|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
TOBACCO INFLUENCE ON REDUCTION OF POVERTY AMONG HOUSEHOLD FARMING Mile Peshevski1, Dragić Zivković2, Miloš Kocić3, Marjana Trajkoska4, Ljupčo Maneski4 1Mile Peševski, PhD, regular professor, University ”Ss Kiril and Methodius” in Skopje, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Food, Blvd Edward Kardelj bb, 1000 Skopje, Republic of Macedonia. e-mail: milepesevski@yahoo.com 2Dragić Zivković, PhD, regular professor, University of Belgrade, Faculty of agriculture, Nemanjina 6, 11080 Zemun- Belgrade, Republic of Serbia 3Miloš Kocić, Mr, manager, Komercijalnа Banка а.д., Niš Republic of Serbia 4Marjana Trajkoska, postgraduate students in Scientific Tobacco Institute, str. Kicevski pat bb,75000 Prilep 4Ljupčo Maneski, postgraduate students in Scientific Tobacco Institute, str. Kicevski pat bb, 75000Prilep
ABSTRACT In this paper the authors will present a few definitions about poverty, followed by a compara tive analysis of resources available for living and personal consumption in the Republic of Macedonia and in the Republic of Serbia. The results had shown that Macedonian citizens spent 14.9% more money than they had available. The situation in Republic of Serbia was quite reversed, because theyhad 12.1% more than actual spending. In both countries, over 41% of overall consumption went to food and non-alcoholic beverages.Republic of Macedonia has 3.4 times smaller surface area (when observing the whole territory)than the Republic of Serbia, the production of tobacco used by 2.3 times more arable land. The Virginian tobacco is the reason why average tobacco production in the Republic of Serbia was 200 kg/ha higher than in the Republic of Macedonia. In both countries gross margin is grater than all other cultures, even in breeding dairy cows. This implies that in the future tobacco area should be enlarged, which in turn would be useful in poverty reduction or to increase the family budget from agricultural activities.
Key words: tobacco, gross margin, poverty. |
