Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendelianae Brun. 2014, 62(4), 777-782 | DOI: 10.11118/actaun201462040777

Economic Performance of SME Agricultural Producers in the Context of Risk Management: Focus on Visegrad 4 Member Countries

Jan Vavřina, Dana Martinovičová
Department of Business Economics, Faculty of Business and Economics, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00, Brno, Czech Republic

The long term regulation of the EU agrarian sector via the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and its respective instruments focuses on the sustainable development both of the agriculture and rural area as a whole. It is needed above all to stress out the equalization instruments of CAP within the context of negative impacts' diminish of outer sectorial environment in relation with the economic status of agricultural businesses, specifically the small and medium ones. The EU programming period of years 2014-2020 is focused from the view point of the agrarian sector on more efficient CAP to encourage the competitiveness of European farmers. The aforementioned programming period is for agricultural producers from V4 countries the first one when CAP guarantees the maximum amount of operational subsidies for them, of course regarding the respective agreed EU accession treaties. Nevertheless, CAP subsidies cannot be considered to be the key factor of competitiveness within EU single market. The relation between long term increasing of production's inputs on one hand and the decreasing of agricultural producers' prices on the other one can be marked as very important negative aspect within the need of farmers' sustainable competitiveness.
So, the direct consequence of a negative influence of aforementioned factor is the subsequent negative direct influence on profitability of agricultural producers. The need for increasing the efficiency of production, marketing and other related processing activities appears to be relevant and inevitable. The business processes are repeated cyclically, that is why there is emerged the need for its systematic and continuous management, measurement, assessment and subsequent changes and optimization. The management of risks has to be involved in the business activities of agricultural businesses regardless their economic size and branch, taking into account possible negative influences.
The article aims at identification of instruments for measuring the sustainable economic performance of agricultural businesses via management of risks using secondary economic data. Subsequently, there are defined factors influencing the economic performance of SME agricultural producers settled in the V4 countries using the economic analysis. There are utilized secondary data of Eurostat and official EU documents.

Keywords: agri-business, agriculture, economic performance, factors of production, risk management, standard output of agricultural production

Published: October 4, 2014  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Vavřina, J., & Martinovičová, D. (2014). Economic Performance of SME Agricultural Producers in the Context of Risk Management: Focus on Visegrad 4 Member Countries. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 62(4), 777-782. doi: 10.11118/actaun201462040777
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. BERSTEIN, L. A., WILD J. J. 1998. Financial statement analysis, theory, application and interpretation. 6th Edition. Boston: Irwin/McGraw-Hill.
    2. BIGLIARDI, B., BOTTANI, E. 2010. Performance measurement in the food supply chain: a balanced scorecard approach. Facilities, 28(5-6): 249-260. Emerald Insight. [Online]. Available at: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/02632771011031493.[Accessed 2014, February 3]. DOI: 10.1108/02632771011031493 Go to original source...
    3. EUROPEAN UNION. 2004. Regulation (EC) No. 138/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 December 2003 on the economic accounts for agriculture in the Community. In: Official Journal of the European Union. Edition L 33: Volume 47. Also available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2004:033:TOC.
    4. EUROPEAN UNION. 2008. Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1242/2008 of 8 December 2008 establishing a Community typology for agricultural holdings. In: Official Journal of the European Union. Edition L 33: Volume 51. Also available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2008:335:TOC.
    5. EUROSTAT. ©2005. Farm structure survey. [Online]. Available at: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/agriculture/documents. [Accessed: 2014, January 16].
    6. EUROSTAT. ©2007. Farm structure survey. [Online]. Available at: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/agriculture/documents. [Accessed: 2014, January 16].
    7. EUROSTAT. ©2010. Farm structure survey. [Online]. Available at: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/agriculture/documents. [Accessed: 2014, January 16].
    8. FOTR, J., DĚDINA, J. and HRŮZOVÁ, H. 2000. Manažerské rozhodování. 2. vyd. Praha: Ekopress.
    9. KISLINGEROVÁ, E. et al. 2007. Manažerské finance. 2. vyd. Praha: C. H. Beck.
    10. KONEČNÝ, M. and REŽŇÁKOVÁ, M. 2000. Controlling. Brno: VUT-FP Brno.
    11. MARTINOVIČOVÁ, D. 2009. Pojistná řeššení negativních následků rizik. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 56(3): 89-96. DOI: 10.11118/actaun200957030089 Go to original source...
    12. MARTINOVIČOVÁ, D., BERANOVÁ, M., POLÁK, J. et al. 2010. Teoretické aspekty kategorizace rizik. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 57(3): 131-136. DOI: 10.11118/actaun201058030131 Go to original source...
    13. MICKIEWICZ, B. 2012. Perspectives of Agricultural Policy for the European Union Member States after 2013. In: Economic Science for Rural Development: proceedings of the International Scientific Conference on Integrated and Sustainable Development. Latvia University of Agriculture, 26-27 April 2012, 164-168.
    14. PALOMA, S. G., CIAIAN, P., CRISTOIU, A. et al. 2013. The future of agriculture. Prospective scenarios and modelling approaches for policy analysis. Land Use Policy, 31: 102-113. Science Direct. [Online]. Accessible at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.12.005. [Accessed 2014, February 3]. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.12.005 Go to original source...
    15. SCHWARCZ, P., BANDLEROVÁ, A., SCHWARCZOVÁ, L. et al. 2012. Reforma SPP v kontexte smerovania priamych platieb. Ekonomika poľnohospodárstva, 12(2): 20-30. [Online]. Accessible at: http://issuu.com/vuepp/docs/ep_2_2012?e=4710326/3236190. [Accessed 2014, January 16].
    16. SOUTAR, G., 2012. Countdown to Cap Reform. Farmers Weekly, 157(27): 24-25. ProQuest [Online]. Accessible at: http://search.proquest.com/docview/1030428574/fulltextPDF/92C0AE0C6F804C75PQ/21?accountid=28016. [Accessed 2014, January 16].
    17. SAUNDERS, C., KAYE-BLAKE, W., HAYES, P. et al. 2007. Business models and performance indicators for Agribusinesses. Canterbury, N.Z: The Agribusiness and Economics Research Unit (AERU). [Online]. Available at: https://researcharchive.lincoln.ac.nz/bitstream/10182/3647/1/Business_models.pdf. [Accessed 2014, January 23].

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY NC ND 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content