Análisis económico de la retención de pases y empleo de lonas en la recolección de café

Juan Gómez-Soto

doi:10.38141/10778/74101

Below you will find published research results on Colombian coffee growing:

Economic analysis of cherry retention and the use of tarps in coffee harvesting Análisis económico de la retención de pases y empleo de lonas en la recolección de café

How to Cite

Gómez-Soto, J. (2023). Economic analysis of cherry retention and the use of tarps in coffee harvesting. Cenicafe Journal, 74(1), e74101. https://doi.org/10.38141/10778/74101

PDF (Spanish)

FLIP

Published: June 30, 2023

https://doi.org/10.38141/10778/74101

Keywords

Cosecha asistida

eficiencia

tecnología

café

Cenicafé

Assisted harvesting

efficiency

technology

coffee

Cenicafé

Colheita assistida

eficiência

tecnologia

café

Cenicafé

Numero

Vol. 74 No. 1 (2023): Cenicafé Journal

Sectión

Articles

License terms (See)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Juan Gómez-Soto

Centro Nacional de Investigaciones de Café

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9270-0538

Summary

In a commercial context, the economic impact of cherry retention combined with the use of tarps in coffee harvesting was evaluated in El Tambo (Cauca), Chinchiná (Caldas), and Pueblo Bello (Cesar). In these locations, assisted harvesting allowed for the collection of 60.5%, 39.5%, and 84.8% of the annual coffee flow, respectively. This resulted in a labor productivity increase of 19.0%, 43.8%, and 20.7%, with surplus for the coffee grower compared to the cost incurred in conventional harvesting of 3.96%, 4.80%, and 6.71%, and a reduction of 10.7%, 12.7%, and 23.6% in the required daily wages per hectare per year, respectively. The picker at the point of isocrematistic surplus perceived additional income compared to the standard daily wage of 7.79%, 38.5%, 9.84%, and 9.55% for El Tambo, Chinchiná mid-harvest, Chinchiná main harvest, and Pueblo Bello, respectively. Load, harvestable fruit supply, and tarp technology were the variables that explained the economic effects of the technical change. By improving the planning of cherry retention, adapting plots for the use of tarps, and providing training to workers to increase coffee harvested with tarps by 75% per year and increase labor productivity by 45%, a surplus of 10% per hectare per year could be achieved for the coffee grower. This is feasible in the short and medium term, depending on the specific conditions of each region.

Author biography (See)

Juan Gómez-Soto, Centro Nacional de Investigaciones de Café

Investigador Científico II. Disciplina de Economía

References (See)

Alvarez, J. A., Oliveros-Tascón, C. E., & Ramírez, C. A. (2004). Evaluación de dos sistemas para el manejo de mallas en la cosecha manual del café. Revista Cenicafé, 55(2), 130–135. http://hdl.handle.net/10778/110
Bergin, J. (2015). Mathematics for economists with applications (1a ed.). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Cunha, J., Silva, F., Dias, R., Lisboa, C., & Machado, T. (2016). Viabilidade técnica e econômica de diferentes sistemas de colheita do café. Coffee Science, 11(3), 416–425. http://www.coffeescience.ufla.br/index.php/Coffeescience/article/view/1131
Duque-Orrego, H., & Dussán-Lubert, C. (2004). Productividad de la mano de obra en la cosecha de café en cuatro municipios de la región cafetera central de Caldas. Revista Cenicafé, 55(3), 246–258. http://hdl.handle.net/10778/256
Duque-Orrego, H., Salazar, H. M., Rojas-Sepúlveda, L. A., & Gaitán, Á. (2021). Análisis económico de tecnologías para la producción de café en Colombia. Cenicafé. https://doi.org/10.38141/cenbook-0016
Federación Nacional de Cafeteros. (2017). La recolección de café en Colombia: Una caracterización del mercado laboral. Ensayos sobre economía cafetera, 32(1), 35–65. https://federaciondecafeteros.org/static/files/ECC32.pdf
Kanawaty, G., & International Labour Office (Eds.). (1992). Introduction to work study (4a ed.). International Labour Office.
Pemberton, M., & Rau, N. (2016). Mathematics for economists: An introductory textbook (4a ed.). Manchester University Press.
Rendón, J. R., & Montoya, E. C. (2015). ¿Cómo registrar las floraciones en los cafetales?. Avances Técnicos Cenicafé, 455, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.38141/10779/0455
Rosser, M. J. (2016). Basic mathematics for economists (3a ed.). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Santinato, F., Silva, R. P., Ruas, R. A., Cassia, M. T., & Santinato, R. (2013). Comparação entre o custo da colheita manual e mecanizada de uma a seis passadas da colhedora. En Consórcio Pesquisa Café e Desenvolvimento do Café (Organizador), Simpósio de Pesquisa dos Cafés do Brasil, Poços de Caldas, Minas Gerais, Brasil. http://www.sbicafe.ufv.br/handle/123456789/7304
Sanz, J. R., Duque, H., Menza, H. D., Zamudio, G. E., Oliveros-Tascón, C. E., & Ramírez, C. A. (2018). Lonas para asistir la cosecha manual de café. Avances Técnicos Cenicafé, 487, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.38141/10779/0487
Sanz, J. R., Oliveros-Tascón, C. E., Duque Orrego, H., Mejía, C. G., Benavides Machado, P., & Medina-Rivera, R. (2018). Retención de pases: Una opción para mejorar la productividad de la mano de obra en la cosecha de café. Avances Técnicos Cenicafé, 488, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.38141/10779/0488
Srivastava, A., Goering, C., Rohrbach, R., & Buckmaster, D. (Eds.). (2006). Engineering principles of agricultural machines (2a ed.). American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers.
Tavares, T. D. O., Oliveira, B. R., Silva, V. D. A., Silva, R., Santos, A. F., & Okida, E. S. (2019). The times, movements and operational efficiency of mechanized coffee harvesting in sloped areas. PLOS ONE, 14(5), e0217286. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217286