Products 0.0 0.0
4. Vegetables 0.0 0.0
5. Fruits 0.0 0.0
6. Sugar and Syrup Crops 0.0022 0.3673
7. Greenhouse and Nursery Products 0.0 0.0
8. Other Crops 0.0 0.0
9. Forestry Products 0.0 0,0
10. Fishery Products 0.0 0.0
11. Agricultural Forestry, and Fishery Services 0.0721 0.0
12. Mining 0.0006 0.0001
13. Construction 0.0045 0.0040
14. Ordnance and Accessories 0.0 0.0
15. Meat Products 0.0 0.0
16. Dairy Products 0.0 0.0
17. Canned and Frozen Foods 0.0 0.0
18. Bakery Products 0.0 0.0008
19. Sugar and Confectionery Products 0.0 0 1887
20. Beverages 0.0 0.0
21. Other Food Products 0.0 0.0
22. Textile and Apparel 0.0 0,0000
23. Lumber and Wood Products 0.0 0.0
24. Furniture and Fixtures 0.0 0.0
25. Paper Products 0.0 0.0
26. Printing and Publishing 0.0 0.0
27. Chemical Products 0.0023 0.0004
28. Rubber and Plactic Products 0.0003 0.0000
29. Glass, Stone and Clay Products 0.0004 0.0
30. Primary Metal Industries 0.0 0.0001






21



Appendix Table 2.--Direct local input requirements per dollar of output for sugarcane
production and processing (continued)


Sectors Sugarcane Production Sugar Processinc


31. Fabricated Metal Products 0.0001 0.0001
32. Nonelectric Machinery 0.0030 0.0026
33. Electric and Electronic Equipment 0.0002 0.0000
34. Transportation Equipment 0.0 0.0
35. Instruments and Related Products 0.0 0.0
36. Other Manufacturing 0.0 0.0
37. Transportation and Warehousing 0.0021 0.0227
38. Communication 0.0009 0 0016
39. Electric, Gas & Sanitary Services 0.0021 0,0227
40. Wholesale and Retail Trade 0.0070 0 0132
41. Finance and Insurance 0.0022 0.0057
42. Real Estate and Rental 0.0151 0.0094
43. Hotels, Personal and Repair Services 0.0 0.0003
44. Business Services 0.0103 0.0096
45. Eating and Drinking Places 0.0029 0.0005
46. Auto Repair and Services 0.0010 0.0005
47. Movies and Amusement 0.0 0.0
48. Medical Services 0.0 0.0
49. Other Services 0.0002 0.0
50. Government Enterprises. 0.0001 0.0003
51. Special Industries 0.0 0.0
52. Households 0.0968 0.0723







22



Appendix Table 3.--Total local requirements per dollar of export sales for
sugar processing


Sectors Sugar Processingo


1. Cattle and Other Livestock 0.0001
2. Poultry and Products 0.0000
3. Dairy Farm Products 0.0002
4. Vegetables 0.0007
5. Fruits 0.0004
6. Sugar and Syrup Crops 0.4538
7. Greenhouse and Nursery Products 0.0003
8. Other Crops 0.0000
9. Forestry Products 0.0
10. Fishery Products 0.0000
11. Agricultural Forestry and Fishery Services 0.0342
12. Mining 0.0004
13. Construction 0.0151
14. Ordnance and Accessories 0.0
15. Meat Products 0.0
16. Dairy Products 0.0010
17. Canned and Frozen Products 0.0002
18. Bakery Products 0.0016
19. Sugar and Confectionery Products 1.2330
20. Beverages 0.0010
21. Other Food Products 0.0001
22. Textile and Apperal 0.0008
23. Lumber and Wood Products 0.0005
24. Furniture and Fixtures 0.0003
25. Paper Products 0.0
26. Printing and Publishing 0.0047
27. Chemical Products 0.0023
28. Rubber and Plastic Products 0.0005
29. Glass, Stone and Clay Products 0.0013
30. Primary Metal Industries 0.0001





23




Appendix Table 3.--Total local requirements per dollar of export sales for
sugar processing (continued)


Sectors Sunar Processing


31. Fabricated Metal Products 0.0008
32. Nonelectric Machinery 0.0045
33. Electric and Electronic Eqiupment 0.0032
34. Transportation Equipment 0.0
35. Instruments and Related Products 0.0009
36. Other Manufacturing 0.0013
37. Transportation and Warehousing 0.0366
38. Communication 0.0093
39. Electric, Gas and Sanitary Services 0.0191
40. Wholesale and Retail Trade 0.0589
41. Finance and Insurance 0.0210
42. Real Estate and Rental 0.0642
43. Hotels, Personal and Repair Services 0.0083
44. Business Service 0.0316
45. Eating and Drinking Places 0.0146
46. Auto Repair Services 0.0053
47. Movies and Amusement 0.0036
48. Medical Services 0.0139
49. Other Services 0.0077
50. Government Enterprises 0.0035
51. Special Industries 0.0019
52. Households 0.2715





University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs