A rational basis for planing a program of agricultural mechanization in Colombia

Texto completo

(1)A RATIONAL BASIS FOR PLANNING A PROGRAM OF AGRICULTURAL MECHANIZATION IN COLOMBIA. ,. BY. DR. WESLEY II0I31SS, DIRECTOR PROGRAMA DE MAQUINARIA ING. JORGE E. QUINTERO, DIRECTOR DEPARTAMENTO DE INGENIERIA AGRICOLA. INSTITUTO COLOMBIANO AGROPECUARIO BOGOTA, COLOMBIA. JUNIO, 1970.

(2) ZI9 r;r. A RATIONAL BASIS POR PLANNING A PROGRAN OF AGRICULTURAL MECRANI ZATION IN COLOMBIA. BY. DR. WESLEY HOBBS, DIRECTOR PROGRAMA DE MAQUINARIA ING. JORGE QUINTERO, DIRECTOR DEPARTAMENTO DE INGENIERIA AGRICOLA INSTITUTO COLOMBIANO AGROPECUARIO Bogotá, Colombia.

(3) INTRODUCTION. Any program planning must be based upon the most recently available data. The data should, of course, he valid. It is assumed that the basic data on which this study is based is reasonably valid, as they were taken from reliable sources such as DANE, CIDA, ICA, INCORA, ADIMAGRO, The Ministry of Agriculture and other reliable ones. However, the results of this study can be no more accurate than the data upon which it is based. Therefore, fot the purpose of this study it is assumed that the basic data is of sufficient accuracy to permit realistic planning.. '.1.

(4) -2-. TRE. PROBLEM. In 1960 Colombia had 1,193,828 farms with an average size of 20.3 hectares per farm, totaling 24,264,000 hectares as shown in. Table 41, Colombiaá total land area is 113,891,400 hectares. The data from different sources show approximately 3.5 to 5.0 million hectares of land in cultivation. However, one study indicates that a mínimum of 10 million hectares 2 are suitable for mechanized farming, not including most of the Llanos area. The Departamento Nacional de Planiación 3 estimates that there are 17.3 million hectares of mechanizable land in Colombia. As this is only 157,, of the total land area it is very probably a realistjc e st i ma te. DANE4 states that out of 1,209,672 farms reporting in a 1960 study,. 2.4% used mechanical power only, 3.8% used mechanical. an animal power, 29.2 used animal power,and. V/o. power. Other sources vary slightly from the percentages abo ye for 1 CIDA, 1966. 2 Garland P. Wood and Guillermo A. Guerra E., Land Use in Colombia Universidad Nacional, Medellín, 1962 3 lnforme sobre disponibilidad y uso de Maquinaria Agrícola in Colombia, Doc, DNP-202-UETA, Depto. Nacional de Planeación Jan. 28 1969. 4 lnforme al Congreso Nacional 1963, DANE, 1963, p. 31. t..

(5) -3mechanical. power. ADINAGRO, for exar p le, shows a total of 2 3 7. of. the tctal hectares in cultivation being partially mechanized. However, the differences are not the significant points. The sig nifican point is that so little farming is done by either animal or mechanical power, and that much of the remainder is orily mechanized in such operations as seedbed preparation, ADIMAGRO reports that of the 24,800 tractores in Colombia in 1966 only 17,400 were less than 10 years oid. Therefore, it can be safely assumed that most of the others, due te inavailibility of repair parts, are unusable. As the importation of tractors for the years of 1967 and 1968 was no greater than for the years of 1957 and 198, the number of tractors in use has not increased in the las,, DANE and ADIMAGRO report that the greatest dollar value of tractors imported in any one year, since 1955, was the 14.2 miliicn dollars of importation in 1956. No importation in the 10 year period of 1953 te 1967 lias exceeded 8.9 million dollars. Caja Agraria reports that for the years of 1963 through 1967 the total number of tractors imported was 2,054 less than the number needed te replace those worn out, and no longer useable,during tI is pe:iod. These figures were based upon a useful life of 10 years, which is probably a maximum valid life span due to problems in obtaining major repair parts..

(6) -4-. Of the 17,400 tractors in 1966 which were less than 10 years of age (Caja Agraria reported only 16,484 in 1967) a significant number, probably as many as 10. 157, are not actually used in. crop production. These are being used by building contractors, institutions of variouskinds, and country clubs for lawn maintenance. If all of the 17,400 tractors (with average hp range of 50-60) were used in agricultural production they would only be sufficient for approximately 974,400 hectares based upon the ADIMAGRO data of one tractor for each 56 hectares. The ADIMAGRO data is probably reasonably accurate as it is in une with the internationahly accepted figure of 1 hp needed for each hectare of land that a tractor is tu cultivate.. ALTERNATIVES. The only alternatives to the use of tractors, as a power source in crop production, are the use of animal power or human power. As the long-term goal of Colombia is to replace the general use of human power in crop production,by other sources of power, then the only remaining alternative is that of animal power. Is this a vahid and economically feasible alternative? The writes do not think so. The aboye viewpoint is based upon the foliowing facts Animal power sources include - oxen, mules, horses, donkeys. (). L..

(7) -5-. and water buffalo. Horses can, for the average farmer, be eliminated on the basis of lack of resistance to deseases. Donkeys can be eliminated on the basis of insufficient power. Water buffalo, for the immediate future at least, can be eliminated on the basis of not being available in sufficient numbers in Latín America. This leaves mules and oxen as t1 only valid alternatives. However, are they an economically feasible alternativesV? This must be investigated from the points of A. Original cost as compared to tractors. B. Maintenance, including feed and medicines, as compared to the fuel, lubrication and repair costs of tractors. C. Would the land required to produce grain and forage for the mules or oxen produce higher values of cash crops or saleable animal products? Would the sale of products from this land be moreor less than the costs of fuel and lubricants for the tractor on a netFp basis? D. Relative risk factors. E. Other costs such as differences in taxed, depreciation, etc. F. What is the relative salvage value of oxen and mules as compared to tractors? The point of original costs can be easily analyzed. The price.

(8) -6-. of both oxen and mules in 1969 averad a minimum of 3,000 pesos (US $171.50*) each for those of sufficíent size and quality for regular agricultural use. The mules, weighing an average of 300 kgs, have a maximum horsepower value of 0.75 each. The oxen weighing and average of 400 kgs, have a maximum horsepower value of 1.- each. Therefore, it can he stated that mules have an original cost of approximately 3,975 pesos per available horsepower, and oxen have an original cost u2 approximately 3,000 pesos per avi1c1e tors cost an average ofappox::ately 1,424 pesos (US$81,50*) i-.r 1r';le horsepor (engine horsepoer x 0.75. avaiable. ho.sepower at sealevel) in Colombia during 1969 The aboy e data, all of which can be easily proven, show that tractors, in Colombia in 1969, had an average economic advantage of being only 47.57 as costly, per available horse power , as oxen, and only 367 as costly, per available hor power, as mules. The practical application of these data show, for example that (1) a two-wheel tractor with 12.5 engine horsepower aid a selling price of 14,500 pesos would cost 1,611 pesos per available horsepower; (2) it would require as many as 12 * Exchange rate of 17.50 pesos to a dallar..

(9) cric. mules weighing 300 kgs each or 9 oxen weighing 400 kgs each to do the same amount of continuous work 10 hours per day and 5-6 days per week; (3) The original cost of the 12 mules would be approxirmately 36,000 pesos and the original cost of the 9 oxen would be 27.000 pesos as compared to the 14,500 pesos for the 12.5 engine horsepower tractor; or (4) that a four wheel tractor with 72 engine horsepower and 56 available horsepower and costing 78,000 pesos would do the same amount of work as 75 mules costing 225,000 pesos or of 56 oxen costing 168,000 pesos Table L.- Comparison of Mules, Oxen and Tractors in Available Horsepower, Average Costs, Cost per Horsepower, ETC. Power Size Available HP Unit. 1. 3,000. 3,000. 75. 8. 300 kgs. 3/4. 3,000. 3.975. 100. 9. 12 hp. 9. 14,500. 1,611. 40. 10. 72 hp. 56. 78,000. 1,425. 36. 10. Oxen. 40C. Mule Trac toi" 2-wheel Tractor 4-wheel. 1969 Cost per 7. of cost Working Cost available of . mules average per life in HP available years (pesos) HP. Note : The average campesino in Colombia cannot produce more than 1/10 of a horsepower continuously for a 10 hour day over an extended period of weck or more. This is based upon e tensive investigation in the Far East..

(10) -8The data in Table 1 clearly show that it costs less to purchase mechanical power than either mule or oxen power. As most farmers would need credit to purchase either animal or mechanical (tractors) power it is clearly to the farmers advantage, in terms of original costs, te purchase a tractor. The question is frequently asked - "Can the average campesino or small farmer learn to operate and perform the daily maintenance necessary for the successful and economical use of a tractor, flie answer is definitely "yes". With a minimum of training (3-5 days) a person who has never operated a mechanical vehicle can learn to operate a two-wheel tractor quite well. A slightly longer period of time is needed (2 - 3 weeks) for four whcel tractors. This has been provenin many parts of the world such as Japan, Formosa Thailand, The Philíppines, India, Ethiopia, Kenya, and also here in Colombia. Frequently, the person who has never operated an automobile learns to operate a tractor more skillfully, and is more careful in maintenance, than does one who has operated auto mobiles or trucks. Thís is due to the fact that he realizes that he knows nothing about operating a motor vehicle and, there fore, he is a more eager student. In a comparison of the operational costs of animal power aand mechanical power we find that for 180 days of work per year and 10 hours per day it requires 1,560 pesos to feed oxen suf-. iEC! OitWJUA LE CL.t.

(11) - 9ficiently to get 180 hp-hrs of work, and 1,500 pesos for mules to get 180 hp-hrs of work.. Table 2. Annual Feed and Fuel Costs for 180 Days (1,800 hours) Work Per Year for Mules, Oxen and Tractors.. Power. Fuel Cost per .Unit. Fuel Type. Consumption 10 hrs. 180 days. Total Cost(pesos) 1-lp.hr annual. Mule concentrates (3/4 hpnet) pasture. 1 p/kg. 300 p/yr. 5 kg. --. 900 kg. 1200. 0.90. Oxen concentrates (1 hp net) pasture. 1 p/kg 300 p l yr. 7 kg. 1260 kg. 1560. 0.86. 2.35 p/gal. 6 gal 1/4 qt. 1080 gal 45 qts 6qts. 2934. 0.18. 7200 gal 90 qts 20 qts. 15240. 0.15. 2-wheel Tractor gasoline (9 hp net) motor oil lubricants. 6p/qt. 4 wheel Tractor diesel (56 hp neo motor oil lubricants. 2 p/gal 8 p/gt 6 p/qt. Note : Cost/hp-hr. 8 p/qt. total annual cost. -. ---. 40 gal qt --. (180 days x lO hrs x net Hp). Example : Minitractor Cost/Hp-hr = 2,934 p-,. (180 diays x 10 hrs x 9) Cost/I-Ip-hr = 2,934 p. 162,000. Cost/Hp-hr = 0.18 pesos * Pesos value of 17.5 to the dollar (average 1969).

(12) - 10-. Table 2 shows that the hp-hr feed or fuel cost of mule power is si times as large as that required for the 4-wheel tractor and five times as large as for the 2-wheel tractor. Oxen power is almost as expensive ¿s mule power. Giles 5 found the same cost/ hp hr relationships, as shown in Table,2, to exist in India.. Tablc 3.- Comparison of Annual and Hp Hour Medical and Repair Costs for Mules, Oxen and Tractors. Annual Use Power Source. HP-Hr/Yr*. Mule (3/4 hp net). 1,450. Ox en (1 hp net). 1,800. 2 wheel Tractor (9 hp net) 4 wheel Tractor (56 hp net). Medical or Repair Costs** Annual Total Per HpHr. (pesos) 200. (pesos) 0.14. 0.11. 16,200. 1,058. 0.07. 100,800. 5,694. 0.05. * Annual use of 1800 hours for animals and tractors. ** Medical costs inelude vetrinary fees, vaccinations and medicines. Repair costs includes repair parts, labor and transportation. These costs are based upori a realible predietive equation which.

(13) -11avQrge an annual cost, for 1800 hours of use, of 73 pesos per each 1,000 pesos of original ccst of tractor. Example : Two-wheel tractor original cost is 14,500 pesos 73 X 14.5 - 1,058 pesos. Hp-Fir Costs - Total Annual Costs : Hp-Hrs Use/Yr. Note : Peso value of 17.50 to the dollar (average for 1969). Table 3 shows that the annual repair costs, per hp-br of use, are considerable less than the medical costs of either mules or oxen. The answer to the question - "Will the amount of land required to produce sufficíent concentrates and forage for mules and oxen produce a higher or lower value of saleable products needed to pur chase the fuel, oil and lubricants for a tractor doing the same amount of work?"- can be determined by reviewing Table 2 and by making the calculations and comparisons given in the foliowing example. The Ministry of Agriculture reports an annual average yield of 1100 kgs of maize per hectare for the years of 1960-67. We note from Table 2 that one oxen, producing 1 hp met, consumes 1260 kgs of concentrates per year. This is slightly nore than the yield of one hectare with two harvests per year. The cost of the 1260 kg of concentrates at one peso per kg equals 1260 pesos per yeat to. 1. '3.

(14) -12produce only 1800 hp-hrs or work (1 hp x 10 hrs/day x 180 days/yr = 1800 hp-hrs/yr) per year. This cost does not include the value of pasture. The data for the 2-wheel tractor shows a total annual cost of fuel, oil and lubricants of 2934 pesos to produce 16,200 hp-hrs of work (9 hp x 10 hrs/day x 180 days/yr) per year. This is fine times the yield of the one oxen. To do the saine amount of work as one oxen, the 2.wheel tractor would need only 326 pesos of fuel, oil and lubricants. This would be purchased with the yield of only 0.3 of a hectare of maize with a selling price of one peso per kg of maize. As to the question of relative risk. factors" in the ownership of mules, oxen and tractors, one needs to note that "tractors do not get sick and die". Tractors rnay be out of working order due to delays in getting repairs. However, mules and oxen can and do get sick, and are unable to work for extended periods of time. All are subject to theft. If there is any relative advantage on this point it is probably with the tractor. It is only from the points of depreciation, possibly taxes and salvage valun that animal power, especially oxen, have an advantage over tractors. From the point of depreciation and salvage value an oxen definitely has an advantage over tractors. Mules would have no advantage, as they could not be soldas meat animais at the end of their useful hife as a draft animal. Their salvage value would be less than that of a tractor..

(15) -i Draft animais may often be taxed at a lower rate than tractors, although there is no logical rason for doing so. From the previous discussjon and study of the tables it can be seen that tractors are much more economical sources of powcr than are either mules or oxen. This advantage becomes even greater when one considers the greater number of extra operators that it takes to do the same amount of work with the draft animais. More than four draft animais in one hitch are extrernely difficult to rnange in Leid work. Two to three is the general rule. The foregoing discussion, asell as the great amount of defensi ble evidence from other countries of the world - botF developed and developing ones, 6 make it evident that animal power cannot economically compete with tractor power on farms of sufficient size to effectively utilize the fuil potential of tractor power. Therefore, the seeniingly obvious question is - "Why don't we immediately proceed ith mechanization?". However, the seemingly obvious question is not always the most appropriate one. At this time. in Colombia, the most appropriate questiori is -. ohail we proceed,. and what shall be the basis for the procedure?".. 6 Special reference * "The Developmmt of Agriculture in Spain", IBRD and FAO, Nov-1966, pp. 76-78 and 142-151..

(16) -14-. A Basis For Proceeding Rationaily in Mechanizing Colombia 's Agricultural Production. Any plan for the solution of a nations problems must, if it is to result in an overail improvement of the natiods well-being, care consjder the total socio-economjc effect on the country. In the solution of Colombia 1 s agricultural production problems, through the assistance of mechanization, we must be careful not to create an even more serious problem in other sectors of the economy. The authors, after nearly three years of careful study and investigation, have come to the f±rm conlcusion that Colombia's agricultural mechanization cannot be accomplished solely, nor even in the major portion, through importations of agricultural tractors and equipment. To do so, would not only require a greater amount of foreign exchange (hard currency) than Colombia can afford to make availab],e without drastjc results on other parts of the ecolomy; but would eventually result in large scales displacement of labor from the rural areas without, at the same time, providing new alternative sources of employment. Row then can agricultural mechanization be accomplished? The authors propose a combinatjon of increased import ation and greatly expanded local m anufacturing of agricultural n"chi tcry, including two-wheel tractors up to 12 hp and even four—wheei tractors of 18 to 24 hp. As members of the Agricultura]. Engineering.

(17) -15Department of the Instituto Colombiano Agropecuario (ICA) they are successfully initiating, with the cooperation of Colombian industry, this program. What is the basis for the abo y e recommendatjon and course of action. Let us take a look at the data, carefully compiled and ana lyzed by variouv public and prívate agencies of Colombia, including the Instituto Colombiano Agropecuario, on which the abo y e recornmendation is based.. J.

(18) The Need. This section is based upon an analysís of the foliowing data on number of farms, size of farms, percentage mechanizabie, and hectares in cuitivation. It is assumed for the purposes of this study, that the foliowing data are reaonably accurate.. Table 4.- Number of Farms and Farin Size in Colombia in 1960. Total in 1,000 Hec tares. Mountain Regions. Range (Hectares). Number. Av.Size (Hectares). Subfamiliar. Leas than 5. 644,287. 1.7. 11090. 5 - 50. 316,838. 14.0. 4,447. 51 - 200. 41,340. 90.4. 31739. 12,248. 651.5. 7,980. 1,014,713. 17.0. 17,256. 120,793. 2.0. 241. 10 - 100. 43,741. 34.1. 1,491. Multifamiliar mediano. 101 - 500. 12,225. 192.1. 2,348. Multifamiliar grande. 501 - +. - 2,356. 1,242.8. 2,928. 179,115. 39.1. 72008. Familiar Mu it i familiar mediano Muitifamíliar grande. 201 - +. TOTAL Plaina and Valley Regions Subfamiliar Familiar. TOTAL. Lees than 10.

(19) -17Table 4 - cont. Mountain Regions. Range (Rectares). Number. Av.Sie. Total in 1,000 Rectares. Country Totals Subfamiliar. 785,080. 1.7. 1,331. Familiar. 360,597. 16.5. 5,938. Multifamiliar mediano. 53,565. 113.6. 6,087. Multifamiliar grande. 14,604. - 746.9. 10,908. 12193,823. 20.3. 24,264. TOTAL. Note The farms of less than 5 has. in the Mountain Regions and of less than lO has. in the Plains and Valley Regions are considered as too siall for a satisfactory living for a famuy; and, therefore, are not included in the foliowing calculations and discussjons. Source : CIDA. "Tenencia de la Tierra y Desarrollo Socioeconomjco del Sector Agricola"., Colombia, 1966. Assumptions to be used in the calculationsof the data in Table S. 1. Assume that 90% of the farrns of 10 has. and over in the plains and valleyregions. are mechanizable, and that 70% of the land on each of those farms is, or will be, in cultivation during the next tenyears. 2. Assume that 50% of the farms of 5 has. and over in the raountajn regions are mechanizable and that 40% of the land on each farm is being cultivated..

(20) -18-3. Assume that 100% of the mechanizahie farms are to be mechanized* during the next 10 years. *Note : The degree of mechanization will vary from farrn to farm depending upon size and other factors. However, this study assumes that mechanization wili include 1. Land preparation. 100%. 2. Seeding ----------70% 3. Cultivation ------80% 4. Chemical spraying. 75%. 5. Harvesting A. Corn ----------40% B. Cotton --------60% C. Small grains. 100%. D. Soybeans --------100% E. Sorghurn -------100% F. Rice, irrigated 100% G. Rice, dry land. 50%. H. Potatoes---. 20%. I. Sugar Cene-----50% J. Other crops. 10% of total process, mainly hauling..

(21) -19Table 5.- Number of Tractors 1 Needed in Colombia, 1969, by Regions and by Size of Farms, not Including "SubfarnLijar" Farrns. Familiar Farms Mountain Regions - 316,838 farms x 50% x 1 tractor/fari a' 2 - 158,419 small tractors Plains Regions -. 43,741 farms x 90% x 2 tractor/fai$i- 78,734 small tractors.. Multifamiliar r1e . 1ino Farms:: 'P4). Mountain Regions - 41340 farms x 50% x 3 tractors/farm' 62,010 = small tractors. Plains Regions -. 12,225 farms x 90% x 3 small tractors.. 33,006. Multifamiljar Grande Farms Mountain Regions - 12,245 farms x 50% x 4 tractors/fr46)= 24,492 large tractors. Plains Regions -. (7) 2,356 farms x 90% x 12 tractors/farm = 25,440 large tractors.. Totais = 299,163 small tractors (two-wheel type, 12 hp) 82,942 large* tractors (four-wheel type) * The term 1arge tractor" is based upon those having 3040 hp. Larger tractors, in many instances, would be more economical, L. and not as many would be required. This size (30-40) is used solely as a basis for caiculation. Notes (1) Based upan 1 engine horsepower per hectare of cuitivated ].and. This figure is an established average for tropical conditions.. -j.

(22) -20-. (2) Based upon 40% of 14 has. average. 6,4 has in cultivation.. (Assumptions on this page and data in Table 4) However, it is a fairly safe assumption that the 50% mechanizable farms are larger than the average of 14 has. and could, therefore, just ify one tractor per farm. (3) Based upon 70% of 34.1 has average. 23.87 has ./farxn.. (4) Based upon 40% of 90.4 has. average = 36.16 has. This may not he sufficient for a large tractor, but would justify three small ones. The choice would be dependent upon the size and shape of fields, etc. (5) Based upon 70% of 192.1 has. average = 134.47 has. This would require two large tractors with a capacity of 65 hectares each, or possible three with a capcity of 45 hectares each. (6) Based upon 40% of the 651.5 has. average = 260.6 has./farrn. This would require four tractors at an average of 65 has. each, or perhaps two larger ones depending upon the cropping systertl. (7) Based upon 70% of the 1,242.8 has. average/farm. 870 has./farm. This would require 12 tractors at an average of 65+ has. each, or six tractors at 130+ has. each or of, perhaps 4 even larger tractors depending upon the cropping system..

(23) -21-.. The data in Tables 4 and 5 show that 158,419 small t7,jo-ee1 tractors are needed for the 50% of the "familiar" farms rf the mountain regions that are mechanizable. This is based upon the use of an average of one tractor per farm, as the average fa:m size is only 14 hectares, with an average of 6.4 hectares in cultivation. (See Note 2 in Table 5) . The "u1tifamiliar mediano" farms of the same region would need 62,010 two-wheel tractors. This number is based upon 50% of the farms being mechanizable, with an average size of 90.4 hectares and 36 hectares in cultivation. (See note 4 of Table 5), and using three tractors per farm. Sonie of these farms could use small four-wheel tractors, depending upon size, type of crops, and size of fields. The "familiar" farms of the Plains and Valley Regions would need 78,734 small tractors. This is based upor 907 of the farms being mechanizable, with an average size of. 3 4. 1 hectares, 23,87. hectares in cultivation, and needing two tractors per farm, (See Note 3 in Table 5). Therefore, the total number of two-whe1 tractors needed would be 299,163. Tables 4 and 5 aleo show that 33 1 006 four-wheel tractors (30-40 hp for this calculation)are needed for the 90% of the "multjfamjljar mediano" farms that are mechanizable in the Plains and Valley Regions. This is based upon three tractors (30-40 hp) per farm, with the farms having an average size of 192.1 hectares.

(24) -22and.J34.47 hectares in cultivation. (See Note 5 in Table 5). A more economical choice, however, would probably be one tractor of 65 hp and one of 35 hp, rather than three of 30-40 hp. The "Multífamiliar grande" farms of the Mountain Re g ions 7ou1d need 24,496 four wheel (30-40 hp) tractors. This is based upon 507 of the fariisbeing mechanizable, with an average size of 6515 hectares and 260.6 hectares in cultivation, and four tractors (30-40 hp) per farm. (See note 6 of Table 5) . On many of these farms, particularly those producing wheat or barley, one tractor of 100-130 hp or two with 50-65 hp would probably be. better. choice. The `Multífamiliar grande" farmsaf the Plains and Valiey Regions would need 25,440 four-wheel tractors (30-40 h p for this calculation). This is based upon 907 of the farms baing mechanizable, an average farm size of 1,2428 hectares, 870 hectares iii cultivation, and needing 12 tractors (30-40 hp) per farm. Almost without exception these farms could more profitably use tractors in the 65-130 hp size range. The total numer of four wheel tractors needed, with the 30-40 hp size as the basis for c calculation, would be 82,942. In summary of Table 5, we find that as of 1969 Colombia could economically use approximately 300,000 two-wheel tractors and 83,000 four wheel tractors. This would total 383,000 two-wheel tractors.. CE. L.

(25) TABLE 7 - A 10 YEAR PLAN FOR INPORTATIONS AND NANUFACTURINC OF ACRICULTURAL TRACTORS IN COLOMBIA Year. -22a-. Type an.d Size l of Tractors Anrual Importations Two Wheel Four-Wheel Four Wheel Four-Wheel Four-Wheel Four Wheel No. of Total Motor 70-80 Hp Tractors Horse Power 18-25 Hp 3 30-40 Hp 4 50-60 Hp 8-12lip2 1" 0 + HP. 1970. - 500. 3,000. 1,000. 300. 300. 4,600. 212,500. 1971. 6,000. 3,000. 1,500. 500. 500. 5.500. 275,000. 1972. 12,000. 3,000. 2,000. 800. 800. 6 3,600. 355,000. 1.73. 18,000. 2,500. 3,000. 1,200. 1,000. 7,700. 442,500. 1974. 25,000. 200. 2$00. 3,000. 1,200. 1,400. 8,100. 482,500. 1975. 30,000. 800. 2,000. 3,000. 2,000. 1,500. 8,500. 535,000. 1976. 40,000. 2,000. 2,000. 3,500. 2,500. 1,500. 9,500. 600,000. 1977. 40,000. 3,000. 2,000. 3,500. 3,000. 2,000. 10,500. 687,500. 1978. 50,000. 4,000. 1,000. 4,500. 3,000. 2,000. 10,500. 707,500. 1979. 50,000. 5,000. 1,000.. 5,000. 3,500. 2,000. 11,500. 772,500. 271,500. 15,000. 30,000 -. 18,000. 13,000. lOYr.. Totais. 22,000. 83,000 5,070,000. Total Engine Horsepower Available in 1080 -- 8,085,000 Hp. 'Size la based upon motor horsepower. 2 Two-wheel tractora to be mainly manufactured in Colombia, especially when local industry proves ita capaity to manufacture tractors of acceptable quality. Importations should be allowed, especially during the first 2-5 years of the plan. 10 horsepower la used abo ye as the average motor size. 3 The four-wheel 18-25 horsepower tractors could be largely manufacture in Colombia, especially during the last 6 years of the plan. 20 horsepower is used as the average motor size. 4All four-wheel tractors of 30 motor horsepower oi more should be imported. At sorne future date Colombia should investigate the feasibility of manufacturing, under license from sorne reliable company, tractors in the 60-70 motor horsepower range. *Note : A total available engin horepower of 8,085,00, including that of the tractors manufactured in Colom bia, is sufficient only for a maxinium of the sanie nurnber of hectares of cultivated latid. This i s based upon the utiiversally accepted factor of 1 horsepower per cui2ed1and..

(26) -23If the reader finds these figures too staggering to the imagination, we respectfully cali hís attention to the agricuiturti mechanization situation in Japan. Although Japan has four times the popuiation of Colombia, it has oni y 337 of the land area_(Ja pan, 143,719 square miles; Colombia, 439,513 square miles) and wih a higher percentage of mountaínous land than does Colombia Hoever, as of 1966, Japan had atotal of 2,800,000tractors in agricultural use'. The major portion of these have less than 35 hp Japafl5 annual. replacement of worn out andobsolete tractors is more than 300,000. Japan is a food and fib.r importing nation. Colombia couid be afood and fiber exporting nation. However, this can never be without mechanization. Another exampie is that of Spain 2 . Spain had 1.5 times the population of Colombia in 1964, only 707 of the land area; but had 140,460 four-wheel tractors and 22,200 two wheel tractors inuc in 1965. Spain has set as its irtmediate goal one tractor for each 65 hEctares. This calls for 325,000 four-wheel tractors or their equipment in combinations of two and four-wheel tractors. Another example worthy of mentiori is that of Greece 3 which had one-half of Colombia g 1964 population, only 10 of Colombia's land area, but had 33,700 large two-wheel (40-5 hp.average) tractors and 18,000 two wheel tractors. The annual increase in the number of twawhecl tractors is increasing rapidly while there is little change in the number of four wheel tractors. iBuchele, Wesley F., 'The Use of Er . ergy for Food Production', p 4 Ion. State Univ, Ames, Iowa, 1968. 2 IBRD ard FAO "The Devclopment of Agriculture in Spain, Nov. 1966 3 IBRD and FAO 'The Developmcnt of Agriculture in Greece', 1966 p.4S-49-3.

(27) -24The Cost What would be the cost of the abo ye nurnbers of tractors, including basic cquipment, if all were to be imported. T. two-wheel. tractors and equipment would cost an average of U.S. $1,300 (22,750 pesos each, with a total of US $390,000,000 (6,825,000,000 pesos). The 30-40 hp four-wheel tractors would cost with basic equipment, US $5,000 (87,500 pesos). This would total US $415,000,000 (7,262,500,000 pesos). The grand total would he US $805,000,000 (14,387,500,000 pesos). The aboy e figures are staggering to the imagination, however, the authors are of the opinion that they are reasonably correct. LE the basic data as to thenumber arid size of farms, and percentages mechanizable are not correct, then the abo ye calculations are subject to the same degree of error. However, even if there are errors in the aboy e calculations of as much as 25% a dollar cost of even US 600,000,000 would still be a tremendous amount of money. Can Colan bia reahly afford to spend this amount of foreign exchange (dollars or other hard currency) to mechanize its agriculture? Can Colombia afford the annual replacement cost of US $100,000,000* that í would take for annual importatiori of replacement tractors and repair parts necessary to maintairi the level of mechanization? (These figures do not include the cost of importation of the more complicated *Based upon an annual replacernent and repair part figure of 12.5%, which is an ultra-conservative one. Ex :US $800,000,000 x 12.5% US $ 100,000,000..

(28) -25-. agrícultural. equipment such as grain combines, corn pickers, cotton. pickers, etc. , which will also be needed in any mechanization program). Fortunately Colombia does not need to import all of its tractos and basic equipment. The authorE, in cooperation with Colombian industry, are proving that Colombia can and wihl increasingly manufacture more and more of its small tractors and virtually all of its basic equipment for them and for the large tractors. For example, Spain has only beeri able to reach the stage of mechanization that it now has (approximately 3C7' of that needed compared to Colombias 127) through the manufacturing of a major portion of their smahl two-wheel tractors and smaller proportion of the smaller sizes of four-wheel tractors. They also manufacture the major propertion of the basic implements for all tractore..

(29) -26-. The Plan. As stated earlier in this study, Colombia cannot afford to mechanize its agriculture if, in so doing, it upsets the socioeconomic balance of its system. People displaced from rural areas by mechatiization must be reemployed in other sectors of the econorny if serious social problema are to be avoided. If Colombia were to mechanize its agricultural production through the rapid importation of a substantial por tion of the tractors and equipment shown as needed from the previous data, serious social p problerns would result from the large number of people displaced, In addition, such a large transfer of expenditures of foreign exchange earnings from other sectors of the economy to fariri nchinery importations would cause severe disruptions - both social and economic. Colombia simply cannot afford, at the present tirne,such an amount of foreiga purchased machinery and tractors. The total cost for importatíons of agricultural tractors and machinery during the period of 1955 through 1967 was only US $199,300,000, or ari average of only US 7l5,331,000 (268,292,500 pesos)1 per year. The pertinent question than becomes -"Uow can Colombia mechanize agricultural production if it cannot afford to do so through importations alone?".. 1 Source : 1955 - 1965 Adimagro. 1966 - 1967 Dane.. -.

(30) -27-. The. plan proposed by the writers, after more than two years. study and consultation* with personnel of agricultural institutions, government agencies, private industry and foreign missions, is basad upon a combination of importations and manufacturing of farm tractors and machinery by local industry. Increasing emphasis, year by year, is to be placed upon manufacturing within the country. Colombian industry, with the cooperation of the Agricultural Engineering Department of the Instituto Colombiano Agropecuario (ICA) has proven that it has the ability to build high quality two-wheel tractors and irnplement. A considerable number will be constructed. during 1970. An improved model has already been designed. Table 6 shows a 10 year projection for the construction of two-wheel tractors, their annual and total costs in pesos, and the annual and total cost in dollars for the needed imported parts.. Table 6 - A 10 Year Production Projectionfor Two-wheel Tractors Number Year Produced. Cost of Production* Millions of Pesos. 7. Imported Parts Costs Pesos in Millions US Dollars. 1970. 500. 6. 25. 1.5. 1971. 6,000. 72. 20. 14.4. 822,857. 1972. 12,000. 144. 20. 28.8. 1,645,714. 1973. 18,000. 216. 15. 32.4. 1,851,428. 1974. 25,000. 200. 15. 50. 0. 2,857,142. $. 85,714.

(31) 28(ont. Table 6). Year. Number Produced. 1975. 30.000. 360. 10. 36.0. 2,057,000. 1.976. 40,000. 480. 10. 48.0. 2,743, 000. 1977. 40,000. 480. 10. 48.0. 2,743,000. 1978. 50,000. 600. 10. 60,0. 3,430,000. 1979. 50,000. 600. 10. 60.0. 3,430,000. Total 271,000. Cost of Production* Millions of Pesos 7. Imported Parts Tractors Pesos in Millions US Dollars. 3,258 million. Us $ 379,1 mill. 21,605,755. * Based upori arid exchange rate of 17.5 pesos to the dollar, and a production cost of 12,00 pesos for a tractor and basic equipment of piow, harrow and cultivator.. The data in Table 6 show that building of 271,500 tractors over a 10 year period would cost 3,258,000,000 pesos including US$21,605,755 (379.1 million pesos) value of imported parts. The imported parts would require foreign exchange. However, there would be a saving in foreígn exchange of approximately liS $330,000,000*. *Calculat ion 271,000 tractors. is 907 of 300,000 tractors 907 of US $390,000,000 is US $351,000,000 potential import cost US $351,000,000 foreign exchange.. liS $21,605,755 = US $329,394,245 savings of.

(32) -29--. The significant point here is the saving in foreign exchange. Extra imported machines and tools to produce this number of tractors in Colombia would probably reduce this saving by another US $30,000,000 dollars. 'The net savings in foreign exchange would then be only US $300,000,000. Colombian industry also currently has the ¿bility and capacity to produce four-wheel tractors in the size range of 18-24hp. Such a tractor is now (1970) being designed and a prototype being cons tructed by the Agricultural Engineering Department of ICA. This tractor will utilize a Colombian manufactured engine, a transaxie designed by ICA and to be manufactured in Colombia, as well as locally produced steel and ¡ron products, except for those needed for gears, axeis, and bearings. It is projected thatthis size of tractor would take the place of probably 30,000 of the two-wheel tractors, at a substitutíon rate of one four-wheel, 18-24hp tractor for two two-wheel, 8-12hp tractors. At this rate of substitution Colombia could use 15,000 of these in place of 30,000 of the twowhe1 tractors (Thus the reason fór only 271,500 in the 10 year projection). This would result in another foreign exchange saving of US $3,000 per tractor for a total savings of US $45,000,000 in foroing exchange. The extra imported machines, tools and parts needed to produce these would reduce the abo ye amount by approximately US $9,000,000 for a net foreign exchange savings of US36,000,000..

(33) -30-. The. total navíngs of foreign exchange on both types of tractor'. and equipment would then amount to US $336,000,000 ($300,000,000 $36,000,000) by manufacturing the two-wheel tractors and equipment, and the small four-wheel (18-24 hp) tractors and equipment in Colo: bia. Most of the basic equipment forfi-ie large tractors (30-40 hp and larger) can, and ghould, be manufactured here in Colombia. Such companies as APOLO, MANAGRO and several minor corapanies are currently annually producing (mainly since 1964) several hudred each of disc piows, cultivators, disc harrows, planters and several other types of implernents. Their individual capacities couid easily be increased several foid, almost immediateiy, without adding any newly imported machina tools. Other companies could easily uriderake the manufacturing of these basic agricultural impiements. The imported costs of the basic implements included in the US $5,000 average cost of 30-40 hp tractors, as discuesed on page 20 under the heading of "The Costs, would be approxímately US $11800 This wouid amount to US $149,400,000. At least 907. of this amount, (US $134,460,000) of foreign exchange can be saved by local manufact uring. This amount wouid probably be reduced byme US $10,000,000 needed for importations of new machina tools, ball bearings and high quality steel for discs, etc., in the local manufacturing of these implements in Colombia. Therefore, the net savings in foreign.

(34) -31-. exchange would, for these implements, be approximately liS $1246O,('-24 if they vere manufactured in Colombia. The total savings in foreign exchange on the tractors manufactured in Colombia, their basic equípment, and also the equipnEnt for the large tractors would be as follow: Tractors and equipment -. US $336,000,000. Equipment for large tractors -- US $124,460,000 A total savings of - lIS $460,460,000 in foreign exchange.. Thus we can see that the US $805,000,000 of foreign exchange needed over a 10 year period for mechanization through importations can be reduced by the abo ye US $460,460,000 to a more majegeable liS $364,540,000. This would arnount to anannual expenditure of only US $364,540,000. This would amount to an annual expenditure of only liS $36,454,000 over a 10 year period. This is only four times the average annual expenditure for the 10 ycar period of 1958-67, and only two and one-half times the highest expenditure (1955) in any one year. We balieve that Colombia can afford this annual amount oí foreign exchange expenditure necessary to supplement local manufacturing efforts in order to mechanize its agricultural production. In closing we would like to emphasize that Colombia cannot afford to ignore this, or sorne similar type of agricultural mechanization plan. The grim alternative is a losing battle against the rising specter of food shortages caused by a rapidly expanding total population arid a decreasing agricultural population. Drastic social upheavelswill suely occur if this bartie is not won, and won soon..

(35)