Ocena ekonomike pridelave hmelja v okviru analize kmetij v panožnem krožku za leto 2023

Razboršek, Špela (author), Udovč, Andrej (mentor), Pavlovič, Martin (comentor)

V magistrski nalogi je predstavljen model panožnega krožka v hmeljarstvu (PKH) ter analiza enajstih kmetij, s poudarkom na razlikah v prihodku, spremenljivih stroških in pokritju. Analiza je pokazala, da se največje razlike med kmetijami pojavljajo pri stroških za material in sicer gnojila, energijo in najeto delo. Primerjava dveh skrajnih primerov – kmetije z najvišjimi (CE1: 8.620 €/ha) in najnižjimi spremenljivimi stroški (CE8: 3.801 €/ha) – je razkrila ključne dejavnike, ki vplivajo na ekonomski uspeh. Največje pokritje je imela kmetija CE6, in sicer zaradi kombinacije povprečnih stroškov, nadpovprečnega pridelka in nekoliko višje odkupne cene hmelja. Anketna raziskava med udeleženci PKH je pokazala zadovoljstvo z vključitvijo v krožek, predvsem zaradi boljšega upravljanja s fitofarmacevtskimi sredstvi in nasvetov za finančno načrtovanje. Prvo raziskovalno vprašanje o pripravljenosti udeležencev za komentiranje poslovnih podatkov je bilo potrjeno. Ovrgli pa smo preostali dve raziskovalni vprašanji, da je kmetija, ki je najbolj učinkovita na stroškovni strani, nadpovprečna tudi v ostalih ekonomskih kazalnikih in da ima kmetija, ki dosega najvišje pokritje, tudi najvišji pridelek in odkupno ceno hmelja.

• Language: Slovenian
• Keywords: panožni krožek v hmeljarstvu (PKH), tehnološko-ekonomska analiza, spremenljivi stroški, pokritje, hmelj, kmetijsko gospodarstvo, ekonomika pridelave
• Work type: Master's thesis/paper
• Organization: BF - Biotechnical Faculty
• Year: 2025
• PID: 20.500.12556/RUL-177613
• Publication date in RUL: 26.12.2025

Secondary language

• Language: English
• Title: Economic Assessment of hop farms within benchmarking sessions for hop growers for the year 2023

Abstract

The master's thesis presents the benchmarking sessions for hop growers (PKH) and analyzes eleven farms to identify differences in financial coverage and variable costs. The analysis highlighted significant cost discrepancies in materials (fertilizers), energy, and hired labor. A comparison of two extreme cases – the farm with the highest (CE1: 8.620 €/ha) and the lowest variable costs (CE8: 3.801 €/ha) – revealed key factors influencing economic performance. The highest gross margin was achieved by farm CE6, due to a combination of average costs, above-average yields, and slightly above- average hop prices. A survey among PKH members showed high satisfaction with participation, especially due to improved fertilizer and pesticide management and better financial planning. The first research question, which assumed members are willing to discuss financial data with each other, was confirmed. However, the other two research questions – that the most successful farm in terms of variable costs also performs in all economic indicators, and that the farm with the higest gross margin has the highest yield and price – were rejected.

• Keywords: Benchmarking sessions for hop growers, techno-economic analysis, variable costs, coverage, hops, agricultural farm, economics of crop production