Journal of Economics and Business Research, [601626]

Journal of Economics and Business Research,
ISSN: 2068 – 3537, E – ISSN (online) 2069 – 9476, ISSN – L = 2068 – 3537
Volume XVII, No. 2, 2011, pp. 189-197

Study on the Degree of Technological Equipment Used by
Vegetable and Fruit Producers from Arad County

G. Sanda, M.D. Pop

Grigorie Sanda
Faculty of Economics, "Aurel Vlaicu" University of Arad, Romania
Marius D. Pop
Faculty of Economics, “Babe ș Bolyai” University, Cluj-Napoca,
Romania

Abstract
Our study on vegetable and fruit producers from Ara d
County intends to offer a clear cut image on the ve getable
and fruit production, but also on the producers’
technological endowment . This paper is part of a l arge
work and we wish to present aspects regarding the
technological endowment and the producers’ content
towards the middleman companies.
Keywords: agromarketing, agrobusiness

Introduction
After 1989, the Agricultural Production Cooperativ es
disapeared, the existing technological equipment wa s divided or left
neglected. The farmers have got back their land pro perties, so the
production area has been reduced and the mass produ ction has
disappeared. There are no written evidences regardi ng the vegetable and
fruit quantitative and qualitative production of Ar ad county. The lack of
a system able to collect and process these data can not offer a starting
point to build up strategies necessary for the form ation of the
association of small producers in order to offer th e product quantity
necessary for entering the multinational markets.
From the technological point of view, the vegetab le and fruit
producers, namely those who have greenhouse or sola rium productions,
which require small investments, are able to keep t he step with

G. Sanda, M.D. Pop
190
producers from other European countries. Great adva ntage for native
producers is the fact that their products are tasti er than those imported,
but their disadvantage is that the price is higher than that of the import
products. The targets of the work were many, but th is paper deals only
with the topic regarding the technological endowmen t level of the
vegetable fruit producers and we state that more th an 50% of the
producers need technologies they do not have.

Material and Methods
For selecting the sample, we have used a mix of met hods:
areolar method (Pop,2004) due to which, we have sel ected those areas
that are known as important vegetable and fruit pr oduction areas; the
first 30% of the producers were selected out of the townhall evidences
according to their owned surfaces, type of producti on (greenhouse,
plastic thin sheet or agricultural area)
The study was done using a questionnaire managed b y 3 inquiry
operators, from July till September 2011, the numbe r of total inquered
people being 201. The datas have been processed by means of a
statistical programme. For being able to measure th e technological
endowment degree, a set of questions (Table no.1) h as been formulated,
wich contains an answer that points out the need of a technological
equipment, an answer to point out its holding, an a nswer regarding the
degree of its usage in the agricultural activity.

Tabel no.1

Questions regarding the Technological Endowment

Technological name
Would it
be
necessary? Do you
have it
now ? What
percentage of
the owned
equipment do
you use?
Farm tractor Yes NO Yes No %
Equipment for land working Yes NO Yes No %
Pesticide equipment Yes NO Yes No %
Combine
Yes NO Yes No %
Covered warehouse Yes NO Yes No %
Closed warehouse Yes NO Yes No %

Study on the Degree of Technological Equipment Used …

191
Handling area Yes NO Yes No %
Fridge room Yes NO Yes No %
Equipment for washing,
selecting, sorting Yes NO Yes No %
Packing equipment Yes NO Yes No %
Means of transport Yes NO Yes No %

Literature review
According to Letitia Zahiu (L.Haziu coord, 2010), analyzing the
value evolution of the agricultural production, agr icultural prices and
agricultural efficiency, in preadhering period, the indicators that reflect
the global efficiency of the agro food sector indi cate a decline between
2005-2007.
Under the circumstances in which the prices of in termediary
consumptions rise, namely the intermediary consump tions are not
effieciently used, if the fixed capital stocks are distroyed, there will be
no investments, the labour force will be unefficien tly used, then the
subsistence state of agriculture will be kept, name ly the discrepancy
between the native farmer and the European one will increase.
The low agricultural production of the farmer keep s Romania’s
agriculture at a low level of competitiveness, both on the unique market
and on the native one. For generating an economic i ncrease in
agriculture, besides the rising of the products’ qu ality level, it is
necessary to create an efficient distribution natio nal network.
The agricultural labour productivity shows the subsistance state of
this domain, due to the weak technico-material infr astructure and to the
low out-turn. The available labour force, existing in the rural area, can
be used both in the agricultural sector and in the non agricultural
activities, assuring a lasting development of the r ural area.

Results and Discussion
Agricultural activities have been grouped in: anim al breeding,
cereal production, vegetable – fruit production and agricultural services.
22% of the people have declared that they are also involved in animal
breeding activities, and the great majority have de clared that animal
breeding represented 10 up to 30% of their activiti es. 30.5 % are
involved in cereal production and the share of cere al cultivation from all
the agricultural activities is between 10% and 50%.

G. Sanda, M.D. Pop
192
96% are dealing with vegetable and fruit production , out of
them, a percentage of 56.7 are 100% busy with veget able and fruits, fact
that demonstrates the sample representation.
None of the questioned persons declared that they offered
services using their owned equipment
As far as the production areas are concerned, the great majority
produce vegetables on areas under 1 ha, only a smal l percentage of 5%
have areas between 1 and 10 ha. Fruits are produced in a percentage of
24.4% on surfaces below 1 ha, 12.4% on areas betwee n 1 and 10 ha
(here is to be mentioned the water melons and melon s) and only 2% on
areas larger than 10 ha.
The results of the analyses regarding the technolo gical
endowment degree have been got through their proces sion with a
statistical informatics programme, using the answer association,
answers indicating the necessity of owning an equip ment and its
physical owning.
Regarding the farm tractor, 50.5% have declared th at they will
need one, as they have none, fact that „slightly” r efutes our hypothesis,
according to which more than half of the farmers do not have the
necessary equipment.
There are 18.5 % of those farmers who have a tracto r, but they
have declared they will not need an excess of techn ology which can be
either the result of investments in the future or t he result of the not using
the land maximum capacity.
As far as the need of land working equipment is co ncerned, one
can notice that, out of the 33.8% of the persons wh o have declared they
need equipment, 53.5% own it, while 46.5% do not ha ve it.
Also, we have to mention that out of the 13.4% of the farmers
who have declared that they do not need land workin g equipment,
46.6% own this equipment, so there is a surplus of equipment.
Owing the pesticide equipment indicates the fact t hat 52.7% of
the questioned persons who have declared that they need it, really own
it, but 47.3% of those who have declared they need it, do not own it.
A high percentage of 26.7% out of the questioned p eople, in
spite of the fact that they have not declared they need these equipments,
own them, but these are not used, so, there is a s urplus of technology
that can be taken into account in the future, as a potential production
capacity, in the case the producers wish to increas e their production.

Study on the Degree of Technological Equipment Used …

193
Regarding the owning of the combine, associated wi th the need
to own one, we have noticed that 38.6% (22 persons) of the ones who
have declared they need a combine, have the combine , while the great
majority of 61.4% (35 subjects) have no combine. A great number of
people, 64.2% (129 subjects) have declared that the y do not need one
and really do not own one. This great number of per sons is involved in
vegetable growing, namely closed greenhouses where they cannot use
such an equipment.. We have found out that there is a percentage, 2.3%
(3 subjects) who have declared they do not need a c ombine but they
own one.
Analysing the answer results, namely the associati on regarding
the need to have a covered warehouse and its owning , one can notice
that only 42.3% of those who have declared they nee d one, have one,
and 11.7% of those who have declared they do not ne ed one, still have
such a warehouse.
Regarding the closed warehouse, associated with th e need to
have it, only 41.5% of those who have declared to n eed such a
warehouse own it and 58.5% do not have it. So, a su rplus of 15.1% has
been found out.
As far as the handling area is concerned (meant fo r washing,
selecting, packing) the results indicate that only 20.6% of those who
have declared they need one, have it, and a great p ercentage of 79.4%
do not own it.
Speaking about the fridge room, 43.3% (87 persons) have
declared that they need it and out of them only 12. 1% (12 persons) have
the room, the rest, i.e. 87.9%, lack it. There is a percentage of 4.5% who
have not answered this question. In this case there is no surplus, none
has declared that they do not need such a room but they still own one.
Analysing the results of the association between t he need of an
equipment of washing, selecting, sorting and its ow ning, one draws the
conclusion that out of 36.8% (74 subjects) who have declared they need
one, only 23% own it. There is a smaller percentage , 3.1%, out of those
who have declared they do not need it but still own this equipment
The result of the association between the need of having a
packing equipment and its owning shows us that 34.3 % have declared
that they do not need it, only 13% own it and 87% d o not have such an
equipment. There is a small number of subjects who, in spite of the fact
that they have declared that they do not need a pac king equipment, still
have it (1.5%).

G. Sanda, M.D. Pop
194
Speaking about the endowment of the producers with means of
transport, the result of the association between th e need of having one
and its owning, out of the 110 persons (54.7%) who have declared that
they need a means of transport, 59.1% own it, but t here is a percentage
of 14.9% (30 persons) who do not have it though the y have declared
they do not need one.

Tabel no. 2

The analysis of the area where the agricultural pro ducts are sold
Independent % Through collecting firm Selling Area
Cereals Vegetables Fruits Cereals Vegetables Fruits
In the own area 5.47% 17.91% 7.46% 2.49% 1.49% 1.49%

Outside the area, in
the bordering area 6.97% 20.40% 7.46% 1.00% 1.49% 0.00%
Outside the
bordering area, in
the county 7.96% 29.35% 19.90% 2.99% 6.47% 1.00%
Outside the county,
in the region 7.46% 16.42% 6.97% 1.00% 19.40% 0.00%
Outside the region,
in the country 1.49% 2.99% 0.50% 1.00% 4.48% 0.00%
Abroad 0.50% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
In the EU countries 0.50% 0.00% 0.00% 1.00% 0.00% 0.00%
In East Europe 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
In other countries 0.50% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Analysing the data (percentage of total subjects), one finds out
that independent selling of cereals is achieved in the county (7.96%)
followed by region (7.47%), namely outside the livi ng area (6.97%). A
very small percentage (0.5%) is sold in the country , in the UE countries,
East of Europe, even in other non UE members. It is worth mentioning
that cereal sales through collecting firms, arrive in the EU countries in
very small percentage.
Direct vegetable sales, in the highest percentage, 29.35%, arrive
in the county, a percentage of 20.40 % are sold out side the living area
but in the bordering area, 17.19% are sold on the l iving area markets,
16.42% are to be sold in the region and a very smal l percentage of

Study on the Degree of Technological Equipment Used …

195
2.99% is sold in the country, outside the West regi on, by placing them
on the Bihor and Cluj counties’markets.
Vegetable sales through collecting firm s (wholesale) arrive in
the region in 19.40 %, but 6.47% in the county. A v ery small
percentage, 4.48%, is sold in the country. The sale s in the living area
and the bordering areas are unimportant.
Direct fruit sales, in the highest percentage, 19. 90%, are done in
the county, 7.47% are sold in the living area or th e bordering areas (this
is due to the fact that many water melone and melon e producers sell
their products near the roads), and a percentage of 6.97% are sold on the
region markets. As far as the fruit sales through t he collecting firms
(wholesale), the percentage is low and they do not reach the county
markets.

Tabel no. 3.
Satisfaction Degree towards the Services of other C ollectors (wholesale)

Offered
service (no.
of subjects)
Very satis fied
Partial satisfied
satisfying Partial dissatisfied
Very dissatisfied
Total subjects % respondents
of the total sample
Obtained Score * Goods
transport 11 – – – 2 13 6.47% 4.38
Purchasing
price 3 6 9 – 2 20 9.95% 3.40
Payment
deadline 11 2 3 – 2 18 8.96% 4.11
Offered
consultancy
services 2 – – 1 – 3 1.49% 4.00
Offered
equipment
for lending – – – – 2 2 1.00% 1.00
Packing
Services 3 1 – 3 2 9 4.48% 3.00
Depositing
Services 12 1 – 2 – 15 7.46% 4.53
* 1 – 2 very dissatisfied, 2 – 3 dissatisfied, 3 – 4 satisfactory, 4-5 contented, 5 – very contented

G. Sanda, M.D. Pop
196
This segment of the analysis was designed to highl ight
experiences that vegetables and fruits producers ha d with various
companies that have bought their products in order to resell the
production.
From the transport point of view, analysing the an swers offered
by the 13 subjects (6.47%), the obtained score is 4 .38%, it means a high
degree of content towards this type of service.
Regarding the purchasing price, we have found out that the 20
subjects (9.95%) indicate a score of 3.4, pointing out that the price they
obtained was satisfying for them
Studying the results of the 15 subjects (7.46%), e xperience
regarding the depositing services has got a score o f 4.53%, indicating a
degree of satisfaction.
Concerning the got consultancy services, the equipm ent offered
to be lent namely the packing services, being under 5% of the subjects,
we cannot take them into account as being represent ative .

Conclusion
On the ground of the issued hypothesis, i.e. over 50% of the
producers lack technology, it was validated, for a great part of the
technological equipment, but there were elements fo r which the
hypothesis was invalidated (Table no. 4)

Table no. 4
Analyses Results of the Answers regarding Technolo gical Capacities
Would it
be
necessary?
(% of total
answers) Do you
have it
now?
(% total
answers) Technological name
Yes No Yes No Hypotheses
(% those
who need it)
Farm tractor 49% 40% 43% 58% 49% –
validated
Equipment for land working 63% 28% 53% 43% 54% –
invalidated
Pesticide equipment 56% 37% 42% 54% 53% –
invalidated
Combine 28% 65% 13% 82% 38% –
validated

Study on the Degree of Technological Equipment Used …

197
Covered warehouse 48% 46% 26% 70% 42% –
validated
Closed warehouse 47% 46% 26% 67% 42% –
validated
Handling area 48% 44% 11% 83% 48% –
validated
Fridge room 49% 43% 7% 88% 12% –
validated
Equipment for washing,
selecting, sorting 36% 48% 10% 77% 23% –
validated
Packing equipment 34% 50% 6% 79% 13% –
validated
Transport means 54% 34% 53% 43% 59% –
invalidated
For validating the hypotheses, we have taken into account only
those persons who have declared that they need the respective
technology. So, the hypotheses have been validated for: farm tractor,
combine, covered warehouse, closed warehouse, handl ing area,
equipment for washing, selecting, sorting namely pa cking.
The hypothesis has been invalid, namely more than 50% of
those who need equipment also own it: equipment for land processing,
equipment for pesticide, namely means of transport.

Bibliography

Ad ăsc ăli ței, V (2005). Euromarketing, Editura Uranus, Bucure ști
Dătculescu, P (2006). Cercetarea de marketing, Editura Brandbuilders
Group, Bucure ști
Diaconescu, M (2005). Marketing agroalimentar, Editura Universitar ă,
Bucure ști
Pop, M (2004). Cercet ări de marketing, Editura Alma Mater, Cluj-
Napoca
Zahiu, L coord. (2006). Agricultura Uniunii Europene sub impactul
politicii agricole comune, Editura Ceres, Bucure ști
Zahiu, L coord. (2010). Agricultura în economia României – între
aștept ări și realiz ări, Editura Ceres, Bucure ști
INSSE –
http://www.insse.ro/cms/files/RGA2010/comunicate/In fo_gen_RGA2010.pdf

JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS RESEARCH

A biannual peer-reviewed journal edited by
„Aurel Vlaicu” University,
Faculty of Economics

JEBR is an open access journal. The materials published in
JEBR are free for all to read and for use, with usu al citation.
All the received manuscripts will be distributed b y the editors to
the JEBR reviewers. All the submitted manuscripts a re revised
independently by minimum two reviewers
The unpublished materials are not returned. The ed itorial office
reservs its right to correct the eventual errors an d, in extreme cases, to use
only a fragment of the sended texts.
The articles, books for reviewing and any other pa pers will be send
on the editorial office address.

Editing conditions
• The articles must have between 6 and 10 pages, A4 f ormat, drawing up
at 1 (one) space between the lines, with Times New Roman, font 12;
• The margins will be: 2,5 cm at the top, at the bott om and at the right and
3 cm at the left.
• The title will be written with capital letters.
• Under the title, it will be mentioned the name of t he author, his function
and scientific degree and also the workplace.
• Each article will have an abstract of 8-12 lines a nd keywords.
• The entire article will be written in English.

The editorial office reservs its right not to publi sh the articles which
do not respect the above mentioned conditions.
The articles can be also send by e-mail : luielacs@yahoo.com, as
attached document.
The biannual journal aims to the students attending economical
study programms, and also to all the professionals being interested in. The
authors must assume their responsability for the co ntent of the published
articles.
More informations at e-mail address: luielacs@yaho o.com