AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS REPORT 22 ISSN 0379-0827

EVALUATION OF THE VINE REPLANTING PROJECT IN CYPRUS

S. Papachristodoulou and Chr. Papayiannis

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES

[

NICOSIA CYPRUS

SEPTEMBER 1989

.Ji

-

The viewa and interpretations in this report are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources.

EVALUATION OF THE VINE REPLANTING PRO..lECT IN CYPRUS

S. Papachristodoulou and Chr. Papayiannis

SUMMARY

Farmers' participation in the Vines Replanting Project since its initiation in 1970 has been limited. Replanting of old vineyards with new wine grape varieties has been implemented on an area of 1315 ha, of which only 582 ha are under the project, which is far behind the set target of 15000 ha. Analysis of data obtained from 260 project participants in the three quality zones A, Band C revealed that location, variety, replanting period, familY size, farm size, area under vines and variety of old vines before replanting were factors which innuenced farmer's satisfaction. Opportunity, expectation and belief orientation of the farmers, identified as elements of decision making, were also significantly associated with the degree of farmers' satisfaction from their participation. Comparison of new wine grape varieties proposed to replace old vines in each quality zone showed that only the low yielding varieties Cabernet franc and Riesling in zone A and Shiraz and Mataro in zone B were less profitable than the local varieties. Replanting of old

(I

vineyards with either local or new varieties, except Shiraz and Mataro in zone B; is expected to considerably reduce the average total cost of grapes. With the present set of prices replanting of low or mean productivity old vines with new varieties is financially viable in zones Band C, but not in Zone A. From the point of view of the national economy vines replanting is not viable in any of the three zones. However, the economic viability of the project depends to a large extent on grape prices. Production of superior quality wines, the prices of which are high, ensures that the present situation will be reversed and the project wUl become viable. Considering that vine replanting is a prerequisite for production of quality wines its implementation must continue.

11 EPII\H4JH

H OUlJlJeTOxn TWV alJm:'\oupywv OTO oxt~ilo aValJntAwOTjC;, Tl ecpaplJ0V1'J TOU onolou ciPXloe TO 1970 pe OT6xo rnv aVllKaTOOTaOTj 15000 eKTaplwv ucplOTalJtvwv alJneAtwv vreruev nOlKwwv ue vtec; nOlKLAiec;, nrcv noM IJIKPn pe anoTtAeOlJa Tl avaIJneAw8eioa tKTaOTj va unoxetnerc, OTjlJa­VllKO TOU apXlKou oT6xou. MtXPl TO 1985 aValJneAw8T]Kav 1315 eKTopla an6 rc onola 1J6vo 582 rrrcv lJe l300Tj TO OXtlllO. AVQAUOTj TWV orolxe!wv nou lJa~euTTlKaV an6 260 QlJneAoupyoUC; nou oulJlJeTelxav OTO OXtlllO one Tpeic; alJneAoupYlKtC; ~wvec; nOlOTTlTac; A, B Kal r, t~l~e nwe; Tl alJneAouPYlKi) ~WVT], Tl vta nOlKLAia nou XPTloljJOnOu;8TlKe Yla cvnxcrccrcon TOU naAlou QlJnt­AtOU, Tl XPOVlKi) nepiolloc; KaTo rnv onoia tYlve Tl aValJntAWOTj, TO IJtye80c; TTlC; olKoytvelac; TOU alJneAOuPYOU, TO OAlK6 IJtve80c; TTlC; eKlJeTciMeuOTjC; Kal Tl tKTaOTj TWV alJneAuj)V uecc o'auTi), Kal Tl nOlKLAla TOU alJneAlOU nou ~epl~w8TlKe i)rav napciyoVTeC; nou srtnoecocv TO l3a81J6 ucovo­noITlOTjC;· TWV aIJneAOuPYwV ana TTl OUlJlJeTOxn roue OTO OXtlllO, Kal enOlJ&vWC; rnv napantpa OUlJlJeTOxi) OTTlV aVQIJntAWOTj. AVTi8eTa, Tl TlAlKla Kal Tl 1J6pq>wOTj TWV alJneAouPYwv Ka8wc; Kal Tl T]AlKia TOU naAlOU alJneAlou llev ermoecccv TTlV napantpa OUlJlJeToxn TWV QlJneAouPYwV OTO OXtlllO. An6 ntVT& napciyoVTec;, 01 onoiOl avayvwp~oVTal oav OTolxela nou enTlpeo~ouv TTlV Arillnl anocpaOTjC; VIa Ol.\JlJeToxn OTO oxt&o, 01 eUKalPiec; nou "iXav 01 alJneAouPYol va yvwp!­

-

1

OOUV TO mOVtKn'UJaTa TOU oxt610u, 01 npoo60Ki&e; TOUe; ana 1TI OUIJI.I&TOxt\ o'aUTO Ka8we; Kal 11 rnorn TOUe; ncoc lTIV av~ntAwOl1 I3pt811Kav va 6J1T\PtO~ouv TO 13a8~o lKavonolr]OTIC; TOUe; ana 1TI OU~tTOX1') o'curo. IUYKPlllx1') OlKovO~lK1') avOAuOl1 TCiJV vtwv Kal vreruev nOlKwwv oivonom­o\jJwv OTacpuAlwv nou npoTtlvoVTOl yla K09t ~IO ana nc Tptie; ~wVte; nOlolTlTae; t6tl~t nwe; uevc 01 xa~nA1')e; nopaywYlKOlTlTac; noooMte; Cabernet franc Kat Riesling 01Tl ~WVl1 A KOl 01 Shiraz Kal Matara OTI'\ ~WVl1 B 1')Tav xtLPOTtpte; ana TIe; vrerasc nOlKVJ&e;. AVTlKaTooTaOTl TWV UCPlOT~tVWV ~ntAlWV ~ onola6f)noTt vta nOlJ<wa OKTOe; ana TIe; Shiraz Kat Matara OTI'\ ~WVl1 nOlolTlTac; B, 1') aKO~l1 KQl ~ vromsc nOlKVJ&c;, ava~tvtTOl va 0611yf)Otl ce orl~avTlKl't

I.Itlwon TOU KOOTOUe; napaywyf)e; KaTO I.I0VOOO nopayo~tvou npoiovroc, Mt 1300Tl TIC; UCPlOTO~­Vte; TljJte;, 11 aVTlKaTcioTaOl1 al.lntAlWv X~l1Af)e; 1') ~tOl1e; napaywYU<OlTlTae; ~ vue; nolKlAlte; one; ~wVte; nOlOlTlTac; B KOl r tivOl l.IaKponpo8t0l.la nooc TO OU~CPtpov TOU napaywyou, OX1

o~we; Kat 01Tl ~WVl1 A. Ano rnv rlA£UpQ 0I.lWe; 1TIe; t9VlK1')e; OlKov0l.llae; 11 wcptAtla ana lTIV ava­I.IntAwOl1 tlval TOOO I.IlKPf) WOT& va 1.I11V KcWJnm TO KOOTOe; TWV analToUlJtvwv Yl'aUTf)v enev­6uotwv. H OlKOV0l.IlKOlTlTa 0I.lWe; TOU OXt610u t~apTciTat oe I.ItyllAo l3a8j.lo ana TIe; TlJ,lte; TWV OTacpUAlWv. napaywyf) KPaOlwV aplolTle; nOlOlTlTae;, rn onola 0lT) 61£8vf) ayopo anoAa~vouv

no,\u qJr}AWV TljJWV, 9a tnlTptllJ£l OTIl.1avTlK1'\ aU~l1on TWV TlJ,lwv aUTWV Kat tTm 11 OTI~tPlV1'\ KaTO­creon 9a avaTpanti ara61OKO Kal TO OXt610 eo KaTaOTti l3l~o. ~6o~tvou 6t on 11 aval.lnt­AWOTl 9twp&ITal anapalnllTl npoun09tOTl VIa rnv napaywyf) KPaouiw lIJIlA1'\e; nOlOlTlTae;, l1 ccpop­1.I0yf) TOU oxt6lou nptncl va OW&XlOTtl Kat &n&KTa9tl.

The main objectives of the present study were: INTRODUCTION (a) To assess the progress of the Vine Replanting

Project since its initiation in 1970 Wine grapes are a very important crop both (b) To identify the factors that affected fanners from an economic and a social point of view. They

participation in the project. are grown on an area of about 30 000 ha and cover (c) To examine the economics of the new wine almost 20% of the total cultivated land. The annual

grape varieties in comparison with the existing production of wine grapes is about 180 000 t. Their local varieties. value of production over the period 1980-86

(d) To appraise through cost-benefit analysis the averaged C£12.0 million, accounting for about 7% of benefits from vine replanting. the total agricultural output. The yearly mean

export value of vine products in the same period, excluding fresh table grapes, was C£11.0 million or 4% of the total domestic exports. About 20% of the BACKGROUND INFORMATION gainfully employed in the agricultural sector are employed in viticulture (Department of Statistics Wine grape cultivation has been recognized as an and Research.1986). important activity of the rural population of Cyprus

since ancient times. A tremendous impulse of vine The two local wine grape varieties, i.e. Local cultivation occured in the end of the 19th century,

black (Mavro) and Local white (xynisteri) produce when vineyards in Europe were destroyed by low quality wines when planted in the low lands. In Phylloxera, and continued through the first half of the mountain region, their quality is better. but the 20th century. The increased demand for Cyprus yields are considerably lower. Since 1970 improved wines during World War I continued until the end wine grape varieties were introduced from Europe of World War n. The high prices gave the impulse and efforts are being made to establish them in to Cypriot farmers to replace most other crops with Cyprus in order to replace old unproductive vines (Vines Products Commission, 1978, vineyards. through the Vine Replanting Project. unpublished).

I

)

l:

\

2

-- --

After World War Il demand for CypIUS vine products decreased as a result of the development of new improved varieties in Europe and changes in the consumers' preference. The need for expensive imported inputs and the inability of fanners to undertake the investments needed to replace the old unproductive vines with improved and competitive varieties led CypruS Viticulture to a severe depression.

The Government of Cyprus in its effort to find a solution to the problem and being aware of the possible repercussions on the employment of the rural population called for expert advise. In 1955, FJ. Rossi (1956) recommended the introduction of

.new more productive wine grape varieties and quality control in order to meet consumers' wants and compete with other exporting countries. In 1957, professor Branas (Monbellieux, France) recommended the introduction of new, Improved varieties for the production of special types of wines for which there was an increasing demand in the international mar~et (Ministry of Agriculture, 1957, unpublished).

In 1958, 75 improved varieties were imported from various European countries and in 1963 the first experimental vineyards were established.. The Department of Agriculture has been issuing cuttings to fanners free of charge since 1970 towards implementing the Vine Replanting Project.

The Vine Replanting Project was launched in the early seventies, Its main objective was to replace the old, unproductive vineyards with new ones, either of the same (local) or improved varieties with higher yields and better quality grapes. More specifically, the project aimed at:

a. increasing the production of good quality wine grapes..

b. reducing the production costs. c. estllblishing the tight variety in each location. d. producing selected wines with export potential. e. promoting medtanlWlon of grape production.

f. expanding the harvesting period.. g. improving the fanner's income and stopping

the depopulation of the viticultural areas.

Only fanners having agriculture as their main occupation could participate. Technical and fmancial assistance in the form of input or output subsidy' was provided by the Government to the participants. Regarding the area of vines to be replanted or replaced with other crops the provisions of the project' were very general. Out of an area of 46000 ha of vines, 15000 ha would be replanted with new varieties and 23000 ha with relatively satisfactory productivity would remain unchanged. Vines in the remaining area, (about 8000 ha of unproductive vineyards), would either be replaced by other rainfed crops or abandoned.. The first phase of the project, planned to start in 1970, included only Limassol district where the existing vines were less productive: The second phase, to be initiated 3-5 years later, included the vines of Paphos district. No scheduling for the completion of each phase and specific locations to be replanted, replaced by, other crops, or abandoned were indicated. Implementation of the project tasks lied with the good will of the growers.

METHODOLOGY

Assessment of the progress of the Vine Replanting Project was based on data on the vines area replanted with improved wine grape varieties by district, variety and year, obtained from the Viticulture and Oenology Section of the Department of Agriculture. To identify the factors influencing fanners' participation in the project a sample of 260 participating farmers was randomly selected among the 1822 participants in the three quality zones. The sample consisted of 57 fanners in quality zone A (Mountains) 39 in quality zone B (Krasokhoria) and 164 in quality zone C (Vines Paphos, Fig 1). Data obtained in 1985 ,through personal interviews, referred to the reference group characteristics and elements of their decision making.

--"

~

~ Delimitation of quality zones for wine grapes

• Quality zone A

m Commandaria zone Kyrenia

Quality zone B~ AREA OCCUPIED BY TURKISH ARMY

~ QuaI i.ty zone C SINCE 1974

NICOSIA

KEY

Agroceonomie zoncs

I Paralimni. 2 Kokkinokhorin 3 L/eo Coastol 4 L/ssol Coostnl

Larnaca 5 Pissouri 6 Pophos Coastal 7 Khrysokhou 8 Tyllirin 9 Lien mountain 10 Llea Hlxed Fnrming II Dhcft£'raPaphos 12 Astromcritis - Aknkl 13 N.ieos.in ~lixl'd ~'nronlng

II, Nicosia Suburban 15 Hantadnes LIssol 16 L/ssol Nixcd Forming 17 Pnphos Scmi-Mountainous 18 Commnndariascale 19 Krasokhorla

I I r I 20 Vines Paphos I

21 Solcn o 10 20 30 40 22 Hnrothasn Ffg .. 1. Agroeconomic Zones of Cyprus. 23 PitsU~o

km 21, Deciduous

The basic assumption was that the success of the project is reflected in the degree of satisfaction of the farmers from their participation. The degree of

satisfaction was assessed from answers on the following ten items thought to be relevant to the respondent's satisfaction:

1. Replanting of a second plot. 2. Satisfaction with yield of the new variety. 3. Preference for the new/old variety. 4. Perceived advantages of the new variety. S. Perceived disadvantages of the new variety. 6. Regret for replanting the old vines. 7. Improvement of the agricultural road network. 8. Improvement of farm mechanization as a

result of replanting. 9. Easier cultivation as a result of the planting

distances of the new variety.

10. Satisfaction from fallow period of 2 years required between uprooting of old and planting of new variety.

The total satisfaction score (dependent variable) was developed by assigniilg scores in the range of 1

to 3 to the responses on each of the above ten items in descending order, I.e. the most favourable answer received the highest score (3 points) and the least favourable one the lowest score (l point). In case of no response or no clear-cut answer the median score (2 points) for each item was assigned.

The total satisfaction score for each respondent was determined by the summation of scores on all ten items. The respondents were then classified into three satisfaction classes. i.e. "satisfied" (24-30 points), "fairly satisfied" (17-23 points) and

"dissatisfied" (10-16 points).

Ten reference group characteristics (independent

variables), i.e~ location, variety of replanted vines, planting period. age of growers, education of growers, family size, farm size, area under vines,

variety of old vines and age of old vines before replanting together with five elements of decision making, (opportunity, expectation, goal, ability and

belief), were hypothesized as influencing farmers' satisfaction.

The measurement of all the reference group characteristics was based on their quantitative

characteristics (Reeder, 1963, 1967, Yacoub, 1967, Yacoub and Haddad. 1970).. A' score was also developed for the five elements of decision making, as follows: (Reeder, 1963, 1967, Yacoub, 1967,

. Yacoub and Haddad. 1970).

An opportunity score was developed as the total score of ten responses related to the awareness of

the farmers regarding the project and their previous knowledge of the horticultural and economic<

characteristics of the new wine grape varieties. An expectation score was the total score of five responses connected to expected yields, decreased production costs, prolonged harvesting, easy delivery

to the wineries and application of farm mechanization. A goal score 'was the aggregate score of two items related to the possession of shares and the productivity of the old vineyard. These two were thought of as crucial points for the decision of the farmer who's ultimate objective from replanting

was the increase and disposal of his produce. An ability score was the composite score of four responses related to off-farm employment, income,

access to labour and machinery, and decisiveness of the respondent. A belief score was based on a single, direct question related to whether the

respondent agrees or 'disagrees with the' Vine Replanting Project.

Two major hypotheses were examined. I. The degree of satisfaction from participation in

the Vine Replanting Project is intluenced by the location, variety, replanting period, age of grower, education of grower, famBy size, farm

size, area under vines, variety of old vines, and age of old vines before replanting.

II. The degree of satisfaction from participation in the Vine Replanting Project is intluenced by the opportunity, expectation, goal, ability and belief elements of decision making.

:5

I

The ChI-square test criterion was used to test the above hypotheses.

Accounting methods were used for computing costs and returns for the local and new wine grape varieties. Data on yields of the new wine grape varieties were obtained from the experlmentall demonstrational farms of the Department of Agriculture, while data on costs were based on actual costs of the local varieties and on the varieties recommended by specialists for each quality zone. Three quality zones (A, B and C) and two training systems (head and cordon) were used. The economics of new wine grape varieties proposed for each quality zone were further compared to the economics .of the local varieties black and white (Xynlsteri).

Cost-benefit analysis was applied to investigate whether replacing old vines with new wine grape varieties is financially and economically feasible under the prevailing conditions in each quality zone. The Internal Rate of Return (lRR) was calculated and compared to the official market rate of interest (9%) on borrowed .capital. Two types of cash-flows

(including and excluding labour costs) and two PIl?ductivity levels (low and mean) were used for the calculation of the financial and economic IRR of vine replanting with new varieties, or local ones for comparison purposes. The IRR was calculated by quality zone, variety and training system over a period of 40 years.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Progress of the Vine Replaating Project

Eight years after the beginning of the implementation phase of the project, results were disappointing. Out of 15000 ha of vines planned to

. be replanted, only 382 ha were replanted with new varieties of which only 49.6% under the Vines Replanting Project (fable 1).

Vine replanting moved at a faster rate in Paphos . district, due mainly to the better financial position of the farmers in this district. their higher investment ability: and the higher fertility of the land. Thus, about 70% of the replanted area was in

'!,able 1· Area (ha) of vines replanted with improved varieties during 1970-78.

Year

Under project

Out of project

Total area

(ha) (%) (ha) (%) (ha) (%)

1970-1974 15.8 8.3 41.9 21.8 57.7 15.1

1975 18.7 9.9 38.0 19.8 56.7 14.9

1976 46.7 24.7 43.8 22.8 90.5 23.7

1977 43.6 23.0 34.0 17.6 77.6 20.3

1978 64.J 34.1 34.6 18.0 99."3 26.0

TOTAL 189.5 100.0 192.3 100.0 381.8 100.0

% of total 49.6 50.4 100.0

._..••_~ __..._ ..•c.•.~.

% of success over task (15000 ha)

Under Totalproject

0.1 0.4

0.1 0.4

0.3 0.6­

0.3 0.5

0.5 0.7

1.3 2.5

...

6

-

Paphos and only about 30% in Urnassol district Hence progress was very slow and its success' limited The main reasons for the unsuccessful implementation of the project were:

a. Farmers preferred to replant their old vineyards with local varieties, which were well known to them.

b. The area subsidy provided by the Government for the old vineyards was not transferable to the replanted vines. Instead, fanners were compensated for uprooting their old vineyards by an amount equal to the area subsidy for five years in order to recover their foregone income.

c. As a result of the limited investigation of the ecology of the vine areas in relation to the adaptability of the new varieties it was difficult to establish viticultural zones and set up replanting

! I

priorities accordingly. I

I ,

d, Difficulties faced by the farmers in delivering grapes of the new varieties because the wine industries were relactant to receive the small quantities of grapes produced at the early stages of the project.

e. The high cost of uprooting the old vineyards and the limited access of the farmers to heavy machinery required for this purpose.

f. The unavailability of sufficient number of cuttings of the new varieties which were suitable for replanting.

g. The relatively low prices paid to the farmers for grapes of the new Varieties, the productivity of which was lower.

In 1978, the replanting of about 1500 ha of old vines was planned within the context of the Pitsilia Integrated Rural Development Project. In the same year the Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources in cooperation with the Vine Products Commission launched a prorgamme to establish viticultural quality zones and promote the production of improved quality vine products. In 1982 the Vine Replanting Project was included in the Fruit and Vegetable Production and Export Project the aim of which was to produce and promote the

r __

export of quality agricultural products. Old vines (2000 ha) were to be replanted during the period 1982-85. In order to expedite the rate of vine replanting new measures were taken by the Ministry of Agriculture. New heavyduty machinery were bought to be used exclusively ~ the project area. Improved incentives were declared including transfer of the subsidy right to the new vineyard, increase of the area SUbsidy for new vines planted in the quality zones, price differentiation for grapes of the new varieties (price increase ranged between C£7.8/t and C£27.6/t) and delivery of grapes to the wine industries without shares.

In spite of all the measures taken, progress was still small. The replanting target of the Pitsilia Integrated Rural Development Project was only partly implemented . By the end of its implementation phase (1983) only 193 ha of old vines were replanted. of which only 80 ha with new improved varieties. 1.abour scarcity, high cost of

land levelling, small size and fragmentation of holdings were some factors adversely affecting the implementation of vine replanting. Out of 2000 ha of old vines to be replanted within the context of the Fruit and Vegetable Export Project, only 500 ha were uprooted representing 25% of the projected task.

The progress of the project between 1970 and 1985 and the present situation, by district and variety were as follows:

The total area replanted with new varieties and its percentage over the initial task were as in Appendix Table 1.

One third of the replanted vines were in Limassol district and two thirds in Paphos district. About 50% of the replanted vines in Limassol district and 60% in Paphos district were not under the project (Appendix Table 2).

Seventeen new varieties were used to replace old vines. Most of the replanted area (75%) was taken up by three new wine grape varieties Le., Carignan

7

. .'

noir (42%), Palomino (21%) and Crenach noir (12%). Nearly 50% of the new varieties were established between 1970 and 1980 and another 50% from 1981 to 1985 (Appendix Table 3).

Factors influencinll participation in the Vine Replantinll Project

The limited success of the project was, to a certain extent, attributable to disadvantages in the design of the project itself. Such disadvantages were the lack of delimitation of viticultural zones, determlnation of the best varieties for each zone, phasing and time horizon for each phase, etc. Also, some policy measures and incentives given to the fanners such as differential prices for the grapes of the new varieties, transfer of area subsidy, fmancial aid for vine establishment etc. proved unsatisfactory. The progress of the project was closely related also to the degree of satisfaction of farmers, which was influenced by certain socioeconomic, and social­psychological factors as follows:

Reference group characteristics

Out of the ten reference group variables investigated, seven were found to be sJgnificantly 'related to the degree of fanners' satisfaction from participating to the project (p<O.OS). There was no relationship between degree of satisfaction and grower's age, grower's education, or age of vines before replanting (P>O.OS; Appendix Ta1lles 4-13). Fanners' satisfaction varied sJgnificantly (P<O.OOl)

from one zone to another.

Location: Viticultural zones were highly related to fanners' satisfaction (p>O.OOl) from vine replanting. More fanners (34%) to zone C were satisfied compared to participants in zones A (7%) and B (28%). Since vines in zone C were grown on more fertile soils farmers achieved higher yields and were therefore better satisfied. The quality of grapes produced in this zone was, however, lower than that of grapes produced in zones A and B. Since price differential between high and low quality

grapes was marginal, vine growers in zone C realized higher Incomes. The close relation between location and satisfaction explains to a great extent the willingness of fanners in zone C to replant old vineyards (Appendix Table 4).

Variety: Seven major new varieties, proposed by the project, were tested. Variety was sJgnificantly (P<O.OOl) related to fanners' satisfaction from vine replanting. Within zones the relationship was also significant (P<0.001). Fanners were more satisfied with those varieties that were more productive or produced higher income, therefore modification of the pricing system to increase quality premiums are urgently needed in order to promote the preferred vanenes. Also further research towards high yielding wine grape varieties and their adaptation to the local conditions of each zone could be beneficial for the successful implementation of the project (Appendix Table 5).

Replantinl period: The period of replanting asa causal variable was tested by dividing all the respondents according to when replanting was performed i.e. 1970-75, 1976-80 and 1980-84. The period of replanting showed a significant relationship to fanners' satisfaction (O.OOl<P<O.Ol) only in zone C. Early participants were more satisfied than followers because they had the opportunity to see the advantages of the new high yielding varieties, which reached the stage of full bearing. These varieties were more promising in zone C than in

the other two zones because of the more fertile land (Appendix Table 6).

Family size: The actual number of family members was used to measure the family size. The respondents were then divided into two groups i.e., up to 4 members and over 4 members. Family size was significantly (0.01 <P<O.05) related to the participant's satisfaction. Fanners with larger families were less satisfied than those with smaller families. Thus, only 2.4% of those having up to 4 family members were not satisfied as opposed to 12.3% of those with more than 4 family members. It

8

is possible that farmers with larger families expected to recover their invested capital, needed to satisfy other needs, more rapidly. After replanting, they discovered that returns were not as high as expected (Appendix Table 9).

Farm size and area under vines: Previous research (papachristodoulou and Papayiannis, 1988) showed that farm size and area under vines are interrelated, therefore, the two variables are discussed together. These two factors, tested separately, were significantly (O.OO1<P<O.Ol) related to the dependent variable. Farmers owning larger farms or bigger area under vines were more satisfied with vine replanting than farmers with smaller farms because the percentage of unproductive vines in larger farms is greater. Therefore, farmers have reasonably chosen to replant their less productive plots. Comparing their old local unproductive vines with the new varieties they found themselves more satisfied. On the other hand, farmers with smaller farms could not affort the loss of grape production for a period of 5 to 6 years required until the development of the new vines. Thus the foregone income has in the short run adversely influenced their satisfaction (Appendix Tables 10 and 11). In zone A the size of farm and the area under vines were not significantly related to the degree of satisfaction, since in this zone almost all farms are small.

Variety of old vines: The last reference group variable tested was the variety of the uprooted old vines. Three varieties were considered: Local black, Local white and other. The variety of old vines was significantly (P<O.OOI) related to the degree of satisfaction. Analysis by zone showed that the two variables were significantly related to each other only in zone C. Farmers replacing Local black vines with new varieties were more satisfied. The lower quality of black grapes in zone C, compared to the quality of the same variety in the other zones, and the difficulties faced by the farmers in delivering their produce to the factories was the main reason for their satisfaction (Appendix Table 12).

Elements of decision making

Of the five elements of decision making examined, three (Opportunity, Expectation, and Belief) were significantly related to farmers' satisfaction while two, the Goal and Ability elements, were not (Appendix Tables 15 and 21).. ,

Opportunity: The opportunity variable was inversely related to farmers' satisfaction (0.05 <P<O.Ol). The better farmers were Informed about the project and the value of the new varieties, the less they were satisfied from their participation in the project (Appendix Table 14). Testing of the opportunity variable by zone showed that only in zone B was this relationship significantly negative (P<O.OOI). It is possible that participants, were misinformed about the advantages of the project and the new varieties, in an effort to convince the vine growers to adopt the proposed change.

Expectation: The composite expectation element was significantly related to farmers satisfaction (P<O.OOI). About 88% of the respondents 'strongly expected' or 'expected' to benefit from participation in the project, of which 94% were 'satisfied' or 'fairly satisfied'. The majority of the respondents, however, did not expect increase in yields from new varieties, while one third of them 'strongly expected'

higher yields. Also, only 10% of the farmers 'strongly expected' or 'expected' decreased production costs and about 77% did not expect any decrease at all. On the contrary, 73% of them 'strongly expected' or 'expected' improvements in farm mechanization and about 88% easier delivery of their produce without shares. As regards prolonged harvesting, about half of the respondents 'strongly expected' or 'expected' prolonged harvesting while the other half did not. Results indicate that farmers expectations from vine replanting are associated with the present acute problems of farm mechanization and disposal of the produce (Appendix Table 15). Testing of the expectation element by zone, showed that it was significantly related to farmers satisfaction only in zone C (P<O.OOI), in which about 85% of the

9

farmers were satisfied and 94% of them 'strongly expected' or 'expected' to benefit from their partldpation in the project.

Ability: Ability was not significantly related to farmers satisfaction (Appendix Table 16). However, when each of the components used to develop the ability variable was tested separately, results were as follows:

The time spent in off-farm employment was not related to farmers satisfaction (Appendix Table 17). In zone A. however, the two variables were Ilpjflcantly related.. About 86% of the farmers with full-time and 90% of those with part-time off­farm employment were 'not ~atisfied', whereas 60% pl the full-time employed in agriculture were lltisfted.

Decisiveness was positively related (O.Ol<P<O.05) to farmers' satisfaction. About 93% of those rating themselves as 'decisive' were either 'satisfied' or 'fairly satisfied' with the project, but only 80% of the 'conservatives' were 'satisfied'. Testing of this variable by zone:: showed that it significantly influenced farmers' satisfaction only in zone 'C'. In the other two zones the relationship of the two variables was insignificant (Appendix Table 18).

Access to labour and machinery was not related to satisfaction (Appendix Table 19). Only in zone B there was a positive relationship (0.01<P<0.05). About 82% of the farmers with 'good' or 'fair access' to labour and macblnery in this zone were 'satisfied'.

Income of the respondents, which included on­and off-farm income, was significantly (p<O.OOl) related to farmers' satisfaction. The higher the income of the respondent, the greater was his satisfaction. in the lower income class (up to C£2(00) were 'not satisfied,' while only 10% of them

- in the highest income class (over C£4(00) were 'not satisfied', the remaining being 'satisfied' or 'fairly satisfied'. The same was also true for each zone separately (Appendix Table 20).

Belief: The beliet element was found to be a factor that significantly infilfenced farmers' satisfaction (O.01.<P<O.05). The majority (92%) of the respondents who agree with the project were 'satisfied' or 'fairly satisfied' and only 8% were 'not satisfied'. The percentage of 'not satisfied' farmers increased to 22% in respondents who 'disagree' with the project. It seems that the belief orientation of the farmers against the project is important for its progress. Since the majority of farmers (90%) 'agree' with the project it could be assumed that the idea of vine replanting has been accepted. Testing, however, the bellef element of decision making by zone it was found that in none of the zones was this significantly related to farmers satisfaction (Appendix Table 21).

A summary of Chi-square (X2) tests for all investigated variables is given in Table 2.

The economics of wine grape varieties

Variety was one of the factOrs that sijJnificantly influences farmers' satisfaction. hence their partldpation in the Vine Replanting Project. The expectation for higher yields and incomes through replanting of old vines with new varieties were also

factors positively related to the success of the vine replanting. In this chapter the economics of new wine grape varieties in the three quality zones are investigated and compared to the local varieties black and white.

Quality Zone A

This includes the Mountain zone and a small part

of the Krasokhoria zone which produces excellent quality grapes. Four new wine grape varieties (Cabemet franc, Riesling, Mataro and Malvasia grossa) which were mainly proposed for quality zone A, were compared with the local. Varieties black and White. Malvasia grossa was the most productive new variety, with yields similar to those of local varieties, whether head-pruned or cordon­pruned (Table 3). Maturo was the second most

10

Table 2. Relationship between grower's satisfaction from vines replanting and Xi variables

Xi variables X2 d. f. P-level

1. Location (zone)

2. Variety

3. Replanting period

4. Grower's age

5. Grower's education

6. Family size

7. Farm size

8. Vines area

9. Age of old vines

10. Variety of old vine

11. Opportunity

12. Expectation

13. Ability

13a. Off-farm employment (F-P-time)

13b. Decissiveness

l3c. Access to L + H

13d. Income of farmer

14. Belief

15. Goal

47.40

102.02

15.55

4.46

2.47

6.47

14.43

27.44

1.30

20.65

13.09

38.06

5.32

8.93

6.39

0.02

61.10

6.03

3.00

4

6

4

4

2

2

4

2

3

4

4

4

4

4

2

2

4

2

4

a

a

b

d

d

c

b

a

d

a

c

a

d

d

c

d

a

c

d

P-level

a= P<O.OO1 b = O.001<" P<O.01

productive new variety, whereas yields of Cabemet franc and Riesling were considerably lower. All

varieties are expected to produce 40% higher yields under cordon-pruning. Prices of Malvasia grossa and Local black were the same (C£8S.5/t) and resulted in

a gross revenue (including area subsidy of C£l1S.6/ ha) of C£816.7/ha for head-pruned, and C£1098.8/ha for cordon-pruned vines. Gross revenue of Local

white was slightly Irlgher due to a h,lgher price by

c = 0.01<P<0.05 d P <0.05

C£l.O per ton. Prices of Cabemet franc, Riesling and Mataro, were significantly higher than prices of local

varieties and Malvasia grossa, but their gross revenue per ha was lower due to much lower yields (fable 3).

Variable costs were also about the same for local

varieties and Malvasia grosse, but slightly lower for the other three new varieties. Material inputs for

11

1 -­

.. I'\:)

Table 3. Costs and returns for one ha of new wine-grape varieties recommended for Quality Zone A.

Yield: Tons/ha

Price: C£lton

Subsidy: C£/ha

A. GROSS REVENUE

Variable costs

Fe rt il i z e rs

Plant protection

Machinery inputs

Hired labour

Other (transportation)

Crop insurance

In terest on opera ting capi. tal

B. TOTAL VARIABLE COSTS

Fixed co!"ts

Rent of land

Family labour

Interest on fixed capital

Establishment cost (depreciati.on)

C. TOTAL FIXED COSTS

D. TOTAL COSTS (B+C)

E. GROSS MARGIN (A-B)

F. NET PROFIT (A-D)

II For comparison purpose.

C£

C£

C£

C£

C£

C£

Local

Black.!.! White

8.2

85.5

115.6

8.2

86.5

115.6

816.7 824.9

3J./

38.3

33.0

-32.8

17.0

7.0

Jj. -/

38.3

33.0

-32.8

17.0

7.0

161.8 161.8

30.0

382.5

92.2

73.5

30.0

382.5

92.2

73.5

578.2 578.2

740.0 740.0

654.9 663.1

76.7 84.9

Head - pruned

Caber net Rieslingfranc

4.5 4.9

128.2 128.2

115.6 115.6

692.5 743.8

'.OJ.7 33.1

38.3 38.3

33.0 33.0

- -18.0 19.6

14.2 15.4

6.2 6.3

143.4 146.3

30.0 30.0

325.5 337.5

92.2 92.2

73.5 73.5

521.2 533.2

664.6 679.5

549.1 597.5

27.9 64.3

Nataro

6.7

101.2

115.6

793.6

33.7

38.3

33.0

-26.8

16.6

6.7

155.1

~Ialvasia

grossa

8.2

85.5

115.6

816.7

33.7

38.3

33.0

-32.8

18.6

7.0

163.4

Cordon - pruned

Local II1l1ack- \'hite

1l.5

85.5

115.6

1098.8

33.1

38.3

33.0

-46.0

23.9

7.9

182.8

30.0

459.0

180.0

122.2

791. 2

1l.5

86.5

115.6

11l0.3

33.7

38.3

33.0

-46.0

23.9

7.9

182.8

30.0

459.0

180.0

122.2

791. 2

Cabernet

franc

6.3

128.2

115.6

923.3

33.7

38.3

33.0

-25.2

19.8

6.7

156.7

30.0

376.5 .

180.0

122.2

708.7

865.4

766.6

57.9

Riesling

6.8

128.2

115.6

987.4

33.7

38.3

33.0

-27.2

21.4

6.9

160.5

30.0

389.3

180.0

122.2

721.5

882.0

826.9

105.4

,I

~Ial vasia ~Iataro grossa

9.4 1l.5

101. 2 85.5

115.6 115.6

1066.9 1098.8

33.7 33.7

38.3 38.3

33.0 33.0

--37.6 46.0

23.3 26.2

7.5 8.0

173.'1 185.2

30.0 30.0

414.0 459.0

180.0 180.0

122.2 122.2

746.2 791. 2

919.6 976.4

893.5 913.6

147.3 122.4

30.0

351.0

92.2

73.5

546.7

701.8

638.5

91.8

30.0

382.5

92.2

73.5

578.2

741.6

653.3

75.1

974.0 974.0

916.0 927.5

124.8 136.3

the production of grapes and their costs did not differ among varieties or between pruning systems. However, the transportation and crop insurance costs varied, as they were directly related to the yields and gross revenue, respectively.

Fixed costs, "(rent of land, family labour, interest on fixed capital and depreclation) were also higher

for the local varieties and Malvasia grossa under both types of pruning due to differences in the cost of family labour, which varied according to yield. Interest on fixed capital for cordon-pruned vines was two times that for head-pruned, due to higher initial investments, Depreciation was also 66% higher for cordon-pruned vines.

Gross margin of head-pruned vines ranged between C£549.l/ha for Cabernet franc and C£663.11 ha for Local white and was considerably lower than that of cordon-pruned vines, which ranged between C£766.6Jha and C£927.5 for Cabernet franc and Local white, respectively.

Most profitable, in terms of net profit, was Mataro (C£91.8Jha and C£147.3Jha under head- and cordon-pruning, respectively). Local white realized considerably higher net profit compared to Local black. and Malvasia grossa, the profitability of which was about the same. The-least profitable variety was Cabernet franc (fable 3).

Total and variable production costs per unit product were estimated for all wine grape varieties, under both pruning systems and were compared to the present unit cost of existing vines (Table 6). Both variable and total unit costs of all new varieties were higher than those of the local varieties. Replanting, however, of old vines with either local or improved wine grape varieties is

expected to result in considerable reduction of the unit costs. Cost reduction depends on yields achieved, as well as on their total production costs. Maximum cost reduction (C£82/t) is expected by replanting old vines with cordon-pruned local varieties or Malvasia grossa, and minimum (C£18.9)

with head-pruned Cabernet franc. Significant reduction is also expected from replanting old vines with Mataro. Variable unit cost was also reduced by 25-50% as a result of vine replanting.

Quality zone B This zone includes the largest part of

Krasokhoria and a small part of Vines Paphos agroeconomic zones. Seven new wine grape varieties (Shiraz, Mataro, Crenache noir, Plant 'X', Chenin blanc, Carignan noir and Malvasia grossa) proposed for this zone were financially investigated and compared with the local varieties black. and white. Comparisons were made again for head- and cordon-pruned vines. The productivity of Plant 'X' and Chenin blanc was as high as that of local varieties. Carignan noir and Malvasia grossa were more productive (7% and 14% higher yields). Crenache noir, Mataro and Shiraz gave 15% 30% and 37% lower yield than the local varieties. Yields of all varieties were 40% higher when cordon­pruned. Prices of all new varieties were higher than those of local ones. Hence growers were partly or fully compensated for lower yields. The price for Plant 'X', Chenin blanc, Carignan noir and Malvasia grossa was C£85.5/t, for Crenache noir C£93.3/t and for Shiraz and Mataro Cfl01.2/t, compared to C£74.0/t and C£78.7/t for Local black and Local white, respectively. Gross revenue (including area subsidy of C£85.5Jha) from all new varieties, except in the case of Shiraz and Mataro, was higher than that from local varieties (Table 4).

Variable cost of Plant 'X', Chenin blanc, Carignan noir and Malvasia grossa were higher than those of the local varieties. Shiraz, Mataro and Crenache noir had lower variable costs. Material input costs were similar for all varieties and both pruning systems. Transportation costs were related to yields, and crop insurance costs differred among varieties and between pruning systems depending on differences in gross revenue.

Fixed costs Varied among varieties only by the difference in the cost of family labour. The labour

13

-----------------------A

-

- - - - - - - - -

~

Table 4. Costs and returns for one ha of new wine-grape varieties recommended for Quality Zone B.

Yield: Tons/ha

Price: C£!ton

Subsidy: C£!ha

A. GROSS REVENUE C£

Variable costs

FertHizers

Plant protection

Machinery inputs

Hired labour

Other

Crop insurance

Interest on operating capital

B. TOTAL VARIABLE COSTS C£

Fixed costs

Rent of land

Family labour

Interest on fixed capital

Establishment cost (depreciation)

C. TOTAL FIXED COSTS C£

D. TOTAL COSTS (B+C) C£

E. GROSS MARGIN (A-B) C£

F. NET PROFIT (A-D) C£

l/ For comparison purpose.

Local

BlacJ./ White

10.5 10.5 74.0 78.7

85.8 85.8

862.8 912.1

33.7 33.7

38.3 38.3

33.0 33.0

- -42.0 42.0

18.9 18.9

7.5 7.5

173.4 173.4

45.0 45.0

414.0 414.0

92.2 92.2

73.5 73.5

624.7 624.7

798.1 798.1

689.4 738.7

64.7 114.0

Shiraz

6.7

101.2

85.8

763.8

33.7

38.3

33.0

-26.8

16.8

6.7

155.3

45.0

351.0

92.2

73.5

561.7

717.0

608.5

46.8

Head - pruned

Mataro

7.5

101.2

85.8

844.8

33.7

38.3

33.0

-

30.0

18.6

6.9

160.5

45.0

369.8

92.2

73.5

580.5

741.0

684.3

103.8

Cre­nache nair

9.0

93.3

85.8

925.5

33.7

38.3

33.0

-36.0

20.5

7.3

168.8

45.0

382.5

92.2

73.5

593.2

762.0

756.7

163.5

Plant'X' Cari.- ~Ialva-

Chenin gnan sis blanc nair grossa

10.5 11. 2 12.0 85.5 85.5 85.5

85.8 85.8 85.8

983.5 1043.4 1111.6

33.7 33.7 33.7

38.3 38.3 38.3

33.0 33.0 33.0

-

42.0 44.8 48.0

21.7 25.5 24.9

7.9 7.9 8.0

176.3 183.2 185.9

45.0 45.0 45.0

414.0 402.0 414.8

92.2 92.2 92.2

73.5 73.5 73.5

624.7 612.7 625.5

800.0 795.9 811.4

807.2 866.2 925.9

183.5 247.5 300.4

Cordon - pruned

Local Shiraz Black 1/ Whi t e

I

14.7 14.7 9.4 74.0 78.7 101. 2

85.8 . 85.8 85.8

1173.6 1242.7 1037.1

33.7 33.7 33.7

38.3 38.3 38.3

33.0 33.0 33.0

58.8 58.8 37.6

26.5 26.5 23.3

8.6 8.6 7.5

198.9 198.9 173.4

45.0 45.0 45.0

497.3 497.3 414.0

180.0 180.0 180.0

122.2 122.2 122.2

844.5 844.5 761.2

1043.5 1043.5 934.6

Cre- P1ant'X' Cari- Nalva-Nat a r o nache Chenin gnan sia

nair blanc nair grossa

10.5 12.6 14.6 15.7 16.8

101.2 93.3 85.5 85.5 85.5

85.8 85.8 85.8 85.8 85·13

1148.4 1261.4 1334.1 1428.1 1522.2

3"3.7 33.7 33.7 33.7 33.7

38.3 38.3 38.3 38.3 38.3

33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0

-

42.0 50.4 58.8 62.8 67.2

26.0 28.7 30.3 35.7 . 34.9

7.8 8.3 8.7 9.2 9.3

180.8 192.4 202.8 212.7 216.4

45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0

433.5 453.0 497.3 480.0 503.3

180.0 180.0 180.0 180.0 180.0

122.2 122.2 122.2 122.2 122.2

780.7 800.2 844.3 827.2 850.5

961.5 992.6 1047.1 1039.9 1066.9

974.7 1043.8 863.7 967.6 1069.0 1131.3 1215.4 1305.8

130.1 199.2 102.5 186.9 268.8 287.0 388.2 455.3

cost of the four new varieties with yields equal or higher than local, were very similar to that of the local varieties. Shiraz, Mataro and Crenache noir were less labour demanding varieties, as a result of lower yields. Interest on fixed capital and depreciation was higher for cordon-pruned vines.

Gross margin of all new varieties, except Shiraz and Mataro, was higher than that of both local varieties. It ranged between C£756.7/b.a for Crenache nolr and C£925.9/b.a for Malvasia grossa when head-pruned, and between C£1069/ha and C£1305.8/b.a when cordon-pruned. Gross margin for Mataro was considerably lower than for Local white but only slightly lower than Local black, while for Shiraz this was about 12% lower than for Local black and 16­18% lower than Local white.

Malvasia grossa was the most profitable new variety with net profit C£300.4/b.a and C£455.3/b.a when head- and cordon-pruned, respectively. Of all

new varieties only Shiraz had lower net profit than local varieties, while Mataro was less profitable than Local white under the same pruning system. All other new varieties were more profitable.

Total and variable cost per ton of grapes was higher than that of local grapes for all new varieties, except Carignan noir and Malvasia grossa, the only new varieties with higher yields than local vines (fable 6). Replanting of old vines with either local or new varieties is expected to result in reduction of the variable cost by C£3.3 to C£13.6/t compared to the unit variable cost of existing local vines. Reduction in the unit cost is expected to be more drastic in the case of cordon-pruned vines. Reduction in total cost per unit of grapes is also expected to occur when replanting old vines with local or new varieties, but not with Shiraz and Mataro.

Quality Zone C

This zone includes the vines area not included in the other two quality zones. Five new varieties (Alicante Boushet, Plant X', Chenin blanc, Malvasia

grossa and Jaen), recommended for this zone, were compared to Local black and Local white. None of these varieties was more productive than local Varieties. Only the yields of Malvasia grossa and Jaen were as high as that of local vines. All

varieties had 40% higher yields when cordon-pruned. Gross revenue (including area subsidy of C£56.0/ha) from Alicante Boushet which fetched the highest price (C£932/t) was at the same level as Local white but higher than the gross revenue from Local black. Gross revenue from Plant 'X' and Chenin blanc was lower than that of both local varieties. Their higher prices (C£85.5/t) did not compensate for reduced yields. Malvasia grossa and Jaen were the only varieties in quality zone C with gross revenue higher than that of the local, under either pruning system.

Variable costs showed only minor differences among Varieties. They were at about the same level for the higher producing local varieties and Malvasia grossa and Jaen, but slightly lower for the other three varieties (fable 5), mainly due to lower transportation and crop insurance costs which were affected directly by the yields and gross revenue, respectively.

Fixed costs presented about the same picture as variable costs. They were slightly reduced for lower yielding varieties as a result of lower labour requirements for harvesting. Both variable and flxed costs were higher for cordon-pruned vines (fable 5).

Gross margin of Alicante Boushet, Malvasia grossa and Jaen was higher than that of local varieties. Gross margin of Plant X' and Chenin blanc was lower. It ranged between C£922.2/ha for Alicante Boushet and C£1102.2/ha for Malvasia grossa and Jaen when head-pruned and between C£1314.2/ha and C£1564.5/ha for the same varieties when cordon-pruned.

Net profit per ha of Plant 'X' and Chenin blanc was similar to that of Local black, but considerably lower than net profit of Local white. Alicante

15

-

-... en

Table 5. Costs and returns for one ha of new wine-grape varieties recommended for Quality Zone C.

Head - pruned

Local

BLach..l! \'hi te

Alicante

boushet

Plant 'X' Chenin blanc

Na l va s i a sr o s sa J"en

Yield:

Price:

Subsidy:

Tons!ha

CElton

CE!ha

15.0

74.0

56.0

15.0

78.7

56.0

12.7

93.2

56.0

12.7

85.5

56.0

15.0

85.5

56.0

A. GROSS REVENUE CE. 1166.0 1236.5 1239.6 1141.8 1338.5

Variable costs

Fertilizers

Plant protection

Machinery inputs

Hired labour

Other

Crop insurance

Interest on ~perating capital

33.7

38.3

33.0

-

90.0

27.0

10.0

33.7

38.3

33.0

-90.0

27.0

10.0

33.7

38.3

33.0

-76.2

28.9

9.5

33.7

38.3

33.0

-76.2

28.9

9.5

33.7

38.3

33.0

-90.0

31.1

10.2

B. TOTAL VARIABLE COSTS CE 232.0 232.0 219.6 219.6 236.3

Fixed costs

Rent of land

Family labour

Interest On fixed capital

Establishment cost (depreciation)

60.0

414.8

92.2

73.5

60.0

414.8

92.2

73.5

60.0

402.0

92.2

73.5

60.0

402.0

92.2

73.5

60.0

414.8

92.2

73.5

C. TOTAL FIXED COSTS CE 640.5 640.5 627.7 627.7 640.5

D. TOTAL COSTS (B+C) CE 872.5 872.5 847.3 847.3 876.8

E. GROSS MARGIN (A-B) CE 934.0 1004.5 1020.0 922.2 1102.2

F. NET PROFIT (A-D) CE 293.5 364.0 392.3 294.5 461. 7

l! For comparison purpose.

Cordon - pruned

LOCClL Alicante Plant 'X' Nalvasia

JHackl! Ililite bousheL Chenin blanc

grossa. Jaen

21,0 21.0 17.8 17.8 21.0

74.0 78.7 93.2 85.5 85.5

56.0 56.0 56.0 56.0 56.0

1610.0 1708.7 1715.0 1577.9 1851.5

33.7 33.7 33.7 33.7 33.7

38.3 38.3 38.3 38.3 38.3

33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0

- - - - -

126.0 126.0 106.8 106.8 126.0

37.8 37.8 40.5 40.5 43.6

12.1 12.1 11.4 11.4 12.4

280.9 280.9 263.7 263.7 • 287.0

60.0 60.0 60.0 60.0 60.0

497.3 497.3 484.5 484.5 497.3

180.0 180.0 180.0 180.0 180.0

122.2 122.2 122.2 122.2 122.2

859.5 859.5 846.7 846.7 859.5

1140.4 1140.4 1110.4 1110.4 1146.5

1329.1 1427.8 1451.3 1314.2 1564.5

469.6 568.3 604.6 467.5 705.0

Boushet was more profitable than both local Estimated variable costs per ton of grapes was varieties. while Malvasia grossa and Jaen were the about the same for the local varieties. Malvasia' most profitable of all varieties with net profit grossa and Jaen, and slightly lower than that of the exceeding the net profit of Local black by about 50­ other three varieties. Variable unit cost is expected

58% and that of Local white by about 25% (fable to be reduced by 36%-51% when old vines are·

5). replanted with either local or any of the new

Table 6. Expected reduction in the cost of production of new wine-grape varieties as compared to the present situation by zone.

Total cost

Quality Zone Present

situation ( Local black)

Es tima ted cost

Difference C[/t

IIEAD-PRUNED\ Quality Zone A (Mountain), Local blac~1 and whi te 166.6 90.2 76.4 Cabernet franc 166.6 147.7 18.9 Riesling 166.6 138.7 27.9 Mataro 166.6 104.7 61.9 Halvasia grossa 166.6 90.4 76.2

Quality Zone B (Krasokhoria)

Local black-V and whit.e 89.2 76.0 13.2 Shiraz 89.2 107.0 -17.8 Nataro 89.2 98.8 - 9.6 Crenach nair 89.2 84.7 4.5 Plant 'X', Chenin blanc 89.2 76.2 13.0 Car i gna n nair 89.2 71.1 18.1 Hal vas i.a grossa 89.2 67.6 21.6

Quality Zone C (Vines Paphos)

Local black-V and white 78.2 58.2 20.0 Alicante boushet, Plant 'X',

Cheni.n blanc 78.2 66.7 11.5 Malvasia grossa, Jaen 78.2 58.4 19.8

CORDON-PRUNED\ Quality Zone A (Mountain), Local blac~1 and white 166.6 84.7 81.9 Cabernet frallc 166.6 137.4 29.2 Riesli ng 166.6 129.7 36.9 Matara 166.6 97.8 68.8 Nalvasia grossa 166.6 84.9 81.7

Quality Zone B (Krasokhoria)

Local blacJ/ and white 89.2 71.0 18.2 Shiraz 89.2 99.4 -10.2 Hataro 89.2 91.6 - 2.4 Crenach nair 89.2 78.8 10.4 Plant 'X', Chenin blanc 89.2 71. 7 17.5 Carignan nair 89.2 66.2 23.0 Ma1vasia grossa 89.2 63.5 25.7

Quality Zone C (Vines Paphos)

Local b1ac~1 and white 78.2 54.3 23.9 A1icante baushet, Plant 'X',

Chenin blanc 78.2 62.4 15.8 Ma1vasia grossa, Jaen 78.2 54.6 23.6

Present situation Estima ted Di f ference

(Local cost CLlt black)

41.8 41.8 41.8 41.8 41.8

26.5 26.5 26.5 26.5 26.5 26.5 26.5

27.2

27.2 27.2

41.8 41.8 41.8 41.8 41.8

26.5 26.5 26.5 26.5 26.5 26.5 26.5

27.2

27.2 27.2

19.7 31.9 29.8 23.1 19.9

16.5 23.2 21.4 18.7 16.8 16.3 15.5

15.5

17.3 15.7

15.9 24.9 23.6 18.4 16.1

13.5 18.4 17 .2 15.3 13.9 13.5 12.9

13.4

.14.8 13.7

22.1 9.9

12.0 18.7 21.9

10.0 3.3 5.1 7.a 9.7

10.2 11.0

11.7

9.9 11.5

25.9 16.9 18.2 23.4 25.7

13.0 8.1 9.3

11. 2 12.6 13.0 13.6

13.8

12.4 L3.5

11 For comparison purpose.

17

2

varieties recommended Ior zone C. Reduction is also expected in the total cost per unit of grapes by 25­30% from replanting with local varieties, Malvasia grossa or Jaen and by only 15-20% from replanting with the other three nevi varieties (Table 6).

Cost • benefit analysis of vine replanting with new wine grape varietl.es

Determination of costs and returns of the new wine grape varieties and comparison of their economic results provide the basis for assessment of their profitability. This kind of analysis, however, constitutes a static approach towards the problem of vine replanting. Cost-benefit analysis is a more dynamic process of assessing' the merit of vine replanting over a given period. It encounters the problem of making comparisons between costs and benefits occuring in different periods of time, in coniuction with initial investment for the establishment of vineyards, the varying progression of yields and the foregone benefit from uprooting the old vines.

Internal Rate ofRetum (IRR) is the rate which makes the present value of all benefits incurred over a period equal to the present value of all costs. It is the most commonly used discounting method for comparisons between future benefits and costs. Estimation of both financial and economic IRR provides a framework within which aspects of vine replanting concerning the private investor (in our case the vine grower), or the economy of the country as a whole can be evaluated.

Calculated IRRs showed considerable variation among and within varieties depending on zone, pruning system, type of cash-flow, productivity of old vines and whether the analysis was viewed from the point of the beneficiary (financial) or the

, country's economy (economic). Results of the cost­benefit analysis (Table 7) were as follows:

(a) In all cases of replanting financial IRR was higher than economic, indicating that vine replanting

would benefit the private grower to a larger extent than. the country's economy. This was expected since all subsidies were excluded from the stream of benefits for the economic analysis.

(b) Replanting with cordon-pruned vines in replacement of low or mean productivity old vines resulted in higher financial and economic IRR than replanting with head-pruned vines irrespective of zone, variety or type of cash-flow, because of the higher yields achieved.

(c) The IRR from replanting low productivity old vines with new or local varieties was at the same or higher level than from replanting mean productivity vines. The level of IRR depends on the foregone income from uprooting the old vines. When the foregone income from replannng :low or mean productivity old vines was zero, (financial analysis including or excluding labour) the IRR was at the same level. When the foregone income was positive, (financial analysis including labour in quality zones B and C and excluding labour in all zones), the IRR for replanting low productivity vines was higher than that for replanting mean productivity vines.

(d) The economic IRR excluding .labour was higher than that of including labour for all varieties, in all quality zones irrespective of the level of the foregone income.

(e) The financial IRR excluding labour was higher than that of including labour in quality zone A, in which the foregone benefit was very low, but not in quality xones B and C where the latter was considerablyhigher.

(0 In quality zone A, replanting of low or mean productivity vines with either new or local varieties,

under any type of training, was neither financially

nor economically feasible when total costs were accounted for. The relatively high investment required at the initial stage of replanting, the slow progression of yields (Appendix Table 22) of new varieties and their low productivity afterwards were

III

18

---------------_........."""""""....,.--,--_._._._.. __._-----~-----

Table 7. Internal rate of return (%) of new wine-making grape varieties ~y quality zone according to type oftraining, type of cash-flow and productivity level of replanted vineyards.

Type uf t r a I ning HEW - PRUNED

• Net cash balance= Total in flo" minus Net cash balance= Total inflow minus

Total cosLs Cash expenses

Qua I ity Zone Area ProducLi.vity level of replantc;d vineyard ( ha )

Low Hcan Low- i'lc<ln

F'inanc i a.l EconomIc Vi nanci a l. Economi.c Ff.nanc ia l ~conom i.e Financial Economic ~

Quality Zone A (Mountain) -. Loca L bIackJ./ 4.7 0.0 4.7 0.0 12.2 3.4 7. I i.6 Cabcr ne r franc 40 3.1 0.0 3. I 0.0 10.4 4.5 5. I 2.~

Ri.cs l i.ng 15 4.3 0.0 4.3 0.0 11.2 5_ 1 6.0 J ,()

Hi! taro 100 5.2 0.0 5.2 0.0 12.0 5.0 6.8 J.S :"1(1 l vas in 35 5.8 0.0 5.8 0.0 12.3 4.J 7.2 2.7 Local whi t c 50 4.9 0.0 4.9 0.0 12.3 3. I, 7.J I,()

gros.s~1

Zone A 2/,0 4.8 0.0 4.8 0.0 U.8 4.5 6.6 2.9

, Qu".Lity Zone n (Krasokhoria)

l.oc n I black1/ 8.3 0.0 6.6 0.0 9. I 5.9 0.0 O. I ShLrilL 45 7.9 0.0 6.2 0.0 7.6 6_6 G.O I.l ~lata ro 125 9.5 0.0' 7.8 0.0 9.1 7.8 0.0 2.6 Crcnuchc noir u.I 0.0 9.4 0.0 lO.4 7.7 l.2 2.6

I "IPL.lnt .\ . Cheni.n b lanc 40 u .« 0.0 10.0 0.0 11.4 8.7 2.6 J ,() \ .,Local white 30 9.8 0.0 8. l 0.0 10.2 6.8 O.S

Carignan noir 13.2 0.0 11.6 0.0 12.3 8.5 3.b 3.6 Malvasia grossa, Jaen 40 14.2 0.0 12.5 0.0 13.3 10. I 4.8 5.5

Zone II 280 10.6 0.0 8.9 0.0 10.1 8.1 l.3 3.0

Quality Zone C (Vines Paphos) , Local blilck11 l6 . .l 0.0 13.9 0.0 .l2.6 8.1 4.6 4. I ALi.canLc boushct l20 17.7 4.2 15.6 4.2 13.9 11.2 6.2 7.6

r r:Plan t Xr I Chcnin b l aric L20 l5.5 0.0 11.4 0.0 l2.4 9.3 4.') 1 •. 1I

~1.J.l\'asi<.J g'-OSSil, Jaen 270 19.7 5 •.l .l7.5 5. L .l5.1 Ll.5 7.4 7. ') Loca.l !>hite 50 17. () 0.5 15.4 0.'5 13.6 9.3 S.8 5.S

Zone C 560 18.2 3.4 16.0 3.4 14 . .l 10.8 6.1, 7. I

Type of traIning CORDON - PRUNED

Quality Zone A (Mountain)

Local black"!.! flo 0 0.0 6.0 0.0 11.9 4.6 tL4 3.4 Ca bo r ne t. franc 40 4.7 0.0 4.7 0.0 .LO.l 5.6 6.4 4.4 Riesling 15 5.7 0.0 5.7 0.0 11.0 6.2 7.3 '.J. L Hata.-o 100 6.5 0.0 6.5 0.0 .ll.7 6.2 s.: s. I Ha.lvasia grosscJ. 35 6.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 .l2.0 5.4 8.5 4.2 Loca.l ..hite 50 6.2 0.0 6.2 0.0 12.2 4.6 8.6 3.4

Zone A 240 6.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 U.S 5.6 7.9 4.5

Quality Zone n (Krasokhor i.a )

Local bLack..!.! 9.6 0.0 8.5 0.0 11.1 7.4 4.3 3.5 Shiraz 45 9.3 0.0 8 . .1 0.0 9.7 8.2 2.5 4.3

125 lO.5 0.0 9.5 0.0 LJ.O 9.2 4.2 5.5Hataro Crenache nair 12.1 0.0 10.9 0.0 12.3 9.2 5.7 5.4

l' l a n L ' X' , Chcni.u I> l anc 1,0 12.6 0.0 Ll. 4 0.0 L3.3 9.9 6.7 6.3 Local whi.Le 30 10.9 0.0 9.7 0.0 12. L 8.1 5. I, 4.3

l4.0 0.0 12.8 0.0 l4. I 9.9 7.r, 6.3Carignan noir Halvasia grossa, .Io ou 40 14.9 2.8 13.8 2.8 l5. I 1.1.6 iJ.6 8.1

280 11.6 0.3 10.5 0.3 12.0 9.5 5.2 5.8Zone·B

QUC1lity Zonr C (Vines Pa phos )

Local bl;:ickl.! 16.6 2. I rs. L 2.1 I~ .8 LO.O 8.7 7. I

IILi cant.c hou shct; L20 J8.2 6.8 16.7 6.8 16.2 13.0 10. l. 10.2 Plant r XI. Chc-ni u bl anc 1.20 .16. L 3.8 14.7 3.8 L4.7 11.2 8.6 8.J Na.l.vas i <.1 grOtiS<::ll Jacil 270 20.0 7.7 18.5 7.7 17.3 LJ.3 11.2 10.5

\~'~1 i t.c 50 18.0 4.2 16.5 4.2 '15.1> u . l 9.7 8.2Loc" I

Zone C 560 18.6 6.3 17.1 6.3 16.4 12.6 10.3 9.7

11 For c omp.ir ison p1l1'po s c , 19

. ....~.

c::__=-,

low productivity old vines with any of the new varieties, except head-pruned Shiraz, was fmancially feasible, irrespective of whether labour costs were included or not in the cash-flow. Replanting mean productivity old vines with any new variety. except Shiraz and head-pruned Mataro, was financially feasible when labour costs were included in the cash­flow. From the economic point of view none of the new varieties could replace old vines of either productivity if labour costs were considered.. When labour costs were excluded, the economic IRR of Malvasia grossa, Jaen (under head-pruning) and all varieties except Shiraz under cordon-pruning, was higher than 9%. Best varieties to replace old vines in quality zone B were Malvasia grossa and Jaen, followed by Carignan noir. Local black and Local white were better varieties than Shiraz and Local white better than Mataro.

(h) In quality zone C replanting of low or mean productivity old vines with any new variety was financially feasible when labour costs were accounted for, and IRR ranged between ,13.4% and 20.0%. When labour was excluded the fmancial IRR exceeded the cut-off rate of 9%, in cases of replanting of low productivity vines, but not of mean productivity vines with head-pruned new varieties or with cordon-pruned Chenin blanc and Plant 'X'. Replanting of low or mean productivity vines with new varieties was not expected to be beneficial for the country's economy, when l~ur

cost was included in the cash flow. The economic IRR exceeded the cut-off rate of 9% only when labour was excluded from costs and new varieties were used to replace low productivity vines, or mean productivity vines under cordon-pruning. Malvasia grossa, Jaen and Alicante Boushet were the best varieties for quality zone C.

It has been sufficiently demonstrated from the above analysis why growers in quality zone A and

'to a lesser extent in quality zone B are reluctant to replant with new varieties. In, quality zone C growers are willing to replant with new varieties

the main reasons for the low IRR, which was lower

20

than the cut-off rate of 9% for all new varieties. When labour costs were excluded from the cash flow,' financial IRR exceeded 9% only when low productivity old vines were replanted, while, economic IRR was below 9% in all cases.

(g) In quality zone B, vines replanting was more promising, because of higher yields. Replanting of low productivity old vines with any of the new varieties, except head-pruned Shiraz, was fmancially feasible, irrespective of whether labour costs were included or not in the cash-flow. Replanting mean productivity old vines with any new variety, excepPt Shiraz and head-pruned Mataro, was financially feasible when labour costs were included in the cash-flow. From the economic point of view none of the new varieties could replace old vines of either productivity if labour costs were considered.. When labour costs were excluded, the economic IRR of Malvasia grossa, Jaen (under head-pruning) and all varieties except Shiraz under cordon-pruning, was higher than 9%. Best varieties to replace old vines in quality zone B were Malvasia grossa and Jaen, followed by Carignan noir. Local black and Local white were better varieties than Shiraz and Local white better than Mataro.

(h) In quality zone C replanting of low or mean productivity old vines with any new variety was fmancially feasible when labour costs were accounted for, and IRR ranged between 13.4% and 20.0%. When labour was excluded the fmancial IRR exceeded the cut-off rate of 9%, in cases of replanting of low productivity vines, but not of mean productivity vines with head-pruned new varieties or with cordon-pruned Chenin blanc and Plant 'X'. Replanting of low or mean productivity vines with new varieties was not expected to be beneficial for the country's economy, when labour cost was included in the cash flow. The economic IRR exceeded the cut-off rate of 9% only when labour was excluded from costs and new varieties were used to replace low productivity vines, or mean productivity vines under cordon-pruning. Malvasia grossa, Jaen and Alicante Boushet were

1

i

the best varieties for quality zone C. It has been sufficiently demonstrated from the above analysis why growers in quality zone A and to a lesser extent in quality zone B are reluctant to replant with new varieties. In quality zone C growers are

willing to replant with new varieties because the productivity of the recommended new varieties is equal or higher than t1w productivity of local black. and because production of new varieties could be

disposed off without shares.

Assuming all costs are invariable, prices of grapes to be paid for the financial analysis to break­even at the cut-off rate of 9%, would be as follows: In quality zone A, prices of grapes of all replanted vines should increase by 22-39% (fable 8). Local varieties could replace low pro~ctivity old vines, but their prices should increase' by about 26%. The situation is completely different in quality zones B and C, where existing prices of all new varieties except Shiraz the price of which needs to be

Table 8. Break-even prices for wine grape varieties as compared to the going prices.

Prices Break-even Variety by received prices Difference

Quali ty zone by growers (cut-off r a t e 9%)':')

Quality Zone A (Mountain)

Local Black

Cabernet franc Riesling Mataro Ma1vasia grossa Local white

Quality Zone B C!rasokhoria)

Local Black

Shiraz Mataro Crenache noir Plant 'X', Chenin blanc Carignan noir Malvasia grossa, Jaen Local white

Quality Zone C (Vines Paphos)

Local Black

A1icante . boushet Plant 'X', Chenin blanc Malvasiagrossa, Jaen Local white

ilkg - - - - - -,ilkg - - - %

8.55 10.85 1.30 26.9

12.82 17.82 5.00 39.0 12.82 17.22 4.40 34~3

10.12 12.62 2.50 24.7 8.55 10.42 1.87 21.9 8.65 10.85 2.20 25.4

7.40 7.65 0.25 3.4

10.12 10.72 0.60 5.9 10.12 9.92 -0.20 -2.0 9.33 8.55 -0.88 -8.4 8.55 7.62 -0.93 -10.9 8.55 6.81 -1.74 -20.4 8.55 6.82 -1. 73 -20.2 7.87 7.62 -0.25 -3.2

7.40 5.75 -1.65 -22.3

9.32 6.72 -2.60 -18.3 8.55 6.72 -1.83 -21.4 8.55 5.72 -2.83 -33.1 7.87 5.22 -2.65 -33.7

*) Financial IRR of head-pruned vines to replace low productivity old vines. 21

- - - - - -

increased by 6%, are beyond the break-even level. In these zones local varieties could also replace old vines but the price of Local black in quality zone B should be increased by 3.4% (Loca1 black Is not recommended for replanting but it Is used for

, comparison).

The prices set for the low yielding, but of superior quality varieties in quality zone A , were

Table 9. Break-even economic prices for to the going prices.

detrimental to their adoption by the growers. Prices of these varieties do not represent their quality and, therefore, the government could examine the poSsibility of raising them above the break.-even levels calculated here. At a later stage when superior quality grapes will be coming into the market the prices would be set by the market forces. Even now, some newly established small vintage wineries offer higher prices for superior quality grapes produced in quality zone A

wine grape varieties compared

Break-even economic Difference bet~een

Prices prices prices received and Variety by received (cut-off rate 9%) break-even

Quali ty zone by growers Labour valued at cost Labour valued at cost

zero full zero full

1 2 3 4= 1-2 5= 1-3

Quality zone A (Mountain)

Local black

Cabernet franc Riesling Nataro Malvas ia grossa Local white

Quality zone B (Krasokhoria)

Local black

Shiraz Na t ar o Crenache noir Plant 'X', Chenin blanc Carignan noir Malvasia grossa, aen Local white

Quality zone C (Vines Paphos)

Local black

Alicante boushet Plant 'X', Chenin blanc Halvasia grossa, Jaen Local white

8.5

12.8 12.8 10.1 8.5 8.6

7.4

10.1 10.1 9.3 8.5 8.5 8.5 7.9

7.4

9.3 8.5 8.5 7.9

9.0

16.0 15.5 10.5 9.0 9.0

6.0

9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 5.5 5.5

5.0

5.0 5.8 5.0 5.0

- - - i/kg

15.0

26.0 25.0 18.0 16.0 15.0

9.8

14.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 10.0 9.0 8.5

6.8

8.0 8.0 6.8 6.8

0.5

3.2 2.7 0.4 0.5 0.4

-1.4

-1.1 -2.1 -2.3 -2.5 -2.5 -3.0 -2.4

-2.4

-4.3 -2.7 -3.5 -2.9

6.5

13.2 12.2 7.9 7.5 6.4

2.4

3.9 1.9 1.7 1.5 1.5 0.5 0.6

-0.6

-1.3 -0.5 -1.7 -1.1

22

Turning now to the crucial question whether to recommend replanting, knowing in advance that this is not an economically attractive proposition for the time being, the break-even economic prices of all new and local varieties were estimated and compared to the existing wine grape prices by quality zone with the following results (fable 9).

When own labour is valued at zero cost, prices of both local and new varieties in quality zone A should be increased by 4 to 25%, for vine replanting to be for the benefit of the economy. The prices presently received by the growers are higher than the break-even prices of all varieties in the other zones. When own labour valued at full cost, the present grape prices of all varieties are slightly higher than the break-even economic prices only in quality zone C. A price increase of 6 to 32%, depending on variety's productivity, is required for the grapes produced in quality zone B to reach the break-even economic price level, whereas for grapes produced in quality zone A such an increase should be much higher (75-100%).

If vintage wineries could offer the above prices to the growers and at the same time export quality wine at remunerative prices then the viticultural sector in Cyprus would face better days. With the present set of f.o.b. prices, quality of wine exported and destination of exports, the vine industry is not economically viable. The only way out is by producing quality wine to satisfy both local demand and the export market. Presently, the f.o.b. price of bottled table wine is just enough to coyer the cost of production and the subsidy of raw material (grapes, Debus, 1986). Therefore, we can conclude, for practical purposes, that the exports of bottled table wines are selling at economic break-even prices. As demand for quality wine is increasing, it would be possible to export in the future bottled quality wine with an appellation of origin status at prices increased by at least 80%. SUch an increased price, assuming the profit to the wineries is 20%, allows increase of 26 cent/kg of quality grapes which is enough to cover the break-even economic

prices given in Table 9 (Coopers and Lybrand, 1987). Therefore, in the long-run it would be profitable for the growers and the economy to produce quality wine. Policy measures such as vine replanting is a prerequisite to the success of this endeavour.

CONCLUSIONS

In spite of all measures .taken and incentives given to wine grape growers, progress of the vine replanting project was slow and its success Umited Most of the area replanted with new varieties is taken up by a few high yielding varieties such as Carignan noir, Palomino and Crenache noir.

Seven reference group characteristics i.e. location, variety, replanting period. family size, fann size, area under vines and variety of replanted old vines, and three decision making elements Le, opportunity, expectation and belief, are factors influencing· farmer's satisfaction from vine replanting and should be taken into account in the preparation of a revised replanting project in order to speed up its implementation.

The most productive new varieties are more profitable than the local ones, and could easily replace old unproductive vineyards in QUality zones B and C. The present set of prices for the least productive but superior qUality varieties was detrimental to their adoption by the growers. Prices of these varieties do not represent their value, therefore, the government should examine the possibility of raising the prices above the break­even levels calculated here.

The economic viability of the vine replanting project depends to a large extent on grape prices which now are low. The present situation will be reversed gradually with the production of superior quality wines (Appellation of Origin) the prices of which are high enough to allow the purchase of superior quality grapes (quality zone A) by the wine industries at about twice their present prices.

23

ACKNOWLEDGEMENfS

The authors wish to thank all the growers

interviewed for their willingness and cooperation

over the period of the study, and to express their

appreciation to Mr. N. Roumbas of the Viticulture

and Oenology Section of the Department of

Agriculture for making available invaluable

information.

They also wish to acknowledge the help of A Demetriou, S. Antoniou, P. Shlskos, Y. Loizou and

K. Charalambous in collecting the data and of S. Philippou, Ph. Pengerou and E. Photiou in

processing the data.

REFERENCES

Coopers & Lybrand. 1987. Feasibility study on proposed establishment of a model winery at Arsos. Revised-report, Nicosia (Unpublished).

Debus, L. 1986. Provisional results concerning the , mission 'Adviser on wines'. Report submitted to

the Ministry of Commerce and Industry. Agriculture and Food International Consulting. Bonn. (Unpublished).

Ministry of Finance. 1986. Agricultural Statistics. 1985. Department of Statistics and Research, Nicosia. Ministry of Finance. 1986. Statistics of Imports and Exports, 1985. Department of Statistics and Research, Nicosia.

Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources. 1957. Report following Branas visit. Department of Agriculture, Nicosia.

Papachristodoulou, S. and Chr. Papayiannis. 1988. Technoeconomic analysis of wine grapeproduction in Cyprus. Agricultural Economic Report 19. Agricultural Research Institute, Nicosia.

Reeder, W.W. 1963. Directive factors in social action: A multiple factor theory of social action. Commu­nity Development Review, 8: 39-53.

Reeder, W.W. 1967. 'A theory of decision making and social action. Department of Rural Sociology. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, USA.

Rossi, F.I. 1956. An Investigation into the Vines Industry of Cyprus. Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Nicosia.

Vine Products Commission. 1978. The Vine Industry of Cyprus. The Vine Products Commission, Limassol. (Unpublished).

Yacoub, S. and A. Haddad. 1970. Factors Influencing Farmers' participation in a Lebanese Village Cooperative. Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, A.U.B., Beirut.

24

APPENDIX TABLES

Appendix Table l. Area (ha) replanted with new wine grape varieties during 1970-85 and degree of success of the vines replanting project.

Out of Total CumulativeUnder Project project area % of success

over taskYear (15000 ha )

(ha) (%) (ha) (%) (ha) (%) Under TotalprQject

1970 1 0.2 1 0.1 0.01 0.01

1971 4 0.7 4 0.3 0.03 0.04

1972 1 0.2 3 0.4 4 0.3 0.04 0.07

1973 20 2.7 20 1.5 0.04 0.20

1974 10 1.7 19 2.6 29 2.2 0.10 0.39

1975 19 3.3 38 5.2 57 4.3 0.23 0.77

1976 46 7.9 44 6.0 90 6.9 0.54 1.37

1977 44 7.5 34 4.6 78 5.9 0.83 1.89

1978 65 11. 2 34 4.6 99 7.5 1. 26 2.55

1979 38 6.5 64 8.7 102 7.8 1.51 3.23

1980 59 10.1 87 11. 9 146 11.1 1. 90 4.20

1981 56 9.6 85 11.6 141 10.7 2.27 5.14

1982 82 14.1 147 20.1 229 17.4 2.82 6.67

1983 32 5.5 64 8.7 96 7.3 3.03 7.31

1984 58 10.0 52 7.1 no 8.4 3.43 8.04

1985 67 n.5 42 5.8 109 8.3 3.88 8.77

TOTAL 582 100.0 733 100.0 1315 100.0

% of total 44.3 55.7 100.0

2S

Appendix Table 2. Area replanted by district, area abandoned with new wine making varieties under vine replanting scheme and outside scheme 1970-1985.

Limassol Paphos Nicosia - LarnacH Area

Year Area

Under scheme TotalOutside

scheme

replanted Area

Under scheme .TotalOutside

scheme

replanted

TotalOutside scheme

Area replanted

Under scheme

Outside scheme

abandoned

Under scheme

Total,

- - - ha - - - - - - - -

1970 1 1

1971 4 4

1972 2 3 1 1

1973 l3 13 2l 21 3 3 17 17

1974 5 8 13 6 19 25 1 8 9

1975 6 8 14 18 35 53 5 5 10

1076 8 8 16 43 39 82 5 3 8

1977 14 18 32 30 16 46

1978 24 9 33 43 30 73 2 7

1979 2l 12 33 20 54 74 3 2 5

1980 33 14 47 27 76 103 4

1981 24 27 51 32 60 92 2 2

J982 24 30 54 55 108 163 3 13 16 4 4

1983 21 36 57 10 24 34 1 7 8 3 3

1984 12 23 35 44 2(, 70 2 4 6

1985 31 \0 41 35 29 64 1 3 4

TOTAL (HA) 229 218 4'47 363 538 901 7 30 37 17 53 70

% of total under scheme 38.2 60.6 1.2

% of total 16.5 15.8 32.3 26.2 38.8 65.0 0.5 2.2 2.7 24.3 75.7 100.0

% decrease

Appendix Table 3. Area planted in new Wine-making varieties, 1970-1985.

TOTtI I.1970-74 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985----~~~---

(ha) (%)

Carignan nair 9 13 18 24 44 47 95 83 149 35 15 18 550 41.8

Palomino 23 12 45 25 30 40 26 12 1 32 37 284 21. 6

Crenache nair 10 9 16 22 25 3 22 22 8 3 l5 156 11. 9

Nataro 4 5 1 2 27 32 6 l6 93 7. l

Oei Llade 1 2 2 4 3 10 6 25 13 3 4 73 5.5

Plant 'X' 1 1 5 l3 16 36 2.7

Cabernet franc 3 29 2 34 2.6

Cabernet sauvignon 1 9 5 7 2.0

Listan 1495 4 7 3 1 16 1.2

Ugn; blanc 1 1 3 1 1 3 l2 0.9

Black muscat 3 3 2 s 0.6

Semil10n 3 2 2 9 1).7

Nalvasia lunga 2 2 2 7 0.5

5h1raz 1 1 4 0.5

Pedro ximenpz 1 2 0.2

Merlot noi r 1 O. l

Riesling 1 0.1

TOTAL AREA' (IIA) 58 57 90 78 99 102 146 141 229 96 110 109 1315 100.0

PERCENT OF TOTAL 4.4 4.3 6.9 5.9 7.5 7.8 11.1 10.7 17.4 7.3 8.4 8.3 100.0

CUMULATIVE % OF TOTAL 4.4 8.7 15.6 21.5 29.0 36.8 47.9 58.6 76.0 83.3 91.7 100.0

26

It­

5.1

Appendix Table 7. Relationship bet ween farmers' satisfaction and age of grower.

Appendix Table 4. Relationship between farmers' satisfaction and location.

AgeFrequency Zone A Zone B Zone C TOTAL Frequency TOTAL L.5 45-60 60

Not sa tisfied 17 4 3 24 Not satisfied 4 12 8 24Fairly satisfied 36 24 105 165 Fairly satisfied 51 54 60 165Satisfied 4 11 56 71 Satisfied 18 30 23 71

TOTAL 57 39 164 260 TOTAL 73' 96 91 260

X2~ 47.4 d.f.~ 4 P<O.OOl ? iX-~ 4.46 d f ,« 4 P/0.05

Appendix Table 5. Relationship between farmers' satisfaction and variety. Appendix Table 8. Relationship. between farmers' satisfaction and education of

growers.Frequency Mataro Cab.S. Cab.F. Carn Grn Pal Ocher TOTAL

Not satisfied 21 16 11 11 7 0 Education12 78 Frequency TOTAL Fairly satisfied 13 3 0 73 36 39 6 618 182

Not satisfied 21 3 24 TOTAL 34 19 11 84 43 39 30 260 Fairly satisfied 126 39 165

59 12 71Satisfied

X2~ 102.02 d.L; 6 P <0.001 206 54 260TOTAL

X2; 2.47 d.L; 2 P )0.05Appendix Table 6. Relationship between farmers's satisfaction and replanting period.

Planting period TOTAL .. Frequency 70-75 76-80 81-84 Appendix Table 9. Relationship between f3rmers' satisfaction and family size

of growers.Not satisfied 4 20 24 Fairly satisfied 18 50 97 165 Family size TOTALFrequencySatisfied 15 26 30 71 4 4

2 22 24Not satisfiedTOTAL 33 80 147 260 Fairly .satisfied 56 109 165

23 48 71Satisfied

x2; 15.55 d i f .« 4 O.OOl<P(O.Ol TOTAL 81 179 260

I\) -..I

2x : 6.47 d.L: 2 0.0l<P(0.05

I

~ Appendix Table 10. Re1ationsh:b b('tl.een farmers' satisfact ion and size of farm. Appendix Table 13. Relationship between farmers' satisfaction and age of old vine.

Farm s1>e Age of old vineFrequency FrequencyfOTAL TOTALJO 10-30 ]0 85 65-84 45-64 45

~ot satisfied 7 15 24 !'ot satisfied 25 16 10 3 54 Fa~r1y satisfied 3S 91 o' Satisfied-00 :65 59 45 20 13 137 Satisfiecl 4 45 n 71

TOTAL 84 61 30 16 191 TOTAL 49 151 60 260

2X = 1. 3 d.L= 3 P)0.05

2x = 14.43 d. f . = L. 0.001 (p (0.01

Appendix Table 14. Relationship between farmers' satisfaction and opportunity of growers to know about the project.

Appendix Table 11. Relationship b~t,·:een farmers' satisfaction and area under vines.

Oppor t uni t v Frequency TOTAL

Vines area Good Fair LimitedFrequency TOTAL

-10 10-25 over 25 Not satisfied 3 17 4 24

Not satisfied 14 9 1 24 Fairly satisfied 14 67 84 165

Fairly satisfied 52 71 29 152 Sa t ished 8 23 40 71

Satisfied 5 39 20 64 TOTAL 25 107 128 260

TOTAL 71 119 50 240

X2 = 13.09 d. f .« 4 0.01 (p (0.05 2=X 27.44 d c f ;> 2 P (0.001

l

f. Appendix Table 15. Relationship between farmers' satisfaction a~c expectations of growers.

Appendix Table 12. Relationship between farmers' satisfaction and variety before replanting.

ExpectationsFrequency TOTALLimited Fair StrongVariety bE~f~~~€l'~nJ:in"

Frequency TOTALXynisteri Navro Other r;ot satisfied 12 5 7 24

Not satisfied 8 13 3 24 Fairly satisfied 17 47 101 165

Fairly satisfied 10 114 41 165 Satisfied 3 17 51 71

Satisfied 5 52 14 71 TOTAL 32 69 159 260

TOTAL 23 179 58 260

? X-= 38.06 d.L=4 1'<0.001

d • [ • = !.

Appendix Table 16. Relationship between farmers' satisfaction and abi. U ty of Appendix Table 19. Relationship between farmers' satisfaction and access to labour growers to participate in the project. and machinery.

Abilitv Access to labour and machinerv Frequency FrequencyTOTAL TOTALHigh Nedium LOI' Limited Fair Good -

Not satisfied Not satisfied2 S 14 24 8 65 5 78 Fairly satisfied 15 26 125 166 Satisfied 18 153 11 182 Satisfied 4 12 54 70

TOTAL 26 218 16 260 TOTAL 21 46 193 260

X2= 0.023 d. L", 2 .e> 0.05

x2= 5.315 d i f .« 4 E> 0.05

Appendix Table 20. Relationship between farmers' satisfaction and income of grower.

Appendix Table 17. Relationship between farmers' satisfaction and off-f~rm employment of growers.

Income (C£OOO)Frequency TOTAL

Off-farm employment 2 2-4 4Frequency TOTAL Full-time Part-ti.me Nil Not satisfied 39 24 8 71

Not satisfied 12 8 4 24 Fairly satisfied 19 49 19 87 Fairly satisfied 62 32 71 165 Satisfied 13 36 53 102 Satisfied 20 18 33 71

TOTAL 71 109 80 260 TOTAL 94 58 108 260

2X = 61.1 d.f.= 4 P (0.001

x2= 8.93 d f ,» 4 t>0.05c

Appendix Table 21. Relationship between farmers' satisfaction and belief in project.

Appendix Table 18. Relationship between farmers' satisfaction and decissiveness of growers.

Belief'Frequency TOTAL

Deci.ssiveness Agree DisagreeFrequency TOTALSelf

Determinant 18 6 24.Conservative Not sat.i s f i ed

Not satisfied Fairly satisfied ISO 15 165IS 9 24 Fairly satisfied 134 Satisfied 64 6 7031 165 Satisfied 61 10 71

TOTAL 232 27 259

TOTAL 210 SO 260

2x = 6.032 d.L= 2 0.01 (p (0.05N <0

x2 = 6.39 d. f 2 O.01<P (0.05

Appendix Table 22. Yield progression of recommended new quality wine grape varieties for vine replanting compared to local black.

ProductivityProgression of yield (year)Type of training/ as compared toZone/Variety 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10-40 Local Black

- t/ha % - ~

HEAD-PRUNED VINES

Quality Zone A (Mountain)

Local Black 0.45 1.19 2.46 4.92 6.56 7.83 8.21 100.0

Recommended new varieties to replace local black

Cabernet franc Riesling Mataro Na1vasia grossa Local wh i. t e

0;22 0.26 0.37 0.45 0.45

0.67 0.75 1.04 1.19 1.19

1. 34 1.45' 2.01 2.46 2.46

2.69 2.91 4.03 4.92 4.92

3.58 3.88 5.37 6.56 6.56

4.25 4.63 6.34 7.83 7.83

4.48 4.85 6.71 8.21 8.21

54.5 59.1 81. 8

100.0 100.0

Quality Zone B (Krasokhoria)

Local Black 0.52 1.57 3.13 6.27 8.36 9.92 10.44 10.44 10.44 100.0

Recommended new varieties to replace local black

Sh i r a z Mntaro Crenache noir Plant 'X', Chenin blanc Cnrignan noi.r Ma1vnsia grossa, Jaen Local whi.te

0.37 0.37 0.45 0.52 0.56 0.60 0.52

1.04 1.12 1.34 1.57 1.68 1. 79 1.57

2.01 2.24 2.69 3.13 3.36 3.58 3.13

4.03 4.48 5.37 6.27 6.71 7.16 6.27

5.37 b.34 6.71 6.71 6.71 5.97 7.09 7.46 7.46 7.46 7.16 8.50 8.95 8.95 8.95 8.36 9.92 10.44 10.44 10.44 8.95 10.59 11.19 11.19.11.19 9.55 11.34 11.94 11.94 11.94 8.36 9.92 10.44 10.44 10.44

64.3 71.4 85.7

100.0 107. I. 114.3 100.0

Quality Zone C (Vines Paphos)

Local Black 0.75 2.24 4.48 8.95 11.94 14.17 14.92 14.92 14.92 100.0

Recommended new varieties to replace local black

A1icante boushet Plant 'X', Chenin blnnc Malvasia grossa, Jaen Local white

0.60 0.60 0.75 0.7.5

l.87 1.87 2.24 2.24

3.80 3.80 4.48 4.48

7.61 10.15 12.09 12.68 12.68 12.68 7.61 10.15 1.2.09 12.68 12.68 12.68 8.95 11.94 14.17 14.92 14.92 14.92 8.95 11.94 14.17 14.92 14.92 14. 'J2

85.0 85.0

100.0 100.0

CORDON-PRUNED VINES

, Quality Zone A (Mountain)

Local Black 0.63 1.67 3.45 6.89 9.19 10.92 11.49 100.0

Recommended new varieties to replace local black

Cal>ernet [rnnc Riesling ~Ia taro r1a l v a s i a g r o s su

Loca 1 vh i te

0.31 0.37 0.52 0.63 0.63

0.94 1.04 1.46 1.67 1.67

1.88 2.04 2.82 3.45 3.45

3.76 4.07 5.64 6.89 6.89

5.01 5.95 6.27 5.43 6.48 6.79 7.52 8.88 9.40 9.19 10.97 11.49 9.19 10.97 11.49

54.5 59.1 81.8

100.0 100.0

Quality Zone B (Krasokhoria)

Local Black 0.73 2.19 4.39 8.77 11.7013.89 14.62 14.62 14.62 100.0

Recommended new varieties to replace local black

Shiraz Na t a r o Chenachc noir Plan t, 'X', [hen i n bl anc Car i.gnan no i.r Malvasia grossa, Jnen Local whit~ .

0.52 0.52 0.63 0.73 0.78 0.84 0.73

1.46 l.57 1.88 2.19 2.35 2.51 2.19

2.82 5.64 7.52 8.88 9.40 9.40 9.40 3.13 6.27 8.36 9.92 10.44 10.44 10.44 3.76 7.52 10.03 11.91 12.53 12.53 12.53 4.39 8.77 11.70 13.89 14.62 14.62 14.62 4.70 9.40 12.53 14.83 15.67 15.67 15.67 5.01 10.03 13.37·15.87 16.71 16.71 16.7L 4.39 8.77 11.70 13.89 14.62 14.62 14.62

64.3 71.4 85.7

LOO.O L07. I. 1.14.3 100.0

Quality Zone C (Vines Paphos)

Local Black 1.04 3.13 6.27 12.53 16.71 19.84 20.89 20.89 20.89 100.0

Recommended new varieties to replace local black

A1icante boushet Plant 'X', Chenin blanc Malvasia grossa, Jaen Local white

0.84 0.84 1.04 1.04

2.61 2.61 3.13 3.13

5.3310.6514.20 16.92 17.75 17.75 17.75 5.3310.65 14.20 16.92 17.75 17.75 17.75 6.27 12.53 16.71 19.84 20.89 20.89 20.89 6.27 12.5316.71 19.84 20.89 20.89 20.89

85.0 85.0

100.0 100.0

Source: Viticulture and Oenology Section, Department of Agriculture, Limassol, Cyprus.30 Own calculations.

\-­

..~ . ,~.

L

Issued by the Press and Information Office. Nicosia Printed by M. S. Zevlari& & Sons Ltd, Tel. 311818. Strovolos - Nicosia

P.I.O. 57/89 - 600