Tudáshasználat és sikeresség- tudásteremtés és -használat a magyarországi borvidékeken (Knowledge-use and success – Knowledge-creation and use on the Hungarian wine-districts)

A cikkben a magyarországi borágazatra vonatkozóan vizsgáljuk a tudáshasználat és sikeresség összefüggését. Magyarország az elmúlt évtizedben elmaradt a magasabb tudást megtestesítő prémium- és szuperprémium- borok irányába mutató világpiaci trendtől. Ennek hátterében vizsgálataink szerint a szőlő- és borágazatban elengedhetetlen és állandóan fejlődő tudás nem eléggé intenzív használata is meghúzódhat. Noha a tudás használata és terjedése ugyan jelentős tényező a különféle vállalkozások sokféleségének magyarázatában, de nem egyértelműen szignifikáns a többféle módon mért sikeresség alakításában. Ugyanakkor azt is megállapíthatjuk, hogy a magyar vállalkozások a tudás saját berken belüli gondozásával és adekvát felhasználásával piaci sikereket érhetnek el. _____ The paper examines the relationship between the use of specific knowledge and success among the Hungarian grape growers and wine makers. In the recent decade Hungary has been left behind by the world trends represented increasing share of premium and superpremium wines (which materialise higher knowledge) in export development. According to the authors’ survey there might be in behind the non-appropriate use and management of knowledge and skills which would be ‘condition sine qua non’ for wine making. However the use and spread of skills is a basic component in explaining the differences of variation among the companies, it is not unambiguous in formulating the business success measured in different indicators. At the same time the authors can conclude that the Hungarian wine enterprises – keeping the idea generation as well as its further development, elaboration and adequate use within the frame of the company – can achieve market success.

Modifying the yield factor based on more efficient use of fertilizer — The environmental impacts of intensive and extensive agricultural practices

The aim of this article is to draw attention to calculations on the environmental effects of agriculture and to the definition of marginal agricultural yield. When calculating the environmental impacts of agricultural activities, the real environmental load generated by agriculture is not revealed properly through ecological footprint indicators, as the type of agricultural farming (thus the nature of the pollution it creates) is not incorporated in the calculation. It is commonly known that extensive farming uses relatively small amounts of labor and capital. It produces a lower yield per unit of land and thus requires more land than intensive farming practices to produce similar yields, so it has a larger crop and grazing footprint. However, intensive farms, to achieve higher yields, apply fertilizers, insecticides, herbicides, etc., and cultivation and harvesting are often mechanized. In this study, the focus is on highlighting the differences in the environmental impacts of extensive and intensive farming practices through a statistical analysis of the factors determining agricultural yield. A marginal function is constructed for the relation between chemical fertilizer use and yield per unit fertilizer input. Furthermore, a proposal is presented for how calculation of the yield factor could possibly be improved. The yield factor used in the calculation of biocapacity is not the marginal yield for a given area, but is calculated from the real and actual yields, and this way biocapacity and the ecological footprint for cropland are equivalent. Calculations for cropland biocapacity do not show the area needed for sustainable production, but rather the actual land area used for agricultural production. The proposal the authors present is a modification of the yield factor and also the changed biocapacity is calculated. The results of statistical analyses reveal the need for a clarification of the methodology for calculating marginal yield, which could clearly contribute to assessing the real environmental impacts of agriculture.

Modifying the yield factor based on more efficient use of fertilizer — The environmental impacts of intensive and extensive agricultural practices

The aim of this article is to draw attention to calculations on the environmental effects of agriculture and to the definition of marginal agricultural yield. When calculating the environmental impacts of agricultural activities, the real environmental load generated by agriculture is not revealed properly through ecological footprint indicators, as the type of agricultural farming (thus the nature of the pollution it creates) is not incorporated in the calculation. It is commonly known that extensive farming uses relatively small amounts of labor and capital. It produces a lower yield per unit of land and thus requires more land than intensive farming practices to produce similar yields, so it has a larger crop and grazing footprint. However, intensive farms, to achieve higher yields, apply fertilizers, insecticides, herbicides, etc., and cultivation and harvesting are often mechanized. In this study, the focus is on highlighting the differences in the environmental impacts of extensive and intensive farming practices through a statistical analysis of the factors determining agricultural yield. A marginal function is constructed for the relation between chemical fertilizer use and yield per unit fertilizer input. Furthermore, a proposal is presented for how calculation of the yield factor could possibly be improved. The yield factor used in the calculation of biocapacity is not the marginal yield for a given area, but is calculated from the real and actual yields, and this way biocapacity and the ecological footprint for cropland are equivalent. Calculations for cropland biocapacity do not show the area needed for sustainable production, but rather the actual land area used for agricultural production. The proposal the authors present is a modification of the yield factor and also the changed biocapacity is calculated. The results of statistical analyses reveal the need for a clarification of the methodology for calculating marginal yield, which could clearly contribute to assessing the real environmental impacts of agriculture.