10Review Article Economics of Agriculture 4/2012
UDC: 631.16:664.857/.858
ECONOMIC FEATURES OF PROCESSED FRUIT PRODUCTION IN SERBIA
Mirjana Lukac Bulatovic, Zoran Rajic, Ivana Ljubanovic Ralevic1
Summary
There are various possibilities of fruit processing regarding assortments of both semi-processed andfinishedfruit products. Within a wide assortment ofprocessedfruit products, there are semi-processed fruit products which can be directly marketed or used as raw materials in further stages of processing, thus causing different economic effects. This paper displays the indicators of economic effects (production value, production costs (especially direct costs), and the difference between production value and total production costs) in all stages of a certain type of fruit processing. The obtained results indicate that advanced stages of fruit processing entail an increase in costs, but these increased costs eventually enable higher revenues.
Fruit processing is cost-effective due to the fact that fruit processing value is higher than the market value offruits. The fruit processing value in compote production is on average 48.87% higher than the fruit market value. In semi-processedfruit production (fruit puree and pitted crushedfruits Rotativa2), the fruit processing value is on average 14.83% higher than the fruit market value.
Key words: processed fruit production, production value, production costs, financial results JEL: D29
1 Dr Mirjana Lukac Bulatovic, Assistant Professor, University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Agriculture, Trg Dositeja Obradovica 8, Novi Sad, Phone: +381 63 892 97 21, E-mail: mirjanalukac@gmail. com (lmirjana@polj.uns.ac.rs), Dr Zoran Rajic, Associate Professor, University of Belgrade, Faculty of Agriculture, Nemanjina 6, Zemun, Phone: +381 63 10 85 915, E-mail: zorajic@ agrif.bg.ac.rs, Dr Ivana Ljubanovic Ralevic, Full Professor, University of Belgrade, Faculty of Agriculture, Nemanjina 6, Zemun, Phone: +381 11 261 53 15/409, E-mail: iralevic@EUnet.rs
2 Unlike fruit puree which is a homogenous fruit mass, pitted crushed fruits (Rotativa) contain parts of processed fruits.
Introduction
Nowadays, Serbia possesses considerable fruit processing and cooling capacities. However, during the last decade of its development, the fruit processing industry in Serbia has addressed the issue of facility underutilisation (Milic at al., 2002, 2005). This is a consequence of the discrepancy between primary fruit production, fruit processing industry and low fruit market value. Approximately 10% of the total fruit yield in Serbia is processed, which is rather low in comparison with the USA where approximately 45% of produced apples and 70% of produced plums are processed.
Processed fruit production can be a highly profitable industry provided it meets market demands. However, current industrial processing facilities should be better equipped, modernised and specialised in order to produce high-quality products which would meet the demands of very selective markets. In addition to production capacity and raw materials, product branding is also an important constituent of successful fruit product marketing. The analysis of product assortment has shown that the Serbian processed fruit production does not have a leading market product, as far as both quantity and quality are concerned, unlike Greece where peach compote dominates the market, as well as apricot products in Hungary, apple juice in Switzerland, tomato products in Italy, etc. (Niketic-Aleksic, 1987).
Research Aims, Data Resources and Work Methods
The principal aim of this research is a review of significant production and economic aspects of processed fruit production. The focus of the research is the quantification of economic effects obtainable in primary production and all stages of a certain type of fruit processing. The analysis of main economic production indicators was done in 2011. The obtained production and economic results in processed fruit production were analysed based on the accounting calculations of the production, business reports, and company's recipes for processed fruit production in the Province of Vojvodina. The following products were observed: fruit purees, pitted crushed fruits, industrial marmalade, jam, compote and fruit juices.
During advanced stages of the research, a method of fruit processing value was applied in order to determine cost-effectiveness of using fresh fruits in production. The assessment of raw materials according to processing value is based on economic gains which are obtained as results of their utilisation in production. This value indicates cost-effectiveness of fruit processing and demonstrates how raw materials purchased on the market gain money value during production.
The processing (yield) value of every agricultural product can be determined, and this value basically represents the economic valorisation of products in technological processing. The processing (yield) value is determined in the following manner:
where Y is the processing (yield) value of an agricultural product (fresh fruits), TV is the market value of obtained processed fruit products, UTP indicates the total processing costs reduced by raw material costs of input agricultural products (fresh fruits), and X is the amount of a used agricultural product in kilograms, which is valorised.
The fruit processing value is calculated on the basis of calculation data of processed fruit production. The quality of raw materials and market price of obtained products greatly affect the processing price.
Research Results
In addition to fresh fruit consumption, fruits can be semi-processed and used in further processing, or fully processed into finished products. Therefore, there are two groups of processed fruit products: semi-processed fruit products and finished fruit products. The group of semi-processed fruit products includes: fruit pulps, purees, fresh (raw) fruit juice, and pasteurised fruits. The group of finished fruit products includes: compotes, purees, jams, marmalades, jellies, candied fruits, fruit preserves, juices, concentrated fruit juices, fruit syrups, and dried fruits.
Although the assortment of processed fruit products (semi-processed and finished products) is very wide, the production of fruit juices and frozen fruits dominates industrial processing (Lukac Bulatovic, 2010). Fruit juices and frozen fruits account for 71.95% of the total processed fruit production in Serbia.
Observed as a whole, the fruit processing in Serbia is badly organized and demonstrates significant weaknesses. First and foremost, processing facilities are oversized and lacking production specialisation, which negatively affects the marketing of high-quality and high-quantity processed fruit products. Approximately 10% of produced fruits and vegetables is processed in Serbia, which is rather low in comparison with developed countries where over 70% of the total fruit and vegetable production is processed.
The utilisation of fruit processing capacities in Serbia approximates to 79.2% in almond, hazelnut, and chestnut processing production, 69.7% in fruit concentrate production, 48.0% in fruit juice production, 34.9% in frozen fruit production, and 31.5% in marmalade production. The utilisation of capacities in other types of fruit processing production is under 17.1%.
One of the reasons of capacity underutilisation is low marketability of fruit products. Processed fruit products are still mostly produced by domestic resources as a consequence of consumer's low standard of living, high prices of processed fruit products, and unsatisfactory quality and assortment of products.
The fruit processing at the observed facility operates in two stages. The first processing stage, which occurs as a consequence of seasonal fruit yield, involves semi-processed fruit production. Fruits are processed into purees and pitted crushed fruits (Rotativa), which are later (out of season) further processed into finished products (jams, marmalades and fruit juices).
During 2011, the total processed fruit production at the observed facility amounted to 821,039 kg. Fruit puree with the annual production of 382,575 kg accounts for 46.60%, and occupies a leading position in the total amount of processed fruits (Table 1-3). The production volume of other processed fruit products ranges from 15,770 kg (industrial marmalade) to 167,247 kg (fruit juices).
Business results can be expressed by means of various indicators which measure and determine the economic effectiveness of production during a fiscal year (Andric, 1998). The most important indicators of business results are: the value of production, production costs, and economic (financial) results.
The production value of analysed processed fruit products was calculated based on the attained production volume and unit selling price. The value of production is directly proportional to the volume of production and selling price. An increase in production volume and selling price causes an increase in production value, and vice versa. In the analysed year (2011), the value of processed fruit production amounted to 92.8 million RSD. The lowest production value was recorded in industrial marmalade production (2.6 million RSD), whereas the highest production value was recorded in compote production (24.5 million RSD).
Table 1. Key economic indicators of the semi-processed fruit production in 2011 (in RSD)
Indicators Semi-processed fruit products
Industrial marmalade Pitted crushed fruits (Rotativa) Fruit puree
A. Production value 2,641,475.00 4,108,863.00 31,184,558.00
I Direct costs 1,744,803.69 2,710,796.35 20,560,035.76
1. Material costs 1,492,856.92 2,145,390.97 17,816,992.14
1.1. Raw materials 651,103.78 2,041,908.29 16,336,032.84
1.2. Additives (sugar, citric acid) 667,755.43 / /
1.3. Package 12,307.74 24,370.92 201,819.79
1.4. Energy (all forms) 161,689.97 79,111.76 1,279,139.51
2. Gross personal income 93,394.06 319,071.60 875,499.93
3. Depreciation 158,552.70 246,333.78 1,867,543.69
II Overhead costs 668,238.09 1,038,201.26 7,870,971.80
III Total costs 2,413,041.77 3,748,997.61 28,431,007.56
B. Financial result - profit 228,433.22 359,865.39 2,753,550.44
Attained production volume (kg) 15,770 49,185 382,575
Selling price (RSD/kg) 167.50 83.54 81.51
Total unit costs - RSD/kg 153.01 76.22 74.31
Production efficiency 1.09 1.10 1.10
Production profitability rate (%) 9.47 9.60 9.69
Production performance Labour hour requirement - h/100 kg Machine hour requirement - h/100 kg 2.21 2.65 0.88
0.30 0.08 0.10
Source: The calculation was done by the author based on the data calculation of fruit processing 718 EP 2012 (59) 4 (715-725)
Within the total unit cost structure, the direct costs account for 72.31%, whereas the overhead costs account for 27.69%. The material costs occupy the largest share of direct costs (60.05% on average). The raw material costs occupy the largest share of material costs (37.01% on average). The average share of additive costs (sugar, citric acid) in the total cost structure amounts to 11.93%, followed by the package costs (6.87% on average), depreciation (6.57% on average), gross personal income (5.69% on average), and electricity and mazut (fuel oil) (4.25%).
Table 2. Key economic indicators of the finished fruit production in 2011 (in RSD)
Indicator Finished fruit products
Compote Jam Fruit juice
A. Production value 24,485,100.00 12,873,750.00 17,516,407.00
I Direct costs 14,435,974.67 7,910,364.74 11,278,519.88
1. Material costs 11,395,456.15 6,506,727.65 9,670,422.24
1.1. Raw materials 4,977,027.36 2,418,894.47 5,632,241.08
1.2. Additives (sugar, citric acid) 1,936,508.84 2,638,793.96 1,569,104.00
1.3. Package 3,379,906.67 980,795.52 2,097,857.73
1.4. Energy (all forms) 1,102,013.28 468,243.70 371,219.43
2. Gross personal income 1,728,883.15 684,861.12 583,344.83
3. Depreciation 1,311,635.37 718,775.97 1,024,752.81
II Overhead costs 5,528,034.00 3,029,361.73 4,318,935.35
III Total costs 19,964,008.67 10,939,726.47 15,597,455.23
B. Financial result - profit 4,521,091.32 1,934,023.53 1,918,951.78
Attained production volume(kg) 139,394 66,868 167,247
Selling price (RSD/kg) 175.65 192.52 104.73
Total unit costs - RSD/kg 143.22 163.60 93.26
Production efficiency 1.23 1.18 1.12
Production profitability rate (%) 22.65 17.68 12.30
Production performance Labour hour requirement - h/100 kg Machine hour requirement -h/100 kg 3.25 3.75 1.37
0.06 0.28 0.04
Source: The calculation was done by the author based on the data calculation of fruit processing
The economic (financial) results were determined as a difference between the production value and total costs. Positive financial results (profit) were obtained in processed fruit production. In the analysed year, the highest profit (4.5 million RSD) was recorded in compote production. The lowest profit (228,433 RSD) was recorded in industrial marmalade production.
In this paper, the efficiency of production is expresses by a ratio based on the relation between the value of production and total costs. Another indicator of production efficiency is the cost price (Gogic, 2005). As long as the cost price of a product or service is lower than the market price, positive financial results (profit) are obtained.
The efficiency ratio of processed fruit production amounted to 1.14, i.e. for every 100 RSD of total costs 114 RSD of production value was obtained. According to the types of processed fruit products, the most efficient production was recorded
in compote production due to the highest efficiency ratio of 1.23. The production efficiency ratio can influence the selection of fruit products in processing provided there are favourable conditions such as a potential for marketing additional amounts of manufactured products.
Table 3. Key economic indicators of the semi-processed and finished fruit production in 2011 (in RSD)
Indicator Semi-processed fruit products Finished fruit products Total
A. Production value 37,934,896.00 54,875,257.00 92,810,153.00
B. Total costs 34,593,046.95 46,501,190.37 81,094,237.32
C Financial result - profit 3,341,849.05 8,374,066.63 11,715,915.68
Attained production volume (kg) 447,530 373,509 821,039
Production efficiency 1.10 1.18 1.14
Production profitability rate (%) 9.66 18.01 14.45
Source: The calculation was done by the author based on the data calculation of fruit processing
Profitability is a very important indicator of business performance, and a key factor in assessing financial success and further development of any enterprise. Moreover, profitability is an indicator of justification and utility of an industry. There are two types of profitability: the profitability of production and the profitability of production resources. Since accounting calculations do not express data on average resource utilisation, the profitability rate was used in this paper. The profitability rate can be calculated based on the relation between profit and total production costs (Elenov, 2002). Production is profitable only if positive financial results are obtained. Therefore, the profitability rate is often referred to as the rate of profit, and it is expressed as a percentage.
The positive profitability rate was recorded in processed fruit production in the analysed year. According to the types of processed fruit products, the positive profitability rate was 14.45% on average. The highest profitability rate was recorded in compote production (the profitability rate = 22.65%). In other types of processed fruit production, the profitability rate ranged from 9.47% in industrial marmalade production to 17.68% in jam production.
Production performance is expressed by means of quantity and value. The quantity of production performance in processed fruit production is measured by labour hours per unit of product. The highest production performance quantity of 0.0088 h/kg (113.64 kg/h) was recorded in fruit purees, and the lowest in jam production (0.0375 h/kg or 26.67 kg/h).
Processed fruit production enables more favourable production and economic results than the fresh fruit marketing (Rott, 1996). Advanced stages of processing cause an increase in costs, but these increased costs enable higher income and residual income. The economic effect of apple processing into clear apple juice and brandy indicates the increase in income of 26.9% and residual income of 1.7% in comparison with the effect of selling apples as consumable commodities on the domestic market (Lukac-Bulatovic, 2006). An apricot semi-processed product, fruit pulp, indicates the increase in income of 28.21% and residual income of 3.63%.
Further processing of fruit pulp into finished fruit products, jam and marmalade, increases the income by 40.83%, and the residual income by 19.94% (CindriC et al., 1981).
The processing value of basic raw materials indicates the highest potential price in purchasing raw materials on the market in order to meet the lowest margin of processing profitability (Radovic, Furundzic, 1997, Gogic, 2005). If the market price of fruits would equal the processing price then business results of processing would amount to zero. Therefore, fruit processing would be on the lowest margin of economic justification because the profit from fruit processing would amount to zero. If the fruit market price is higher than the processing price, fruit processing shows negative financial results (loss), and vice versa; if the fruit market price is lower than the processing price, fruit processing shows positive financial results (profit).
The processing value of fruits is higher than the selling (market) value of fruits as raw materials, thus fruit processing is cost-effective (Table 4-7).
Table 4. Processing value of basic raw materials in the fruit puree production in 2011 (RSD/kg)
Elements Semi-processed fruit products
Apple puree Apricot puree Peach puree Sour Cherry puree Plum puree
1. Selling price 41.50 101.00 69.00 126.50 58.00
2. Total costs (without basic raw material costs) 19.3800 38.0500 28.0900 46.1100 24.7400
2.1. Package 0.6800 0.6800 0.6800 0.6800 0.6800
2.2. Energy (all forms) 3.4600 3.5700 3.5700 3.5700 3.5700
2.3. Gross personal income 2.3200 2.3200 2.3200 2.3200 2.3200
2.4. Overhead costs 12.9200 31.4800 21.5200 39.5400 18.1700
3. Basic processing raw materials
3.1. Amount - kg 1.1800 1.3000 1.3090 1.3300 1.4700
3.2. Selling price 15.53 41.40 26.11 52.10 19.24
3.3. Value (3.1. x 3.2.) 18.3254 53.8200 34.1780 69.2930 28.2828
3.4. Processing value 18.7458 48.4231 31.2529 60.4436 22.6259
3.5. Difference 3.2158 7.0231 5.1429 8.3436 3.3859
4. Profit (1. - (2. + 3.3.)) 3.7946 9.1300 6.7320 11.0970 4.9772
Source: The calculation was done by the author based on the data calculation of fruit production and processing
In the fruit puree production in 2011, the processing value of fruits amounted to 36.30 RSD/kg on average (Table 4). The highest processing value was recorded in sour cherry and it amounted to 60.44 RSD/kg. The processing value of other analysed fruit species ranged from 18.75 RSD/kg (apples) to 48.42 RSD/kg (apricot).
The fruit processing value in puree production was higher by 15.38% on average in comparison with the market price of fruits as raw materials. According to the fruit species, the difference between processing and market value in puree production was significant in
apples and peaches. The processing value in apple puree production is 17.15% higher than the market value.
The processing value of basic raw materials in pitted crushed fruit (Rotativa) production in the analysed year amounted to 43.64 RSD/kg. The highest processing value of 60.60 RSD/ kg was recorded in sour cherries (Table 5). In the analysed pitted crushed fruit production, the processing value is on average 14.28% higher than the fruit market value. In plum pitted crushed (Rotativa) production, the processing value is 16.32% higher than the fruit market value, whereas in apricot Rotativa production the processing value is 12.50% higher than the selling price of basic raw materials.
Table 5. Processing value of basic raw materials in the pitted crushed fruit (Rotativa) production in 2011 (RSD/kg)
Semi-processed fruit products
Elements Apricot pitted crushed fruit Sour cherry pitted crushed fruit Plum pitted crushed fruit
Rotativa Rotativa Rotativa
1. Selling price 98.50 134.50 60.50
2. Total costs (without basic raw material costs) 40.1600 51.4700 28.3100
2.1. Package 0.6800 0.6800 0.6800
2.2. Energy (all forms) 1.7400 1.7400 1.7400
2.3. Gross personal income 6.9600 6.9600 6.9600
2.4. Overhead costs 30.7800 42.0900 18.9300
3. Basic processing raw materials
3.1. Amount - kg 1.2330 1.3701 1.4000
3.2. Selling price 41.40 52.10 19.24
3.3. Value (3.1. x 3.2.) 51.0462 71.3822 26.9360
3.4. Processing value 47.3155 60.6014 22.9929
3.5. Difference 5.9155 8.5014 3.7529
4. Profit (1. - (2. + 3.3.)) 7.2938 11.6478 5.2540
Source: The calculation was done by the author based on the data calculation of fruit production and processing
In the analysed compote production, the fruit processing value was 79.61 RSD/kg on average (Table 6). The highest processing value of approximately 98 RSD/kg was recorded in the sour cherry processing. The processing value of other analysed fruit species ranged from 52.71 RSD/kg (plum) to 83.69 RSD/kg (apricot).
The fruit processing value is on average 48.87% higher than the fruit market value. Therefore, it is economically justified to buy fruits and process them into compote. According to the analysed fruit species, the difference between the processing and market price in compote production is particularly highlighted in peach and plum processing. In the plum compote production, the processing value of basic raw materials is 61.64% higher than the market price.
Table 6. Processing value of basic raw materials in the compote production in 2011 (RSD/kg)
Elements Product
Apricot compote Peach compote Plum compote Sour cherry compote (with pits) Sour cherry compote (without pits)
1. Selling price 184.50 146.50 104.00 153.00 188.00
2. Total costs (without basic raw material costs) 113.3600 95.3100 71.3200 83.9900 93.8700
2.1. Additives (sugar, citric acid) 14.3900 13.4600 10.9300 8.7300 7.8000
2.2. Package 20.9000 20.9000 20.9000 20.9000 20.9000
2.3. Energy (all forms) 6.8800 6.9800 6.7000 6.6300 6.6300
2.4. Gross personal income 20.2900 13.9100 4.0600 4.0600 5.9500
2.5. Overhead costs 50.9000 40.0600 28.7300 43.6700 52.5900
3. Basic processing raw aterials
3.1. Amount - kg 0.8500 0.7872 0.6200 0.7000 0.9600
3.2. Selling price 41.40 27.00 20.22 62.10 62.10
3.3. Value (3.1. x 3.2.) 35.1900 21.2544 12.5364 43.4700 59.6160
3.4. Processing value 83.6941 65.0279 52.7097 98.5857 98.0521
3.5. Difference 42.2941 38.0279 32.4897 36.4857 35.9521
4. Profit (1. - (2. + 3.3.)) 35.9500 29.9356 20.1436 25.5400 34.5140
Source: The calculation was done by the author based on the data calculation of fruit production and processing
The processing value of fruits processed into compotes, purees, and pitted crushed fruit products (Rotativa) is higher than the fruit market value. The fruit processing value is 48.87% higher than the market value in compote production, 14.28% higher in pitted crushed fruit production, and 15.38% higher in fruit puree production.
The highest profit was recorded in the aprocot compote production (35.95 RSD/kg), whereas the lowest profit of 5.12 RSD/kg was recorded in the plum semi-processed fruit production (puree and pitted crushed fruit).
Conclusion
Fruit processing industry is an important factor of market stabilisation, fruit production development and fruit industry enhancement. Therefore, current industrial processing facilities ought to be better equipped, modernised and specialised in order to accomplish planned production structures and create new products which require advanced stages of processing. The advancement of fruit processing and the export of processed fruit products ensure more favourable production and economic results in comparison with the export of raw materials (fresh and frozen fruits).
The processing value of fruits is higher than the selling (market) value of fruits as raw materials. The fruit processing value in compote production is on average 37.0 RSD/kg or 48.87% higher than the selling fruit price. In semi-processed fruit production, fruit puree and pitted crushed fruits Rotativa, the processing value is 5.7 RSD/kg or 14.83% higher than the fruit market price.
Within the total cost structure, the direct production costs of the analysed fruit products account for 72.31% on average, whereas the indirect costs account for 27.69%. Within the direct costs, the material costs account for the greatest share of 60.05% on average, whereas the raw material costs account for the greatest share of 37.01% within the raw material costs.
In the analysed processed fruit production, positive financial results per unit of product are notable (32.4 RSD/kg), as well as high production efficiency (1.23) in compote production. The calculated efficiency ratio of all the other processed fruit products ranged from 1.09 (industrial marmalade) to 1.18 in jam production. In the analysed processed fruit production, the average profitability rate amounted to 14.45%. The highest profitability rate was recorded in compote production (the profitability rate of 23.00%). The largest quantity of production (work) performance was recorded in fruit puree production and it amounted to 0.0088 h/kg (113.64 kg/h), whereas the smallest was recorded in jam production (0.0375 h/kg or 26.67 kg/h).
References
1. Andric, J. (1998): Troskovi i kalkulacije u poljoprivrednoj proizvodnji, Savremena administracija, Beograd.
2. Cindric, P., Dulic, K., Dunderov, M., Gajic O., Gajic, M., Mezneric, D.,Ivic, B., Krnjajski, M., Letic, A., Lovre, K., Mezneric, S., Miljkovic, N., Mulina, V., Trkulja, M. (1981):
Razvoj vocarstva i vinogradarstva, prerade i prometa voca i grozda na Suboticko-horgoskoj pescari, Ekonomski fakultet, Subotica.
3. Elenov, R. (2002): Organizacioni i ekonomski aspekti proizvodnje i prerade grozda, Doktorska disertacija, Poljoprivredni fakultet, Novi Sad.
4. Gogic, P. (2005): Teorija troskovasakalkulacijama uproizvodnji i preradipoljoprivrednih proizvoda, Poljoprivredni fakultet, Beograd.
5. Lukac Bulatovic, M. (2010): Ekonomska efikasnostproizvodnje iprerade vaznijih vocnih vrsta u Republici Srbiji, Doktorska disertacija, Poljoprivredni fakultet, Novi Sad.
6. Lukac Bulatovic, M. (2010): Proizvodno-ekonomska obelezja prerade voca, Ekonomika poljoprivrede, NDAEB, Beograd, IEP, Beograd, ASE, Bukurest, vol. 57, no. 1, p. 111123.
7. Lukac Bulatovic, M. (2004): Proizvodni i ekonomski efekti u proizvodnji ipreradi voca, Magistarski rad, Poljoprivredni fakultet, Novi Sad.
8. Lukac Bulatovic, M. (2006): Ekonomski efekti u proizvodnji i preradi jabuke, Zbornik radova XI Savetovanja o biotehnologiji, Agronomski fakultet, Cacak, p. 15-23.
9. Milic, D., Radojevic, V. (2003): Proizvodno-ekonomska i upotrebna vrednost voca i grozda, Poljoprivredni fakultet, Novi Sad.
10. Milic, D., Rajic, Z., Lukac Bulatovic, M. (2005): Promene u strukturi vocarske proizvodnje Republike Srbije, Ekonomika poljoprivrede, NDAEB, Beograd, IEP, Beograd, ASE, Bukurest, vol. 52, no. 1, p. 71-78.
11. Niketic Aleksic, G. (1987): Prerada voca - stanje i buduci razvoj, Hrana i razvoj, Beograd, p. 767-773.
12. Radovic, I., Furundzic, M. (1997): Principi i metode organizacije i ekonomike poljoprivredne proizvodnje, Velarta, Beograd.
13. Rott, W. (1996): Apples and apple processing, Processing Fruits: Science and Tehnology, Technomic Publishing Company, U.S.A.
EKONOMSKA OBELEZJA PROIZVODNJE PRERADEVINA
OD VOCA U SRBIJI
Mirjana Lukac Bulatovic, Zoran Rajic, Ivana Ljubanovic Ralevic3
Rezime
Mogucnosti prerade voca su veoma slozene, kako po asortimanu poluproizvoda, tako i gotovih proizvoda. U okviru sirokog asortimanapreradevina od vocapostoje i poluproizvodi koji se mogu plasirati direktno na trziste, ali isto tako mogu posluziti i kao sirovina za vise faze prerade, pri cemu, se ostvaruju i razliciti ekonomski efekti. U radu su prikazani pokazatelji ekonomskih efekata (vrednost proizvodnje, troskovi proizvodnje, posebno direktni, kao i razlika izmedu vrednosti proizvodnje i ukupnih troskova) u svim fazama prerade za odredenu vrstu preradevina. Rezultati do kojih se doslo pokazuju da vise faze prerade zahtevaju povecanje pojedinacnih troskova, alipovecani troskovi omogucujupostizanje vecegprihoda.
Prerada voca je ekonomski opravdana, jer je preradna vrednost voca veca od njegove prodajne (trzisne) cene. Preradna vrednost voca u proizvodnji kompota je veca u proseku za 48,87% u odnosu na trzisnu cenu voca. U proizvodnji poluproizvoda -vocne kase i vocne rotativE, preradna vrednost u odnosu na trzisnu cenu voca je veca u proseku za 14,83%.
Kljucne reci: proizvodnja preradevina od voca, vrednost proizvodnje, troskovi proizvodnje, finansijski rezultat
3 Dr Mirjam Lukac Bulatovic, docent, Univeizitet u Novom Sadu, Poljoprivredni fakultet, Trg Dositeja Obradovica 8, Novi Sad, Telefon: +381 21 485 33 31, E-mail: mirjanalukac@gmail.com; Dr Zoran Rajic, vanredni profesor, Univerzitet u Beogradu, Poljoprivredni fakultet, Nemanjina 6, Zemun, Telefon: +381 63 108 59 15, E-mail: /orajic@agrir.bg.ac.rs: Dr Ivana Ljubanovic Ralevic, redovni profesor, Univerzitet u Beogradu, Poljoprivredni fakultet, Nemanjina 6, Zemun, Telrfon: +381 11 261 53 15/409, E-mail: iralevic@EUnet.rs
