Technical and Economic Analysis of Aeroponics and other Systems for Potato Mini-Tuber ...

12 Pages·2013·0.2 MB·English

Am.J.PotatoRes.(2013)90:357–368
DOI10.1007/s12230-013-9312-5
Technical and Economic Analysis of Aeroponics and other
Systems for Potato Mini-Tuber Production in Latin America
Julian R.Mateus-Rodriguez& Stef deHaan&
Jorge L. Andrade-Piedra& Luis Maldonado&
Guy Hareau&Ian Barker&Carlos Chuquillanqui&
Victor Otazú& Rebeca Frisancho&CarolinaBastos&
ArioneS. Pereira&Carlos A.Medeiros&
Fabian Montesdeoca&Jacqueline Benítez
Publishedonline:10April2013
#PotatoAssociationofAmerica2013
Abstract Producing large quantities of high quality mini- theInternationalPotatoCenter(CIP)hasseveraladvantages,
tubers at low cost is essential for an economically viable includinghighmultiplicationrates(upto1:45),highproduc-
supply of seed potatoes. Here we systematize the technical tionefficiencyperarea(>900mini-tubersperm2),savingsin
and economic aspects of aeroponics and provide a bench- water, chemicals and/or energy, and positive economic indi-
mark comparison of this technology with other mini-tuber cators. The fiber-cement tiles technology from Brazil is also
productionsystemsasdevelopedinLatinAmerica:conven- shown to be highly efficient and slightly more robust com-
tional,semi-hydroponics,andfiber-cementtilestechnology. paredtoaeroponics.Preconditionsforthesuccessfuladoption
Research methodologies included: 3-year registration of of the different technologies in developing countries are
cashflowsandproductionregistersofaeroponics,economic discussed.
and technical surveys, in-depth inquiry with managers of
technologies. Results show that aeroponics as promoted by Resumen La producción de grandes cantidades de mini-
tubérculosdealtacalidadyabajoprecioesesencialparaun
abastecimiento económicamente viable de semilla de papa.
J.R.Mateus-Rodriguez Aquí sistematizamos aspectos técnicos y económicos de
TibaitatáResearchCenter,CorporaciónColombianade
aeroponía y se compara la línea de base de esta tecnología
InvestigaciónAgropecuaria(CORPOICA),Mosquera,Colombia
con otros sistemas de producción de mini-tubérculos que
: : : :
S.deHaa:n(*) L.Ma:ldonado G.Hareau C.Chuquillanqui han sido desarrollados en América Latina: tecnología
V.Otazú R.Frisancho C.Bastos convencional, semi-hidroponía, tejas de fibrocemento.
InternationalPotatoCenter(CIP),AvenidaLaMolina1885,
Metodologías de investigación incluyeron: registro de flujo
LaMolina,Lima12,Peru
de caja y registro de producción de aeroponía durante 3
e-mail:[email protected]
años, encuestas económicas y técnicas, indagación en
J.L.Andrade-Piedra detalle con gerentes de tecnologías. Los resultados
InternationalPotatoCenter(CIP),
demuestran que la aeroponía tal como lo promueve el
P.O.Box17‐21‐1977,Quito,Ecuador
Centro Internacional de la Papa (CIP) tiene múltiples
I.Barker ventajas, entre ellas tasas altas de multiplicación (hasta
SyngentaFoundationforSustainableAgriculture, 1:45), eficiencia alta de producción por área (> 900 mini-
Basel,Switzerland tubérculosporm2),ahorrosenagua,químicosy/oenergía,y
:
indicadores económicos positivos. También se demuestra
A.S.Pereira C.A.Medeiros
EmpresaBrasileiradePesquisaAgropecuaria(EMBRAPA), que la tecnología de tejas de fibrocemento de Brasil es
ClimaTemperado,Pelotas,RS,Brazil muy eficiente y ligeramente más robusta comparada con
: aeroponía. Se discuten las condiciones previas para una
F.Montesdeoca J.Benítez
adopción exitosa de las diferentes tecnologías en países en
InstitutoNacionalAutónomodeInvestigacionesAgropecuarias
(INIAP),SantaCatalinaExperimentalStation,Quito,Ecuador víadedesarrollo.
358 Am.J.PotatoRes.(2013)90:357–368
Keywords Seedproductionsystem .Hydroponics . production costs, but at the risk of losing phytosanitary
Semi-hydroponics .Fiber-cementtilestechnology. quality (Struik and Wiersema 1999).
Pre-basictuberseed FormaltuberseedproductioninLatinAmerica,justasin
manyotherpartsoftheworld,usuallyhasthreemultiplica-
tion stages. The first takes place in micro-propagation lab-
Introduction oratorieswhereinvitroseedlingsorcuttingsofhighvarietal
purity and phytosanitary quality are produced. The second
ThevastmajorityofpotatofarmersinLatinAmericaandin consists of the production of pre-basic seed in the form of
developing countries do not use certified seed. Various mini-tubers in controlled environments (green- or
studies have singled out poor quality planting material as screenhouses). The third stage involves taking the mini-
perhaps the single most important constraint undermining tuberstotheopenfieldinordertoincreasevolumesandobtain
effortstoimproveproductivity(Ezeta2001;Gildemacheret thebasicseedandothercategoriesofseedinaccordancewith
al. 2009a). In Latin America, with the exception of the eachcountry’slegislation.Thismodelhasundergonedifferent
southerncone(Chile,Argentina)andpossiblyMexico,area modifications, resulting from technological development or
plantedusing certified seedaccountsfor justatiny fraction the need to adapt it to situations that are peculiar to each
oftotalareaplanted.Informalseedsystemsarepredominant productioncenter(Ezeta2001).
in the Andean countries, particularly for the smallholder This article focuses on the technologies used for the
farmer provision of potato landraces (De Haan and Thiele second stage, i.e. the production of pre-basic seed or mini-
2004; Thiele 1999). Hidalgo et al. (2009) reported that the tubers. Producing large quantities of high quality mini-
use of certified tuber seed in relation to all seed planted in tubers, at a low cost, in a relatively short period of time,
Boliviawas3.01%in2005and2.37 %in2006. InPeruit and inanecologicallyfriendly manner isakey element for
was0.34%in2005,0.24%in2006and0.46%in2007.In improving formal and non-conventional seed production
Ecuador and Colombia, although updated data were not systems (Camargo et al. 2004), i.e. alternative systems that
available, it is estimated that the use of certified tuber seed follow rules, regulations and standards close to the formal
does not exceed 2 %. With the possible exception of India, system,butarebetteradaptedtolocalrealitiesandsmallhold-
thelimiteduseofgoodqualityplantingmaterialissimilarin erconditions.Forexample,the3GStrategy(3Generations,
Asia(Janskyetal.2009;Kadianetal.1999),andevenmore see Acronyms in Table 1) promoted by the International
so in much of Sub-Saharan Africa (Gildemacher et al. Potato Center (CIP). The core innovation of 3G consists of
2009b; Hirpa et al. 2010; Tripp 2006) with the exception the production of large quantities of mini-tubers in a single
of theRepublic ofSouthAfrica (Niederwieser 2003). generation using aeroponics. This makes it possible to pro-
National programs and development organizations in ducefinaltuberseedaftertwogenerationsinthefield,instead
Latin America, Asia and Africa have spent decades trying of three to five generations. Seed tubers are sold to small-
toreplicatetheformalseedsystemsthatexistforpotatoesin holder farmers who receive training to re-utilize the seed
the USA and northern Europe. Producing certified seed without compromising quality, e.g. through simple tech-
potatoes involves overcoming a complex combination of niques such as positive selection and improved storage
technical, ecological, institutional, and economic con- (Gildemacher et al. 2007, 2011). This strategy can also in-
straints. Taken together they typically result in a finished cludetheconceptofQualityDeclaredSeed(FAO2006),i.e.
product that takes years to produce, is of dubious quality, qualityseedthatisproducercertifiedbasedonadecentralized
prohibitively expensive or in extremely limited supply - or qualitycontrolsystem.
some combination of all four. One of the main economic The production of mini-tubers using soil substrates or a
problems of high quality seed tubers produced in formal mixture ofseveralsolidcompoundsiswidespreadthrough-
systems in developing countries is their cost to the end- out Latin America. In vitro plantlets are normally directly
users. Such planting material can make up between 30 and transplanted to beds in green- or screenhouses. Soils are
70 % of the total production costs of a commercial crop frequently extracted from vulnerable sites such as the high
(Struik and Wiersema 1999; Correa et al. 2009). The altitude páramo or puna ecosystems in Ecuador and Peru.
price of such seed preempts its use by the vast majority Multiplicationratesoftheseconventionalorsolid-substrate-
of limited-resource farmers that characterize the potato basedsystemsaregenerallylow(aroundtenmini-tubersper
sub-sector in these countries. To relax this constraint, a plant), which increases the production costs per unit.
common practice of many seed production programs is Moreover,thesubstratesaredisinfestedusingheatorhighly
to produce the final seed (certified, authorized, or toxicproductswithsignificantnegativeimpactontheenvi-
audited, depending on the legislation of each country) ronmentand human health (Gullino etal. 2003).
after three to five generations of propagation in the An alternative technology for obtaining mini-tubers is
open field, in order to increase the volumes and reduce hydroponics (Muro et al. 1997; Ranalli 1997; Rolot and
Am.J.PotatoRes.(2013)90:357–368 359
Table1 Acronymsand
abbreviations Acronymor Meaning Unit
abbreviation
3G Threegenerations
B/C Benefit-costratio Dimensionless
C Unitcostofmini-tuber US$permini-tuber
CIP InternationalPotatoCenter
CORPOICA CorporaciónColombianadeInvestigaciónAgropecuaria
[ColombianAgriculturalResearchCorporation]
EMBRAPA EmpresaBrasileiradePesquisaAgropecuária
[BrazilianAgriculturalResearchEnterprise]
GI Grossincome US$perseason
INIA InstitutoNacionaldeInnovaciónAgraria
[NationalInstituteofAgriculturalInnovation]
INIAP InstitutoNacionalAutónomodeInvestigacionesAgropecuarias
[AutonomousNationalInstituteforAgriculturalResearch]
IRR Internalrateofreturn %
NARI NationalAgriculturalResearchInstitute
NFT Nutrientfilmtechnique
NP Netprofit US$perseason
NPV Netpresentvalue US$
Payback Recoveryofcapital Years
P Profitability %
Q Quantityofmini-tubersproduced mini-tubersperseason
QDS Qualitydeclaredseed
TPC Totalproductioncost US$perseason
Seutin 1999). A specific technology belonging to the hy- been used as a research tool (Tibbitts et al. 1996; Christie
droponics family called telhas de fribrocimento (fiber-ce- and Nichols 2004; Chang et al. 2008) and for mini-tuber
ment tiles) is based on the Nutrient Film Technique (NFT). productionprogramsinKorea(Kangetal.1996;Kimetal.
The technology consists of a series of canals or tiles 1997,1999)andChina(SunandYang2004).Multiplication
mounted on wooden supports, through which a film of rates are reported to be significantly higher than those
nutrient solution flows to wet the roots of the plants obtainedinconventionalsystems,withlesswaterandwith-
(Medeiros et al. 2002). This type of hydroponics has been out the use of solid substrates (Soffer and Burger 1988;
successfully developed in Brazil where it is applied by Ritter et al. 2001; Farran and Mingo-Castel 2006). Nichols
EMBRAPA(Factor etal. 2007;Correa et al.2008). (2005) emphasizes the potential of aeroponics for reducing
Semi-hydroponics,alsocommonlyreferredtoaspassive at least one generation of seed multiplication in the field,
hydroponics,isaspecificapplicationthatconsistsofplants withlowercostsandmaintaininghighphytosanitaryquality.
being grown in an inert medium that transports water and Aeroponics has thus been adapted by CIP and national
fertilizer to the roots by capillary action from a separate partners in Bolivia, Colombia, Peru, Ecuador, Ethiopia,
reservoir. This combination of solid substrates and hydro- Kenya,Uganda, and Malawi as part of the3G strategy.
ponics has also been adapted in the Andean region. In Recognizing that the economic and technical efficiency
Colombia, the development of this technology has been as well as the environmentally-friendly traits of any tech-
the result of cooperation between the national agricultural nologyareakeyfactorsforitsdisseminationandadoption,
researchprogram(CORPOICA)andMcCain(Laigneletand this article analyzes the principal economic and technical
Villota 2006). In Ecuador, the national program (INIAP) indicators of aeroponics adapted by CIP, as compared to
developed a semi-hydroponics mini-tuber production other technologies for mini-tuber production developed
scheme based on direct transplanting of in vitro plants into and/or adapted in Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru:
beds ina greenhouse. conventional (solid-substrate-based), semi-hydroponics,
One of the variants of hydroponics is aeroponics. With andfibercementtilestechnologies.Theaimofthisresearch
thistechnologytherootsofthepotatoplantareinsideadark istoanalyzetheeconomicsofsettingupandoperatingthese
container exposed to a fine mist of a nutrient solution differenttechnologiesforproducingmini-tubersindevelop-
(Christie and Nichols 2004; Otazú 2010). Aeroponics has ingcountries.
360 Am.J.PotatoRes.(2013)90:357–368
Materials and Methods investment in infrastructure of green- or screenhouses and
production modules, as well as materials and equipment.
Selectionof Technologies for Mini-TuberProduction These costs were considered for a variable lifetime (years)
and amortized during each agricultural season (Miragem et
The selection was based on information supplied by the al. 1982). Variable costs included inputs of direct use:
national agricultural research programs that are members phytosanitary diagnoses, water, electricity, maintenance,
of the LatinPapa Network (Bastos et al. 2008). Table 2 storage,and personnelexpenses.
shows the technologiesthat were selected for this study.
Economic Analysis
Data-Gathering
Foreachtechnology,thecostofthemini-tuber(C,US$per
From2008to2010,werecordedthefixedandvariablecosts unit) was calculated using the formula C ¼TPC=Q, where
of the aeroponics and conventional mini-tuber production Q is the quantity of mini-tubers produced based on the
technologies at the CIP experimental station of Santa Ana recordsofhistoricalproduction.Forthecalculationofgross
(Huancayo, Peru). In the case of aeroponics, this informa- income(GI,US$)weusedthesalesvaluepermini-tuberas
tionwascomplementedwithdatafrommodulesinstalledat reported in the survey. The net profit (NP, US $) was
two experimental stations of Peru’s national agricultural calculated according to Maldonado et al. (2007): NP¼GI
research program (INIA) in the departments of Cajamarca (cid:2)TPC. The profitability (P) was obtained applying the
and Junín. Detailed information of aeroponics in Ecuador, formulaP¼NP=TPC(cid:3)100.
semi-hydroponics in Colombia and Ecuador, and fiber- With the information of the TPC, GI and NP, the
cement tiles in Brazil was obtained from two surveys sent cashflows were established,considering a productive activ-
to specialists of each national program, using the same ity of 7 years for each technology, including that of
structure as that used for the Peru data. In-depth inquiry aeroponics (both in Peru and in Ecuador). The cash flow
with managers of the technologies was conducted and the oftheproductionactivity,orthedifferencebetweenincome
analyzed data was revised indetail. and expenditure, was used to define financial viability: net
present value (NPV, US $; Salas 1984), internal rate of
Technical Analysis return (IRR, %; Vásquez et al. 2002), payback period (in
years),and benefit-cost ratio (B/C;Gittinger 1982).
Qualitative and quantitative variables were analyzed.
Qualitative variables were as follows: existence of patents,
degree of local adaptation (referring to whether there was Results
sometypeofadaptationofthetechnologybeforestartingup
the production), ease of technology, requirement for equip- Technical Analysis
ment and inputs, water, solid substrate, disinfestation of
substrates, qualified personnel, risk of total loss (due to Informants reported on the possibility of transferring and
pests, nutritional or equipment failures), health of mini- replicating these technologies using local materials, equip-
tubers harvested, and possibility of staggered harvests. ment and personnel. None of the technologies have any
Quantitative variables included: number of production cy- patents and all have been adapted locally. The difference
clesperyear,greenhousesarea(m2),effectiveplantingarea related to the degree of or local adjustment (Table 2). The
(m2), density (plants per m2), historical multiplication rate aeroponics and fiber-cement tiles technologies generally
(perplant),historicalaverageofmini-tubersperseasonand need a high degree of local adaptation, while the semi-
m2per season. hydroponicsandconventionaltechnologiesrequireinterme-
diate to modest levels of adaptation respectively. With re-
Cost Analysis gard to the aeroponics and fiber-cement tiles technologies,
potential for replicability in developing countries can be
First, a detailed cost analysis was conducted for the relativelylowinlightofrequirementsforequipment,exter-
aeroponics technology as adapted by CIP in Peru (Tables 3 nal inputs and specialized personnel to ensure effective
and 4). Based on this, a less detailed cost analysis was operations. Semi-hydroponics is characterized by an inter-
conducted for the rest of the technologies (Table 2). These mediate degree of replicability because the use of solid
analysesincludedproductioncosts,andusedseveralprofit- substrates provides robustness. The conventional technolo-
ability indicators as described by Espinosa et al. (1996). gy hasa high degree of replicability.
Total production costs (TPC, US $ per season) included Withregardtorequirementsforequipment,materialsand
fixed costs and variable costs. Fixed costs included the inputs, the greatest need exists for aeroponics and fiber-
Am.J.PotatoRes.(2013)90:357–368 361
s
e
til %)
Fiber-cement Brazil(EMBRAPA) No High Low High Low No No High Intermediate High Yes 2 192 82.8 16 1:16 39,168 473 25,574 2,896 805(27.8%) 2,091(72.2 0.07 0.27 10,575 7,679 265 185,978 68.0 1.31
%)
Ecuador(INIAP) No Intermediate Intermediate Intermediate High Yes Yes Intermediate Low Intermediate No 1.5 150 57.15 18 1:10 16,400 287 8,782 4,104 625(15.2%) 3,480(84.8 0.25 0.30 4,920 816 20 16,608 28.3 1.66
s
c
Semi-hydroponi Colombia(CORPOICA) No Intermediate Intermediate Intermediate High Yes Yes Intermediate Low Intermediate No 1 140 69 18 1:16 27,600 400 8,250 5,257 1,398(26.6%) 3,859(73.4%) 0.19 0.30 8,280 3,023 58 25,926 38.8 1.46
%) %)
America Conventional Peru(CIP) No Low HighbLow Intermediate Yes Yes Low Low Intermediate No 2 80 60 16 1:6 18,000 300 17,252 3,545 1,232(34.8 2,312(65.2 0.20 0.22 3,960 415 12 12,295 17.4 2.24
n
ati
L
n
i
ctiontechnologies Ecuador(CIP,INIAP) No High Low High Low No No High High High Yes 1.5 125 30 25 1:25.5 27,540 918 14,833 3,926 1,167(29.7%) 2,758(70.3%) 0.14 0.30 8,262 4,336 110 78,753 54.9 1.42
u
d
o
pr
uber %) %)
potatomini-t Aeroponics Perua)(CIP No High Low High Low No No High High High Yes 1 80 35 25 1:45 31,500 900 9,201 3,340 1,314(39.4 2,025(60.6 0.11 0.22 6,930 3,590 107 32,479 41.6 1.62
or
f
s
or
at
c
Table2Technicalandeconomicindi Indicators Technical Patents Degreeoflocaladaptation Replicabilityoftechnology Requirementofequipmentandinputs Requirementofwater Solidsubstrate Disinfestationofsubstrate Requirementofqualifiedpersonnel Riskoftotalloss(systemfailure) Healthofmini-tubers Staggeredharvests Seasonsperyear2Areaofgreenhouse(m)2Effectiveplantingarea(m)−2Density(plantsm) Historicalmultiplicationrate−1Mini-tubersseason()Q−21Mini-tubersmseason Costs Totalfixedcosts(US$)−1Totalproductioncostsseason()TPC Fixedcostsamortized(US$) Variablecosts(US$) Economic Costofmini-tuber(US$)C, Salesvalue(US$) Grossincome(,US$)GI−1Netprofitseason(,US$)NP Profitability(,%)P Netpresentvalue(,US$)NPV Internalrateofreturn(%)IRR. Recoveryofcapital(years)
362 Am.J.PotatoRes.(2013)90:357–368
es Table 3 Fixed costs for the implementation of an 80 m2 aeroponics
nttil A) systeminPeru.January2010
e P
m A
ce R Item Unitvalue Totalvalue Valueper %
Fiber- Brazil(EMB 7.30 92.7 (US$) (US$) season(US$)
Initialinfrastructure
Greenhouse 4,720 4,720 674 94.0
Wateringsystem 300 300 43 6.0
housing
Sub-total 5,020 717 54.5
orP) Aeroponicsmodule
dA
Ecua(INI 1.80 14.2 SWeaetderbinogxessystem 11,,061695 11,,061695 124368 2475..96
Labor 620 620 89 17.0
s Drainagesystem 345 345 49 9.5
c
ni
po A) Sub-total 3,650 521 39.6
Semi-hydro Colombia(CORPOIC 1.58 43.8 EEpqH.uCim.pmmeteeentretra 116611 116611 2233 3377..66
Sprinklerpump 93 93 13 21.9
Thermometer 12 12 2 2.8
Sub-total 426 61 4.6
al Materials
n
o Uniforms(3) 15 45 6 42.4
nti
nve uP) 7 Measuringcylinders 20 20 3 19.0
Co Per(CI 2.4 6.9 Hose 15 15 2 14.3
Plasticapplicator 8 8 1 7.7
×500ml
Plasticrecipients(5) 1 7 1 7.0
Buckets 5 5 1 4.8
P)
A Scissors 5 5 1 4.7
Ecuador(CIP,INI 3.16 144.5 TSoutabl-total 9,120051 1,31145 1010..30
aElectricalconductivity
cement tiles, intermediate needs for semi-hydroponics, and
Aeroponics Perua)(CIP 2.07 102.5 hesubstrate rtshhetielagarthitlitivhrzeaealttyeilosaltnotoewfrofendfeotfheeicedsisensnfuoocbtrysictnrwocanletuevr.edeenRrtetiehopgenoaarrutdlesitdenecgofhofntrhoaenaloeugarosuyep,toopocnrfloiacvvwsiedaaitfnneorgdr,
t
ze fiber-cement tiles due to the re-use of the tank’s nutrient
erili solution, followed by the conventional technology with an
st
ss) to intermediate requirement, and semi-hydroponics with a
nle ve greaterrequirement.Thelaterisaso-calledopenhydropon-
nsio ocla icsystemandthesearetypicallycharacterizedbythelossof
ed) (.dimeB/C .US$)P nTable1 seofanaut nttehucethrinneoenletodgsoifelosurtriseouqnbu.siTrterhaettheecsoutnesvreielnioztfaiotsinooalnildaosnnudlbysstearmaptpei-lshi.eysTdhrtooerpeotfhnoeirscees,
Table2(continu Indicators Benefit-costratio−2Netprofitm(N aSeeAcronymsibExceptfortheu totshuypebseAetrserausmtprofvsraroe.srydiauscscloitpnnioekfnirersdmosynwesnditetehtlmhtrah.eteqtuhdieergenrmeeeeednotffoacrroesmkcpiolllneecxdeitarynneoddfsep(aTecachibamlleizin2ei)d-,
Am.J.PotatoRes.(2013)90:357–368 363
Table4 Variablecostsforoneseasonofaeroponicsproductioninan solid substrate will still be able to maintain moisture for
80m2greenhouseinPeru.January2010
days. Even in the case of nutritional imbalance, this can be
Item Valueperseason(US$) % covered by the substrate itself. The highest standards of
tuber seed health are obtained in aeroponics and fiber-
Inputs cement tiles systems while technologies that use substrate
Potatoseedlings 169 23.3 generallyshowsomedegreeofrejectionofmini-tubersdue
Electricenergy 169 23.3 tothe presence ofsoil-borne pathogens.
Commercialnutrientsolution 143 19.7 Institutions reported different sizes of green- or screen-
Miscellaneouselements 93 12.8 houses, effective planting areas and densities (Table 2). As
Chemicalinputs 90 12.4 for the historical multiplication rates (mini-tuber per plant),
Water 33 4.5 althoughthesedependtoalargeextentonthevarietiesandthe
Phytosanitarytreatment 15 2.1 environment,informantsindicatedhigherratesforthesystems
Disinfectants 13 1.8 derived from hydroponics compared to those that use solid
Sub-total 726 35.8 substrates. The highest production of mini-tuber per m2 per
Diagnosis season was obtained with aeroponics, followed by fiber-
Diagnosisofviruses 54 78.3 cementtiles,hydroponicsinColombia,conventionaltechnol-
Diagnosisofwaters 15 21.7 ogyinPeruandhydroponicsinEcuador.
Sub-total 69 3.40
Maintenance Cost Analysis
Maintenanceofequipment 75 50.0
Maintenanceofinfrastructure 75 50.0 ThefixedcostsofanaeroponicssysteminPeruamountedto
Sub-total 150 7.40 $9,201 (total) and $1,314 perseason (Table 3). These costs
were estimated over a lifetime of 7 years and amortized to
ColdStorage
one season per year. They included the construction of an
Sub-total 500 24.6
80 m2 screenhouse with a plastic roof, concrete bases,
Personnel
Technicalsupervisora 300 51.7 wooden structure, anti-aphid mesh, and housing for the
watering system, for a sub-total of $5,020 (94.0 % for the
Operator 280 48.3
greenhouse). The cost of the actual aeroponics module
Sub-total 580 28.8
amounted to a sub-total of $3,650 with the highest partici-
Total 2,025 100.0
pation being related to the construction of the boxes
aSalaryofUS$1,000permonth.part-time(30%)ofhis/hertime (45.6%)andthewateringsystem(27.9%).Theinvestments
inotherequipmentamountedto$426andcostsofmaterials
The highest level of expertise is required for aeroponics totaled $105.
and fiber-cement tiles, followed by semi-hydroponics, and The variable costs of aeroponics in Peru totaled $2,025
last conventional technology which can be operated by a perseason(Table4).Thecostsofinputsamountedto$726
technician with basic knowledge of crop management. per season, of which 23.3 % is related to the purchase of
Staggered harvests were only reported for aeroponics and potato seedlings and 19.7 % to the acquisition of the com-
fiber-cement tiles with up to six different moments of har- mercial nutrient solution. The energy and water costs ac-
vest per production cycle. One production cycle per year is countforapproximately27.8%ofthecostsofmaterialsand
obtained with aeroponics in Peru and semi-hydroponics in inputs.Thisisrelativelyhighduetotheconstantfunctioning
Colombia.One-and-a-halfproductioncycleperyeariscom- of the watering pump which is required to maintain the
mon for aeroponics andsemi-hydroponicsinEcuador.Two moisture level in the boxes. Furthermore, the water has to
productioncyclesperyeararereportedforfibercementtiles be changed regularly (every 15 days), in order to maintain
inBrazil and theconventional technology inPeru. theionic balance of thenutrientsolution.
The possibility of total loss is highest for aeroponics, Thediagnosiscostswere$69perseasonwhilethemain-
since there is no substrate at all (neither solid nor water) tenance of infrastructure and equipment amounted to $150
that would enable the plants to survive in the event of a per season. Aeroponics makes staggered harvesting possi-
technicalfailureorpowercut.Fiber-cementtilespresentan ble,consequentlyenablingselectionstobemadebydesired
intermediatelevelofrisk,sincetherootsystemwillcontin- mini-tuber size and significant increasing the number of
uetobeincontactwithathinfilmofwaterwithnutrientsin mini-tubers harvested per plant (Ritter et al. 2001).
case of failure. For semi-hydroponics and conventional However, these staggered harvests cause differences of
technologies, both of which use solid substrates, the risk sprouting in the mini-tubers; it is therefore recommended
of total loss is low. In the event of a technical failure, the todrytheminadarkenvironmentatroomtemperatureand
364 Am.J.PotatoRes.(2013)90:357–368
subsequently store them at 4 °C (Farran and Mingo-Castel main investment was made in the fixed structure of the
2006). The consequent cost of cold storage of the mini- 192 m2 greenhouse, followed by thewatering and drainage
tubers averaged $500. For the personnel, the cost of a system,andequipment.Asforthevariablecostsperseason,
technicalsupervisorparttime(30%)andafull-timeoperator the greatest share was associated with expenditure on per-
wasconsideredtakingintoaccountPeruvianstandardwages sonnel,inputsandmaterials.ThecalculatedTPCperseason
(Table 4). was$2,896,ofwhich72.2%was associated with variable
The TPC per season for the production of mini-tubers costs andonly27.8% with fixed costs that were amortized
using aeroponics in the highlands of Peru was $3,340 for a during each season. The amortization periods in this case
80 m2greenhouse (Table 2). The amortized fixed costs were longer than those reported above for the other mini-
accounted for 39.4% of the TPC and the variable costs tuberseedproductionsystems,especiallyforthegreenhouse
60.6%.Ahigherinvestmentwasmadefortheconstruction (20 years), beds and supports (14 years), and the watering
of the greenhouse and the aeroponics module in Ecuador anddrainagesystem(10years),aswellasthevariability in
($14,833) compared to Peru. The TPC per season for theamortizationofequipmentandmaterials(8.5years)and
aeroponics in Ecuador was slightly higher compared to the fiber cementtiles(6.5 years).
cost reported in Peru ($ 586 difference). The TPC of
aeroponics in Ecuador was calculated at $ 3,926, of which Economic Analysis
29.7 % corresponded to fixed costs that were amortized
during each season in accordance with the lifespan of the Table2showsthefollowingperformanceindicatorsforeach
greenhouse (20 years), aeroponics module (5 years), and of the technologies: the mini-tuber production per season
equipment and materials (3 years). The variable costs of (Q),mini-tubersm2perseason,thecostpermini-tuber(C),
aeroponics in Ecuador accounted for 70.3 %of the TPC. sales value, and the estimation of GI, NP, P, NPV, IRR,
The conventional mini-tuber production technology in payback period and B/C ratio. In the case of aeroponics in
Peru had an initial investment of $ 17,252 (Table 2). This Peru the average yield level was 45 mini-tubers per plant,
amountwas mostly dueto thepurchase of an autoclave for depending on the variety. Q was 31,500 mini-tubers in an
steam sterilization and the construction of a 80 m2 green- 80 m2 screenhouse and C was $0.11 per mini-tuber.
house. The highest variable costs were those of inputs, Assuming a sales value of $0.22 per mini-tuber the GI per
materials and personnel (data not shown). The TPC using seasonwouldbe$6,930.ThecalculatedNPperseasonwas
conventional technology was $3,545. Of this amount, $3,590 and the profitability indicator (P) was 107 %.
34.8 % corresponded to fixed costs, amortized during each Likewise, aeroponics in Ecuador reported Q of 27,540
season in accordance with the useful lifetime of the auto- mini-tubers per season in a 125 m2 greenhouse with a
clave,greenhouse,equipmentandmaterials(7years),while production cost of $0.14 per unit (Table 2). With the
65.2 %corresponded tovariable costs. reported sales value of $0.30 per mini-tuber we obtained a
An initial investment of $8,250 was reported for the GIof$8,262,aNPof$4,336andPof110%.Profitability
semi-hydroponics technology in Colombia (Table 2). The (P) was very similar inboth ofthe Andeancountries.
maininvestmentsweremadeintheconstructionofatunnel- Average production levels of the conventional solid-
type greenhouse with an area of 140 m2, installation of substrate-based mini-tuber production technology in Peru
seedbeds and purchase of the watering system. As for the resultedinaQof18,000mini-tubersina80m2screenhouse
variablecosts,thegreatestsharewasassociatedwithinputs, withaCof$0.19.Withasalesvalueof$0.22weobtaineda
materials and personnel costs. The TPC per season was GIof$3,960perseason,aNPof$41andaPof12%.With
calculated at $5,257: 26.6 % fixed costs amortized in each semi-hydroponics in Colombia an average Q of 27,600
productioncycle(mostlyfor7years)and73.4%associated mini-tubers was obtained in a 140 m2 greenhouse with a C
withvariablecosts.Theinitialcostofthesemi-hydroponics of$0.19.Anaveragesalesvalueof$0.30perminituberwas
technologyinEcuadorwas$8,782.Thismainlyconsistedof reported. On this basis, a GI of $8,280 per season was
theconstructionofa150m2greenhouseandtheinstallation calculated with a NP of $3,023 and a P of 58 %. In
of a watering system. Amongthevariablecosts,thehighest Ecuador, using the same technology, a Q of 16,400 mini-
were those related to personnel, inputs, and materials. The tubers in a 150 m2 greenhouse was reported with a C of
TPCperseasonforsemi-hydroponicsinEcuadorwascalcu- $0.25(Table2).Usingthelocalsalesvaluepermini-tuberof
latedtobeUS$4,104,ofwhich15.2%wereassociatedwith $0.30 the calculated GI was $4,920, the NP was $816 and
thefixedcoststhatareamortizedovertime(10–20yearsfor the P per season was 20 %. Using the fiber-cement tiles
infrastructure,7yearsforthewateringsystem,and2yearsfor technology in Brazil the Q was 39,168 mini-tubers in a
theseedbeds)and84.8%werevariablecosts. 192m2greenhousewithaCof$0.074.Takingintoaccount
Finally,forthefiber-cementtilestechnologyinBrazilan the sales value in Brazil of $0.27 per mini tuber the GI per
initial investment of $ 25,574 was reported (Table 2). The season was $10,575, theNP $7679 andthe P265 %.
Am.J.PotatoRes.(2013)90:357–368 365
For each of the technologies positive NPV’s were While theprivate sectorand strongresearchprograms such
obtained with the highest NPV for the fiber-cement tiles as EMBRAPAwill mainly evaluate feasibility on the basis
technology and the lowest NPV for the conventional tech- of efficiency, smallholder farmer organizations or resource-
nology:$185,978and$12,295respectively.TheIRRofthe scarcenationalprogramsarelikelytofavorrobustnessover
different systems showed a similar tendency with high efficiency.
values for the fiber-cement tiles technology followed by The technical and economic data from this study shows
aeroponics, semi-hydroponics and finally conventional that the aeroponics technology as promoted by CIP shows
mini-tuber production. The difference in NPV and IRR some advantages over the other technologies: (i) high mul-
values for the aeroponics technology in Ecuador as com- tiplication rates (1:25–1:45), (ii) high production efficiency
paredtoPeruislargelyexplainedbythenumberofseasons per area (> 900 mini-tubers per m2), (iii) savings in water,
peryearasallowedbylocalclimateconditions.Inallcases (iv) savings in chemicals or energy for substrate steriliza-
and the payback period was kept below 2 years with the tion, (v) and phytosanitary quality of the mini-tubers.
exception of conventional technology which requires Aeroponics technology thus provides an interesting oppor-
2.47 years to achieve a return of the investment. The B/C tunity for an investor with a P of more than 100 % and an
ratiowashigherthan1inallcasesandparticularlyhighfor IRRabove40%.Thesefiguresarebasedonseveralyearsof
the fiber-cement tiles technology in Brazil followed by the evaluation and more conservative compared to the pilot-
aeroponics in Ecuador. stage-level data shown by Maldonado et al. (2007) who
Finally,Table2enablesacomparisonofthetechnologies compared aeroponics with conventional technology and
tobemadeintermsoftheNPperm2perseason.Usingthis reporteda Pof up to545 %and an IRR of 650 %.
indicator,aeroponics was themost profitabletechnology as The B/C ratio is more than 2 and 3 for aeroponics in
itmadeitpossibletoobtainNPvalueshigherthan$100per Ecuador and Peru respectively with a payback period of
m2 per season. The fiber-cement tiles technology from approximately a year-and-a-half for both countries. The
Brazil resulted in a NP value per m2 that was very close to initial investment in aeroponics infrastructure as embedded
the aeroponics technique in Peru. The semi-hydroponics withintheTPCcanbefairlyhigh.However,equipmentand
technologies as implemented in Colombia and Ecuador infrastructurecanbeamortizedoverseveralyears.Thehigh
showed considerable differences. This was due to the mul- multiplicationrateofaeroponicsislargelyattributabletothe
tiplicationrateachievedinColombia(1:16)versusEcuador staggeredharvests,butalsothetypeofgeneticmaterialused
(1:10)andtherelatedhigherproductioncostpermini-tuber (Factor et al. 2007; Mateus-Rodríguez et al. 2012). A key
inEcuadorascomparedtoColombia.Withtheconventional factor in the success of aeroponics relates to the high mini-
production technology a low NP of $6.9 per m2 per season tuber yields per plant and fixed surface area (m2). These
was obtained. surpassyieldlevelsofotherwiseefficienttechnologiessuch
asfiber-cementtiles.Theaveragehistoricalyieldlevelof45
mini-tubers per plant as registered for CIP’s aeroponics
Discussion system in Peru exceed those reported in Spain (12–13) and
NewZealand(38)(FarranandMingo-Castel2006;Ritteret
There is a direct relationship between the degree of com- al.2001;Nichols2005).Thisislikelyrelatedtotheuseofa
plexity and efficiency of the technologies evaluated. wider diversity of varieties, including Andigena type of
Technologies that were more complex and demanding in materials. Aeroponics technology can likely result in quite
expertise were also found to be more efficient in terms of differentperformanceindicatorsifitwereappliedindurable
their overall production output and economic performance. housingconditions(20yearsamortization),withTuberosum
Atthesametimethereisaninverserelationshipbetweenthe type of materials and a production environment that allows
degree of complexity and the robustness of the different for twoproduction cycles per year.
mini-tuber production systems. The ability to withstand Aeroponics technology does also have some significant
shocks, such as power or water cuts, is low for aeroponics disadvantages.First,relativelysophisticatedwateringequip-
and the fiber-cement tiles technology. The conventional mentisrequired(sprinklers,pumps,timers,etc.).Oftensuch
solid-substrate-based technology is the least complex and equipmentisnotavailableindevelopingcountriesorneeds
certainlynotasefficientascomparedtothesoillesssystems. to be imported. Second, it requires personnel qualified in
However,itisthemostrobusttechnologyamongthediffer- plant nutrition, physiology and watering management.
ent systems compared. In general, depending on a country However, the main disadvantage resides in its limited ro-
or region’s context, different technologies that carefully bustness and the consequent risk of losing the entire pro-
balanceefficiencyandrobustnessmustbesought.Thetype duction. The technology is sensitive to deficient water and
ofusersandprevalentsocioeconomicconditionswilldeter- energy supply, but also to diseases which are easily spread
mine the specific type technology to be recommended. throughtheclosedwateringsystem.Theentryofavascular
366 Am.J.PotatoRes.(2013)90:357–368
pathogen or a nutritional unbalance can cause irreversible tiles technology. This is also reflected in a lower IRR and
damagetotheplantswithinafewdays(FarranandMingo- B/C ratio. Nevertheless, this technology does have some
Castel 2006). This sensitivity is also shared by the fiber- important advantages. It does not require highly qualified
cement tiles technology. In Ecuador, during the validation personnel or sophisticated equipment. In addition, the sys-
phaseoftheaeroponicstechnologytwooutofthreeproduc- tem is robust as it can maintain viable plants after several
tioncyclesalmostfailedduetodiseaseandnutritionrelated days without water and nutrients.
factors. Also in Peru several production cycles were cut Conventional technology based on the use of solid sub-
short because of the same reason. Many of the practical strates shows modest economic performance. This technol-
sensitivities could be relatively easily solved if potato ogy is still amply used by many tuber seed production
aeroponicsexpertsfromtheworldcouldsharetheirpractical programsinLatinAmerica,eventhoughyieldsaregeneral-
expertise. However, mini-tuber production with aeroponics ly low with 6–8 mini-tubers per plant commonly being
is typically a technology where advances have been made reported (Chuquillaqui et al. 2007). In many countries the
by the private sector and where information is commonly pricepercubicmeterofsubstratehassteadilyincreaseddue
protected. to rising sterilization costs. A main difference between this
In Brazil the use of the fiber-cement tiles technology is technology and the others concerns the low multiplication
very common for the production of potato mini-tubers and rates per plant and m2. As in the case of the semi-
considered more economical and simpler than aeroponics hydroponics system, neither highly skilled personnel nor
(Correaetal.2009).Thetechnologyhasalowfixedcostper sophisticated equipment are required. In addition, the sys-
season because of the long amortization period for the temisrobustandcanremainseveraldayswithoutwaterand
greenhouse, material and equipment, as compared to those nutrients.The Pand theNPofthe conventionalsystemare
for aeroponics in Ecuador and Peru. However, the variable positive. Further multiplication under open field conditions
costsareapproximatelythesameasthoseoftheaeroponics willlikelyfurtherincreasePduringsubsequentcyclesasthe
technology (Table 2). Indeed the cost and durability of the finalreturnoninvestmentfortuberseedproductionisoften
housing of mini-tuber production systems is a main factor obtained from basic or certified seed rather than mini-tuber
influencing economic performance. There is a huge differ- perse.Nevertheless,anincreaseinscaleattheearlystageof
ence between developing countries as for the type of mate- mini-tuber production through technologies such as
rialsandsuppliersthatareavailable.Oftenincountrieswith aeroponics will positively impact on the final sales value
a flower industry access is easier and cheaper. Taking the of tuber seed from open field production and/or the
previousconsiderationsintoaccount,theTPCperseasonof phytosanitary quality of seed which can now be profitably
the fiber-cement tiles technology is lower than that of producedinfewergenerations;i.e.asproposedbyCIP’s3G
aeroponics.Withlowtotalcostsperseason,highsalevalues strategy.
and two production seasons per year, this technology in Differences in the performance of the various technolo-
Brazil shows outstanding indicators: (i) high net profit gies can also be partially explained by the type of varieties
(NP), (ii) high profitability (P) (twice that of aeroponics), used (Andigena versus Tuberosum type) and production
(iii) high NPV, RR and B/C ratios. The advantages and environment (climate). Both can affect the number of pro-
disadvantages of the fiber-cement tiles technology are sim- ductioncyclesperyear.InPeruwithaeroponics,varietiesof
ilar to those of aeroponics However, the system is slightly the Andigena type with relatively long vegetative periods
more robust and yield levels are low compared to have been used in a production environment where the
aeroponics with production records of 10 to 21 mini-tubers temperature is a limiting factor: either low temperatures
per plant, depending on the starting material (seedlings or between June and August in the highlands of Huancayo at
tubers)and thecultivars used (Medeiros etal. 2002). 3,200 m of altitude or high temperatures in the coastal
The semi-hydroponics technology in Colombia and dessertofLimabetweenJanuaryandMarch.Bothenviron-
Ecuador are characterized by a higher total production cost ments only allow a single annual production cycle. By
perseasoncomparedtotheothersystemsstudiedduetothe contrast, in Ecuador up to 1.5 cycles per year are reported
use of more inputs, particularly substrates for planting and with fairly lateimproved varietiessuchasSúperChola and
chemicals for the sterilization process. Another variable INIAP-Fripapa in a production environment where the an-
influencing economic performance is the comparatively nualfluctuationoftemperatureismodestcomparedtoPeru
lowermultiplicationrate.Thesefactorsinturnraisethecost (Santa Catalina research station, 3.060 m.a.s.l.). Mini-tuber
(C) per mini-tuber. For example, in Ecuador, the C of a production using the fiber-cement tile technology in Brazil
mini-tuberproducedinsemi-hydroponicsis1.8timeshigher is done with Tuberosum type varieties such as Agata,
comparedtotheCofmini-tubersobtainedwithaeroponics. Asterix and Monalisa. Two cycles per year are possible
ThePinColombiaandEcuador,althoughpositive,islower under the prevalent environmental conditions of Brazil.
than margins obtained with aeroponics or the fiber-cement Permanent mini-tuber production is only effective in