Search

Search Results

• Effect of postharvest on the economic viability of walnut production

  28-38.

  F. Apáti

  E. Kovács

  M. Kocsis

  Views:

  391

  In this study we were studying the question whether walnut production under domestic natural and economic circumstances shall be considered a profitable activity or not. Our partial objective is to determine, what level of natural inputs and production costs are required for walnut production, what yield level, selling price and production value can be attained, what level of profitability, rentability and efficiency may production have, is the establishment of a walnut orchard profitable on the entire lifespan of the plantation, and the production of which is more efficient: the dry shelled walnut production requiring postharvest activity or the raw, shelled walnut without postharvest activities. In this study, comparison of two systems is conducted. First version: producer establishes a walnut plantation and sells walnut raw and shelled. Second version: producer also invests into a drying facility, and in this case the end product is the dry, shelled walnut. If the producer sells walnut right after harvest in a raw bulk, total production costs in productive years reaches 974,011 HUF/ha. Attainable yield is 2.63 t/ha with 396.3 HUF/kg selling price, therefore the profit is 138,258 HUF/ha with 14.19% cost-related profitability. In the case when the producer sells dried, shelled walnut, production costs are 25% higher compared to that of raw walnut due to the cost of drying. By calculating with the postharvest loss, average yield is 1.84 t/ha, however, its selling price is way higher (882.84 HUF/kg), therefore the profit per hectare reaches 475,496 HUF with 39.01% cost-related profitability. Thus it can be stated that walnut production in an average year may be profitable even without postharvest, but efficiency is improved significantly when the producer sells the products dried. Investment profitability analysis revealed that production of raw, shelled walnut is not economically viable, since the plantation does not pay off on its entire lifespan (30 years), while walnut production with postharvest is efficient and rentable, since both net present value (NPV) and internal rate of return (IRR) showed more favourable values than in the previous case, and the orchard pays off in the 21th year after establishment.

• Investment appraisal of a plantation establishment for intensive apple production

  17-20.

  F. Apáti

  J. Felföldi

  Views:

  201

  For fruits, establishing intensive apple-orchards requires the highest amount of investment cost, while the returns depend on many factors. Based on farm and bibliography data we appraised an investment in a model in some variations that are the most used in practice (100% owner's capital and 55% owner's capital +45%o subsidies). The profitability of the investment has been analysed using the methods of NPV (Net Present Value) and DPP (Dynamic Payback Period). The essence of our analysis is a sensitivity analysis with the optimistic, pessimistic and realistic combinations of the yield and the market price. Plantation establishment financed by only own (corporate's) sources turns into profitable over 7-10 years in average and favourable cases, but the opposite is the case in unfavourable circumstances. By subsidy of 45% for investments, it is highly possible to return by the fifth or sixth year after the year of establishment, but it can return by the twelfth year even in unfavourable case.

• The comparative economic analysis of Hungarian and German apple production of good standard

  79-85.

  F. Apáti

  Views:

  294

  The profitability of the Hungarian apple production considering firms producing on high standard is not lagged behind significantly from that of German firms, moreover in certain cases it reflects a more positive situation. It is unfavourable, however, that this statement is true only for 8 to 10% of our whole apple plantation surface. The results of the investigations highlighted the fact that in comparison with Germany our farm business advantages manifest in three factors: in 70 to 80% lower wages, in 15 to 30% higher investment and subsidy intensity and in the fact that at present we cannot neglect the ice safety system which is rather expensive. By the increasing wages, the narrowing subsidy opportunities and incidentally the appearing harmful weather phenomenon, these advantages may be continuously ceased. Our definite disadvantage appears in the level of marketing price, considering the fact that producers in Hungary realize 30 to 35% lower marketing price, which is in connection with the probably much lower level of organization among farmers, in the market and in the logistical background.