In the study El Perfil Tecnológico de la Producción Agropecuaria Argentina (INTA, 2002), the crops were grouped as follows:
Grains
Fruit crops
Industrial crops
Horticultural crops
Then the crops were grouped according to the level of technology used (Table 1).
In the case of grains, high and medium technology producers account for 82 percent of the area and 86 percent of the production, while in the case of fruit crops the 8 percent of producers with a high level of technology produced 42 percent of the production. In the case of industrial crops 14 percent of producers with a high level of technology produced 50 percent of the output.
TABLE 1
Areas, number of producers and production
according to the technical level
Crop group |
Technical |
Area |
Producers |
Production |
Main crops |
Cereals and oil crops |
Low |
3 187 |
38 |
7 015 |
Soybean |
|
Medium |
8 413 |
75 |
24 564 |
Wheat |
|
High |
5 103 |
28 |
19 545 |
Maize |
|
Total |
16 703 |
141 |
51 124 |
Sunflower |
Fruit crops |
Low |
64 |
14 |
532 |
Citrus |
|
Medium |
80 |
8 |
1 864 |
Grapes |
|
High |
75 |
2 |
1 751 |
Apples |
|
Total |
219 |
24 |
4 147 |
Pears |
Industrial crops |
Low |
361 |
31 |
3 733 |
Cotton |
|
Medium |
543 |
22 |
8 761 |
Sugar cane |
|
High |
370 |
9 |
12 318 |
Tobacco |
|
Total |
1 274 |
62 |
24 812 |
Yerba mate |
Horticultural crops |
Low |
27 |
4 |
516 |
Potato |
|
Medium |
23 |
3 |
533 |
Garlic |
|
High |
48 |
1 |
2 036 |
Onion |
|
Total |
98 |
8 |
3 085 |
Tomato |
Note: These are not national totals. They concern producers for which information on levels of were available.
TABLE 2
Differences in yield at different technical
levels
Crop group |
Low-medium |
Medium-high |
Low-high |
Grains |
27% |
24% |
44% |
Fruit crops |
55% |
38% |
70% |
Horticultural crops |
18% |
15% |
44% |
Industrial crops |
37% |
28% |
55% |
Three levels of technology adoption were defined, according to the type of technology used by a given sector. The variables included yields, areas of production, number of producers[1], economic indicators, the size of farms and constraints to the adoption of technology. The latter were evaluated according to a range from no constraints (0) to serious constraints (3). Table 2 summarizes difference of yield between levels, expressed as a proportion of the yield of the higher level.
The gap between the low level and the medium level in general is higher than that between the medium level and the high level, with some exceptions within each group. The difference between the extremes is about 50 percent for each group of crops.
During the past decade there have been profound changes in the profiles of the agricultural producers, especially those of the Pampa (White, 2000).
One in four producers has completed tertiary or university education. However, 43 percent of producers in the humid Pampa have not completed secondary education. There are considerable variations between regions.
Approximately 28 percent of the producers in the humid Pampa live on the farm. However, in certain other regions only 10 percent live on the farm. Only 15 percent of the producers live in cities with more than 50 000 inhabitants, apart from the region of the southeast area of Buenos Aires, where the figure is 38 percent.
Out of a total national population in 2001 of 37.5 million people, only 4.4 million were classed as rural, and 3.7 million, or 10 percent of the total, agricultural (FAO).
Many institutions are involved in the provision of technical assistance to agriculture. They include state, national and provincial programmes, private non-profit institutions, profit making institutions, consultancy organizations, independent technicians, distributors of agrochemicals, seed and other inputs etc. The level of assistance has improved significantly during the past decade. In 1992, 44 percent of the producers did not receive advice whereas today this is the case with only one in four. Eighty four percent of the producers receive advice on accounting and taxation.
About 50 percent of the producers today cultivate rented land (Table 3). The real estate market in land is very active. The growing trend towards the purchase of land for renting reflects the attraction of investment in land due to lower debts in agriculture, the absence of alternative investment opportunities and the low cost of capital. A land-owning farmer may expand the area of his farm with rented land.
TABLE 3
Pampa: Farmer-owned and rented
land
|
Owned |
Rented |
||
Year |
2000/01 |
2001/02 |
2000/01 |
2001/02 |
'000 ha |
273 |
175 |
313 |
136 |
Percent |
47 |
56 |
53 |
44 |
Source: Fertilizar. Unpublished data.
This region produces the main grain crops (wheat, maize, soybean and sunflower). Approximately 15 percent of farms in the humid Pampa are mixed, 28 percent exclusively arable and 17 percent exclusively livestock. There has been an increase in the purely arable farms at the expense of purely livestock farms. In 1992 arable farms represented about a third, increasing to 44 percent in 1999 (White, 2000). The cattle population fell during the same period from 32 to 27 million head.
In terms of the areas cultivated, the main crops are soybean, wheat, maize and sunflower in that order. Secondary crops are sorghum, barley, groundnuts and flax.
Following the abolition of the export levy in 1991, grain production became much more attractive. An average production of cereals and soybeans of 29 million tonnes between 1989 and 1991 rose to over 50 million tonnes by the end of the decade.
There has been a substantial concentration of land, reduction in the number of producers and increase in the average farm size in the Pampa region (Table 4).
The most important technical changes in the 1990s were the increase in the use of fertilizers and direct seeding (Figure 3). Today approximately one in three ha sown in the humid Pampa is direct seeded. This development is explained by the increase in the cost of fuel, the availability of cheap and efficient herbicides and the yield potential of herbicide resistant soybean varieties. With the improvement in fertilizer technology, direct seeding is increasingly used also for cereals crops.
TABLE 4
Number and average area of farms in the Pampa
region
Pampa region |
Number of farms |
Average size |
||
1988 |
2002 |
1988 |
2002 |
|
Buenos Aires |
196 |
136 |
391 |
531 |
NEA |
85 |
68 |
222 |
284 |
NOA |
65 |
56 |
261 |
238 |
Irrigated valleys |
69 |
52 |
363 |
498 |
Source: Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos (INDEC), 2003.
FIGURE 3 |
Source: Asociacion Argentina de Productores de Siembra Directa (AAPRESID), 2003. (The percentages indicate the proportion of the national total).
There are two main agricultural systems in the regions, a subsistence system, which is not considered in this study, and a commercial system characterized by intensification, capital investment and use of inputs.
There have been many changes also in the agriculture of the regional economies. In the north there has been a significant increase in the sown areas, thus expanding the agricultural frontier. In a decade, the sown area in the four provinces of Tucumán, Santiago del Estero, Salta and Chaco has increased from one to more than three million ha, with an annual rate of increase of 6 percent. Until 1997 rice and cotton destined for the Brazilian market were important but with the progressive devaluation of the Brazilian Real they became less profitable and much of their area has been replaced with soybean.
Industrial crops such as sugar cane, tobacco and cotton are grown mostly in the north west and yerba mate and tea in the north east. Subtropical crops have a good potential in the region and there are substantial areas of early vegetable crops.
In the region of the irrigated valleys the main crops are vines, nuts, olives and horticultural crops. In Comahue the main fruit crops are apples and pears.
The irrigation of fruit and horticultural crops with pressure systems (sprays, drip and similar) has increased at an exponential rate (Figure 4).
FIGURE 4 |
Source: Morabíto et al. (1997).
[1] In this publication, a
producer is defined as the first to market the agricultural product.
The producer is not necessarily the farmer who cultivated the
land. |