|
THIRTY YEARS (1955-1985) OF FARM MANAGEMENT
RESEARCH IN GREECE
George J. Kitsopanidis
Staff Paper #307 April 1987
THIRTY YEARS
(1955-1985) OF FARM MANAGEMENT
RESEARCH IN GREECE
By
George J. Kitsopanidis
Staff Paper #307
April 1987
Staff Paper are circulated without formal review
by the Food and Resource Economics Department.
Content is the sole responsibility of the author.
Food and Resource Economics Department
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida
Gainesville, Florida 32611
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Abstract ii
Introduction 1
Selection of Farms and Farmers 2
Farmers' Response in the Field of Records and Accounts 5
Collection of Physical and Economic Data 6
Analysis of Physical and Economic Data 9
Research Funds and Sources 12
Research Papers Published and Utilized by Farmers
and Farm Organizations 13
Concluding Remarks 14
Appendices I V 16
ABSTRACT
The Farm Management research, which is based on records and
accounts, started in certain countries at the beginning of the
present century. In Greece it started at the beginning of the
second half of this century.
In Greece, the purpose of the farm management research was
to introduce records and accounts in agriculture and to estimate
through them the economics, productivity and competitiveness of
several types of farming and various crop and livestock enter-
prises.
Our research experience of thirty years showed that it can
be done by applying a simplified system of records and accounts
and by persuading Greek farmers about the usefulness of farm
accounting for the profitability of their farms. The latter is
very difficult, taking into account the low educational level of
the majority of Greek farmers, the lack of business consider-
ation, and the suspicions of the research worker's motives. All
these can be overcome if the Greek Government and the Farmers'
Cooperatives decree advantages for those keeping records and
accounts and perceive the need for organizing farm management
research on a national basis.
THIRTY YEARS (1955-1985) OF FARM MANAGEMENT RESEARCH IN GREECE
By
George J. Kiteopanidis*
Introduction
In Greece, farm management research started, as far as
Iknow, after 1950, especially that which is based on records and
accounts. Indeed, the first attempts to introduce records and
accounts for farm management purposes had been made after World
War II (1940-1945) and after the Greek Civil War (1946-1949) on
the one hand by the Ministry of Agriculture and on the other by
the Agricultural Bank, but with little success. This is true
taking into account that no research paper has ever been pub-
lished by the Ministry of Agriculture, since it has limited its
task to keeping certain records and accounts exclusively for
educational purposes, while the Agricultural Bank stopped its
endeavors within a very short period. The first serious farm
management investigations, using records and accounts, were
undertaken by the Department of Agricultural Economics of the
University of Thessaloniki in 1954. Their purpose was to esti-
mate the economics, productivity and competitiveness of several
types of farming (cereals, industrial crops, fruit, vegetables,
*Professor and Head of the Agricultural Economics Research
Department of the University of Thessaloniki, Greece and Visiting
Scholar in the Food and Resource Economics Department of the
University of Florida, Gainesville.
2
dairy, poultry, etc.) and various crop and livestock enterprises
(wheat, corn, cotton, tobacco, sugar-beet, tomatoes, grapes,
peaches, cows, sheep, etc.)
During the 30 year period many hundred farms and farm
enterprises were studied in various regions of Greece, especially
in northern and central Greece (see map). Particularly, the
number of regions, farms and farm enterprises studied was closely
connected with the situation in our Department of Agricultural
Economics, its permanent scientific staff and the research funds
provided. As I will show you later, during the above mentioned
period we collaborated with more than 5,000 farmers from the
whole country, by using records and accounts for investigating
their farms and farm enterprises.
Selection of Farms and Farmers
The selection of farms and farmers was made in a systematic
way rather than randomly, because the collection of detailed, re-
liable and accurate physical and economic data for a long period
needs able and willing farmers to keep records and accounts.
Indeed, under Greek conditions this could not be achieved by
farmers chosen randomly, because of low educational level, in-
ability and unwillingness of the majority of them to keep records
and accounts, combined with their suspicions of the research
worker's motives.
The number of farms and farm enterprises chosen usually re-
presented between 3 and 10 percent of the total population based
AIR AND RAIL COMMUNICATION NETWORK
hP. IRIRAA
PAXI
S A Na
IaMNIktIo I A
P fI. L A G 0 S V lI
ZEICMEHESOLON1ERKLARUNG
RAILWAY NETWA
oTu ml r
IONI OzEAmeter, C'AT
CHEMINS DE FER
EISENBAHNNETZ
DOMESTIC AIR ROUTES
SINES AERIENNES
FLUGVERBINOUNGOEN
SEASONAL DOMESTIC AIR ROUTES
......... VOLS DOMESTIOUES SAISONNIERS
EINHEIMISCHE FLUGROUTEN WAHREND DER SAISON
__ __ __ __ __ 1 _1 ____
**CHARTfKDOTI(KI D.0. TSOPLAS (COPYRIGlT)
GREECE
KEY TO MAPS
mm==_ TOLL MOTORWAY
-m m ASPHALT -PAVED ROAD '
NON -ASPHALT ROAD
-m... ROAD UNDERCONSTRUCTION
0s. DISTANCE IN KILOMETRES
----. SHIPPING ROUTES
...1k. CAR FERRY
ffifj AIRPORT
YACHT SUPPLY STATION
SCAMPING
] PREHISTORIC SITE
] ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE
[3 BYZANTINE SITE
MEDIEVAL SITE
MONASTERY
SSPA RESORT
E CAVE
] MOUNTAIN HUT
SSKI CENTRE
SIBEACH FACILITIES
GOLF
-- 1 ----- Cu ---~PP 1IIIIIII
on the degree of homogeneity and our experience. In each re-
search undertaken, an attempt was made to include in the sample
chosen farms and farm enterprises representative of all regions,
locations, sizes, yields, degrees of mechanization, technological
level and of the farm techniques used according to the type of
research.
The selection of the farmers were carried out with the help
of the local agriculturists of the Extension Service of the
Ministry of Agriculture, the Agricultural Bank, the various
Agricultural Organizations (cotton, tobacco, sugar-beet, etc.)
and the Farmers' Cooperatives. The choice of farmers by the fore
mentioned agriculturists was based on the opinion that farmers
who happen to be presidents of their villages or cooperatives, or
who have other occupations beyond farming are more appropriate
for this type of collaboration. But this choice was not always a
happy one, because our experience gained during the past 30 years
has proved that it is a wrong practice. Indeed, these farmers do
not collaborate systematically in this kind of research. The
success of each research undertaken does not depend only on the
selection of the appropriate farmers, but it is also based on the
continuous and close contact between the research worker and the
farmers during the accounting year. This is necessary because
the majority of the farmers willingly undertake at first to keep
records and accounts, but their initial interest is usually ex-
hausted during the first year.
Farmers' Response in the Field of Records and Accounts
In general, the response of the farmers in the field of re-
cords and accounts was a positive one, since 87% of the more than
5000 farmers, who collaborated with us during the 30 year period,
kept simple records and accounts for a period of one, two or even
three years. In this kind of research, farmers of various re-
gions, types of farming, farm sizes and educational levels col-
laborated with our Department. The above mentioned farmers can
be divided into four groups according to their degree of re-
sponse.
The first group included about 3 percent of all farmers.
These farmers kept simple records and accounts by themselves and
showed special interest in this kind of collaboration because
they believed that their income could be improved by so doing.
The second group represented about 30 percent of all
farmers. These farmers did not keep records and accounts by
themselves, but they were willing to collaborate with our Depart-
ment, at least for one year, because they considered the input-
output relationships and the financial results achieved to be
useful to their farms.
The third and largest group of farmers (about 40 percent)
were good natured, but they did not have any special interest in
keeping records and accounts. So they collaborated in this field
of research for a short period of time because the agriculturists
of their region persuaded them to do so.
6
Finally, to the fourth group belonged the remaining about 30
percent. These farmers showed at first a willingness to keep re-
cords and accounts, but this willingness exhausted itself before
the end of the first year.
The unwillingness of the majority of the farmers in the
fourth group and of some farmers in the third and second groups
to continue to keep records and accounts is due to:
(a) the lack of business consideration (not limited to
small farmers), because they believe that the increase of their
farm income can be achieved only through government assistance.
For this reason, these farmers do not believe in the usefulness
of records and accounts as a means of increasing their incomes,
(b) the nature of the Greek farmers, who cannot bear to
wait for a whole year to ascertain the financial results of their
farms, but they want to know their farm income within a very
short period,
(c) the low educational level of the majority of farmers,
who cannot get down on a "handy diary" the simplest physical and
economic data of their farms, and
(d) the suspicion of the research worker's motives, namely
these farmers do not wish to reveal their true income, because
they believe it will affect financial support by the Government.
Collection of Physical and Economic Data
The collection of the physical and economic data of the
various types of farming and crop and livestock enterprises re-
7
fers both to the accounting method used and to the way the data
were kept by the farmers in their notebooks and transferred by
the research worker or fieldman to his accounting books.
Among the various accounting methods, the improved simple
bookkeeping method was used as a basis, as it seemed to be the
most appropriate for the study of small peasant farms. This
method was adjusted to Greek farm conditions and special tables
and diaries' were added so as to make possible the calculation of
input-output relationships and other financial results not only
for the farm as a whole, but also for the most important crop and
livestock enterprises separately. Later, based on the use of
records and accounts in a considerable number of farms over a
period of years and on the experience obtained, we devised a new
method in which special emphasis is given to the need for writing
down at the end of each day the physical and economic data rele-
vant to the various farm enterprises during the accounting year.1
These data include the land used (good or poor quality, irrigated
or unirriagated), the labor required per operation (plowing,
harrowing, sowing, fertilization, inter-row cultivations, plant-
ing, application of herbicides, irrigation, spraying, pruning,
picking, transportation, milking, feeding, cleaning, etc.). In
this way, accurate and detailed physical and economic data are
obtained, which may satisfy the requirements of any single method
for economic analysis and synthesis. This accounting method is
I Examples of these special diaries for one crop and one
livestock enterprise are included in the appendices I and II.
8
taught in detail to the students of Agricultural Economics and it
was presented in a brief paper many years ago.2
The meetings between research worker or trained fieldman and
farmers were arranged by correspondence, the letters being mailed
at least seven days before each visit. The letters informed
farmers of the day and the time of meeting at the village. The
investigator usually met the farmers at their homes or at the
offices of the local agriculturists. The frequency of successive
meetings between investigator and farmers depended on the kind of
records and accounts kept (a whole farm or an individual farm
enterprise only), on the number of years in which the farmer kept
records and accounts, on the type of farming, etc. The interval
usually fluctuated from two to four weeks for the investigation
of a whole farm, and from one to two months for the investigation
of a crop or livestock enterprise only. In the early years the
investigator or fieldman visited the farmers by bus or train,
usually walking from village to village, but later he visited the
farmers in his own car and sometimes used vehicles of the Agri-
cultural Services. In cases where the collection of the physical
and economic data of a large number of farms was made by under-
graduate students of Agricultural Economics, their joint trans-
portation was arranged by a bus especially hired for this pur-
pose. The main task of the fieldman in the farmer's house was to
check carefully the records for omissions and incorrect entries
= "Accounting methods for small farms" The Farm Economist,
Vol. X, No.3, Oxford 1963.
9
and to transfer the various records from the farmer's notebook to
his accounting books. The inventory and appraisal of the various
forms of capital (fixed, working, variable) was taken by the in-
vestigator in cooperation with the farmer at time convenient to
the latter. This work was carried out twice, namely at the be-
ginning and the end of the accounting year.
Our experience over the past thirty years is that Greek
farmers are not only unable to keep a complete system of farm
accounting, but not even simple records and accounts for their
farms by themselves, because this is difficult work for them in
view of their educational level. For this reason, in all inves-
tigations undertaken, the farmers were given a simple notebook to
be used as a "diary of farm records". This notebook was divided
into a number of accounts, depending on the most important crop
and livestock enterprises of each farm and the main farm enter-
prises of each region.
Analysis of Physical and Economic Data
The analysis of the physical and economic data obtained in
the various types of farming and farm enterprises refers both to
the methods used and to the required numerical work, given the
kind of calculating machines that were available.
The analysis was limited to the economics of farm production
only. This was achieved by applying: (a) methodology for the
estimation of farm production costs, returns and incomes, and
certain input-output relationships, (b) statistics, especially
10
simple (linear and curvilinear) and multiple (linear) regression
and correlation analysis, (c) production functions, especially
the Cobb-Douglas, and (d) simple and mathematical programming
(budgeting, programme planning, linear, parametric, quadratic and
integer-programming).
First of all, the collected physical and economic data were
worked out per farm or farm enterprise of each collaborating
farmer and the appropriate tables were completed. These tables
were used on the one hand to inform each farmer of the financial
results obtained in his case and on the other for the main
analysis of the research undertaken.
The initial analysis of the data of 1050 farms refers to the
farm plan, the land available, the labor available and required,
the existing capital (fixed and variable) and to the calculation
of the gross return. The contribution to gross return of each
farm enterprise, the production costs, the profits, the return to
land, labor and capital, the farm income, and the monthly and
annual degree of the farm family's employment were also calcu-
lated. The main purpose of the whole farm analysis, as dis-
tinguished by types of farming, was to estimate their economics,
productivity and competitiveness, according to farm size, gross
return achieved, and production costs involved. The comparative
analysis of the various types of farming revealed the essential
factors of competitiveness. The marginal analysis of the types
of farming showed the existing relationship between marginal
value products and opportunity costs of the various production
11
factors according to the farm size, gross return and production
costs, and it suggested one way by which the optimum combination
of resources could be achieved. The programming of the various
types of farming refers to the comparison between the actual and
optimum farm plans and the corresponding financial results which
showed the need for reorganization and possible optimum organi-
zation of the various farms.
The initial analysis of the data of 20 various crop and
livestock enterprises (a total of approximately 8,000 cases) re-
fers to the land used, the labor required per month and per farm
operation, the various forms of fixed and variable capital need-
ed, the estimation of the different input-output coefficients,"
and to the calculation of the gross return achieved and the con-
tribution to this return of both the main products and any by-
products, the production costs (total and per unit) and the role
which the various production factors played in these costs.'
Various kinds of expenses were calculated, including farm oper-
ations, fixed and variable costs, as well as the calculation of
the profits, the return to land, labor and capital, and the farm
income.4 The main analysis made of the various crop and live-
stock enterprises was presented according to yield, land area
cultivated or number of animals fed, degree of mechanization,
3 Input-output coefficients for the most important crop and
livestock enterprises in Greece are included in the Appendix III.
4 Gross Returns, Returns to Labor, Farm Incomes and Costs of
Each Production Factor Used as a Percentage in the Total Costs
for the Most Important Crop and Livestock Enterprises are
Included in the Appendix IV.
12
variety of crop grown or breeds of livestock, cooperation or
contracts with cooperatives or private companies, method of feed-
ing, length of laying or fattening period, etc. This analysis
helped to determine the economic position, productivity and com-
petitiveness of each crop and livestock enterprise and suggested
ways for a better organization. On the other hand, the various
input-output relationships, which defined the technological level
of the various crop and livestock enterprises and revealed the
strong and weak points of the existing organization and deter-
mined the future level of development, were based on the physical
and economic data analyzed in the corresponding farm enterprises.
Also, the marginal productivity analysis showed the existing
ratios between marginal value products and opportunity costs of
the production factors used and their marginal rate of substi-
tution." Finally, the minimization of the production costs of
the various crop and livestock products achieved by the use of
mathematical programming showed any improvement realizable in the
profitability and competitiveness of the corresponding farm
enterprises.
Research Funds and Sources
The research funds used during the 30 year period were
generally limited and they came mainly from public agricultural
organizations (School of Agriculture of the University of
0 Marginal returns to opportunity costs ratios of the three
production factors used for the most important crop and livestock
enterprises are included in the Appendix V.
13
Thessaloniki, Ministry of Agriculture, Agricultural Bank of
Greece, Hellenic Sugar Industry, Hellenic Organizations of
Tobacco and Cotton, etc.) and secondarily from farmers' cooper-
atives. It is estimated to be approximately $100,000 converted
in 1985 values or about $3,300 per year. This money was spent
for travelling expenses, mailing letters, printing tables, hiring
temporary undergraduate students and young agriculturists, etc.
Research Papers Published and Utilized by Farmers and Farm
Organizations
In the course of the 30 year period, about 60 research
papers were published relating to main types of farming and crop
and livestock enterprises in Greece, especially in Central and
Northern Greece. These papers include classical analysis, pro-
duction functions and marginal productivity analysis, and farm
planning and programming (budgeting, simplified programming and
mathematical programming, e.g., linear, parametric, quadratic,
integer, etc.). Reprints of the most important papers have been
sent to various Agricultural Economics Departments all over the
world and are available in our Department.
During the first years, in which the number of farms and
farm enterprises studied was small, the input-output relation-
ships and the financial results achieved were presented to each
farmer separately by the research worker during a special meeting
at the farmer's village. More specifically, in their meeting the
research worker explained to the farmer the meaning of the rela-
tionships obtained and the results achieved and recommended the
14
appropriate changes needed in the reorganization of his farm in
order to secure a higher farm income. Later, when the number of
farms and farm enterprises studied was considerable, a table with
the main input-output relationships and the most important fi-
nancial results compared to the average ones in his region was
mailed to each farmer. In order to achieve a better compre-
hension by the farmer of the relationships and results appearing
in this table, he was given the opportunity of a personal contact
with the local Agriculturists of the Extension service.
The papers published and especially those relating to the
most important crop and livestock enterprises were utilized by
various Agricultural Services and Farmers' Cooperatives albeit
unsystematically. More specifically, they were utilized briefly
in the case of production costs estimated in order to serve as a
basis for determining guaranteed prices of certain crop and live-
stock products both from the Greek Government and Farmers' Coop-
peratives.
Concluding Remarks
The farm management research during the past 30 years showed
that it is possible to investigate Greek farming in depth by us-
ing records and accounts. This is true taking into account the
input-output relationships and financial results estimated by
this methodology, some of which are included in the appendices of
this paper.
15
The investigation of Greek farming by keeping records and
accounts can be undertaken on a permanent basis by the existing
Departments of Agricultural Economics or by creating a special
Institute of Agricultural Economics Research covering the whole
country. The success of this investigation depends on the will-
ingness on the one hand of the Greek Government and on the other
of the various Public Organizations and the Farmers' Cooperatives
to provide the research funds needed.
It is believed that the accurate measurement of the produc-
tivity of Greek farming every year it would be useful not only
for farm management purposes but also for Government's Agricul-
tural Policy.
APPENDIX I
Account of 5 Acres of Wheat
Variety . .
Age . .
No. of Fields 3
Diary of Physical and Economic Data
Labor in Hours Including Time To and From the Field
Men and Women Machinery Seeds,
Fertilizers
Family Hired Own in Hours Pesticides, Total
etc. Production
Description of each kind Trac- Har- Fertz. Wa- Hired
Date of farm operation performed Hours $ Hours $ tor Plow row Sower Sprayer Binder Spr/den gon $ Ibs $ Bush. $
Nov., 2 Plowing 5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Nov., 3 Harrowing 2.5 3.0 2.5 2.5
Nov., 4 Fertilizing and sowing
(2 persons x 3 hours) 6.0 7.2 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.5
Seeds: 5 acres x 120 lbs 600 60
Fertilizers: 5 acres x 240 lbs 1200 64
June, 25 Combine 130.0 200 1300
70.0 84.0 18 27.0 40.0 5.0 2.5 3.0 5.0 6.0 20.0 145.0 164 200 1300
APPENDIX II
Account of 4 Dairy Cows
Breed: Holstein
Age : 6 years
Diary of Physical and Economic Data
Since .....
Until .....
(Every week
or 10 days)
Oct. 1-10
Dec. 21-30)
.abor ii HoIurs and Dollars
Men and Women Hachir
Own
Family Hired
Trac- Wa-
Hours $
16 19
I
March 11-20 17 20
Year 600 720
Hour
k ..- -
s
tor gon
S Kind and Quantity of Feed
lery
Hired
$ Hours Hours $
Corn
cotton
Bar seed
ley Bran meal
lbs '
alfal-
fa
hay
straw
Veterinary,
Heating,
Electricity.
Material of
Cleaning, etc
Total Production
Product A Product B
Milk Calves
1 1- r r
tons
Gallons
Births
Deaths
Weaning
(units) (units) Units $
i-- I I I I .II I I 4- 4- I t I I- I t
-iJ 1 4 -I-I -I I I I 1 1I
4.45d4,430 3,080 1,185 15.5
.96
4,320
3,276 4
_ I __ _I I I _ _ _ _
I 500
I -
I
APPENDIX III
Input-Output Coefficients of Annual and Perennial Crop and Livestock Enterprises
Farm Enterprises Labor Required Yield Feed Conversion Rate
A. Crops
1. Wheat (soft) cultivated in low land areas
2. Wheat (soft) cultivated in high land areas
3. Wheat (durum)
4. Barley
5. Corn (irrigated)
6. Rice
7. Tomatoes (for processing) (irrigated)
8. Tobacco (neutral) (irrigated)
9. Tobacco (aromatic)
10. Tobacco burleyy) (irrigated)
11. Cottonseed (harvested by machine) (irrigated)
12. Cottonseed (harvested by hand) (irrigated)
13. Sugar beet (irrigated)
14. Beans (dwarf) (irrigated)
15. Beans (climbing) (irrigated)
16. Potatoes (irrigated
17. Alfalfa (irrigated)
18. Peaches (irrigated)
19. Apples (irrigated)
20. Pears (irrigated)
B. Livestock
21. Broiler Production (per 1 m2 or 10 chicks and
3.4 lots per year or 34 chicks)
22. Poultry Egg Production (per layer per year)
23. Dairy Cows (per cow per year)
24. Cow-Calf production (per cow per year)
25. Calves Fattening (per calf for 300 days fattening)
26. Pig Production (per sow and 1.86 litters per year
including fattening of feeder pigs)
man equivalent
hours per acre
6.4
6.8
5.2
6.0
45.6
34.0
330.0
794.0
1,697.6
668.4
64.0
238.8
122.4
150.8
645.6
201.2
50.4
302.4
328.0
361.2
Man Equivalent Hours
2.4
0.6
135.0
58.7
30.5
96.0
27. Sheep Production (per ewe per year)
tons per
acre
1.10
1.63
0.92
1.04
3.66
2.05
18.43
0.56
0.50
1.43
1.05
1.09
26.23
0.67
1.01
8.79
5.07
6.18()
9.09(1)
7.28(1)
Yield
131.3 l.w. pounds
244 eggs
920 gallons of milk
and 0.80 calves
0.76 calves
1,084 l.w. pounds
14.7 feeder pigs or 2,726
l.w. pounds
21.9 gallons of milk
and 0.92 lambs
Feed Conversion Rate
0.42 lbs. meat per lb. feed
2.8 eggs per lb. feed
0.18 gal. milk per lb. feed
0.18 Ibs. meat per lb. feed
0.25 lbs. meat per lb. feed
0.1 gal. milk per lb. feed
(1) Acreage yield over the entire productive life e.g. 15 years for peaches, 25 years for apples and 20 years for pears.
APPENDIX IV
Gross Returns, Return to Labor and Farm Income as a Percentage of the Total Production Costs
TOTAL PRODUCTION COSTS
Annual
Expenses
Land Labor Variable of Fixed Miscella- Gross Return Farm
Rent Wages Capital Capital neous Return to Labor Income(1)
Farm Enterprises % % % % % % % %
A. Croos
1. Wheat (soft) low land
2. Wheat (soft) high land
3. Wheat (durum)
4. Barley
5. Corn (irrigated)
6. Rice
7. Tomatoes (for processing)
8. Tobacco (neutral)
9. Tobacco (aromatic)
10. Tobacco burleyy)
11. Cottonseed (harvested by
machine)
12. Cottonseed (harvested by
hand)
13. Sugar Beet
14. Beans (dwarf)
15. Beans (climbing)
16. Potatoes
17. Alfalfa
18. Peaches
19. Apples
20. Pears
B. Livestock
21. Poultry meat
22. Poultry egg
23. Dairy cows
24. Cows producing calves
25. Calves fattening
26. Pigs
27. Sheep
S4.8
- 4.7
S 15.4
S 24.2
-3.8
-7.4
22.9
50.4
45.8
48.6
50.8
33.1
42.3
27.3
19.5
12.6
25.9
35.4
21.3
31.3
31.2
17.8
47.7
37.5
24.8
31.0
28.5
88.1
57.9
63.5
43.3
84.2
79.9
44.5
8.0
6.7
8.0
8.1
8.9
8.8
7.6
6.3
3.9
8.7
8.4
7.3
9.3
8.1
7.0
8.3
6.7
12.4
17.4
17.0
6.1
35.1
20.7
30.8
9.9
10.1
32.6
114.8
128.8
123.4
113.7
105.5
114.3
101.4
131.0
112.2
168.8
103.7
100.9
101.2
102.2
111.5
125.0
112.4
123.3
176.3
215.3
101.1
111.9
101.1
104.7
105.4
100.5
103.8
20.7
34.1
29.5
20.7
20.3
22.8
42.0
98.1
90.8
118.3
18.4
42.2
19.4
29.4
71.8
50.0
30.3
60.7
112.8
154.5
5.9
16.6
16.5
28.9
9.2
7.9
26.7
56.0
75.5
67.9
54.3
62.3
59.5
68.1
109.9
99.5
140.6
58.6
71.2
60.5
63.3
83.5
68.0
66.7
85.6
128.6
170.8
10.0
23.2
27.4
48.6
17.6
16.5
41.8
(1)In this appendix farm income includes land rent, remuneration of labor used, interest on capital invested and profit achieved irrespective -
of whether all or some of the above resources belong to the farmer or to other persons.
APPENDIX V
Marginal Return to Opportunity Cost Ratios of the Production
Factors Used in Various Crop and Livestock Enterprises
PRODUCTION FACTORS
Farm Enterprises Land Labor Capital
A.
B. Livestock
21. Poultry meat
22. Poultry egg
23. Dairy cows
24. Cows producing calves
25. Calves fattening
26. Pigs
27. Sheep
Crops
1. Wheat (soft) low land
2. Wheat (soft) high land
3. Wheat (durum)
4. Barley
5. Corn
6. Rice
7. Tomatoes (for processing)
8. Tobacco (neutral)
9. Tobacco (aromatic)
10. Tobacco burleyy)
11. Cottonseed (picked by machine)
12. Cottonseed (picked by hand)
13. Sugar beet
14. Beans (dwarf)
15. Beans (climbing)
16. Potatoes
17. Alfalfa
18. Peaches
19. Apples
20. Pears
0.86
1.14
0.87
0.87
0.79
0.49
2.73
2.75
2.53
4.11
0.52
0.63
1.85
0.87
9.77
1.74
1.07
0.58(1)
0 9(1)
0.99(
-2.40
(2)
2.05(2)
2.09(2)
1.18(2)
2.08 2)
5.70(2)
2.23
0.08
-0.24
1.37
-2.60
1.34
0.01
0.92
1.03
0.87
1.36
2.43
1.89
1.42
1.20
0.41
3.17
1.34
2.41
3.14
5.54
1.39
0.83
0.24
1.79
1.91
0.23
0.60
(1)t includes both land and the value of fruit trees.
(2)It refers to the value of livestock.
1.54
1.62
1.04
1.59
1.78
2.29
0.54
1.75
0.99
0.73
0.61
0.30
1.09
0.82
0.56
0.75
1.24
0.43
1.53
0.51
1.39
1.16
1.06
1.20
1.00
1.15
0.97
|
RSS
HIDE
