Table of Content
Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... 3
Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 4
General Background ......................................................................................................... 4
Objectives of Study ........................................................................................................... 6
Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 6
Sampling Methodology ..................................................................................................... 7
Results .............................................................................................................................. 9
Assessment of Cattle Markets ......................................................................................9 Farmers’ knowledge....................................................................................................12
Conclusions and Recommendations .............................................................................. 20
Annex 1 ...........................................................................................................................22
Annex II ........................................................................................................................... 38
Study on Cattle Markets in Kosovo
Executive Summary
UBO Creations was assigned by Caritas Switzerland to conduct a market
study on the Kosovo cattle market. The purpose of the study was to gain
more knowledge on factors and quality expectations influence price
mechanism in Kosovo livestock markets. After a first survey conducted in
three different livestock markets (Gllogovc/Drenas; Malisheva; and Prizren )
the second survey assessed farmers’ knowledge on how to fetch better
prices for their animals.
Data analysis shows that farmers see cattle production as a valuable sector
to invest and increase production. High rates of successful transactions at
livestock markets indicate that this sector enjoys good trading conditions and
potential for further growth.
Farmers do have sufficient knowledge on the most important factors
influencing price mechanism and try to profit by planning production
accordingly. However, old-fashioned stables and insufficient financial
resources account as major obstacles to increase production. Farmers’
interest in receiving loans is strongly voiced without ignoring the need for
extension services.
The report cites two major recommendations stated by the farming
community, including increased direct support for farmers and a stronger
coordinated co-operation with Government institutions to effectively improve
the livestock industry.
Introduction
Kosovo’s livestock sector is changing rapidly. These changes require
major adjustments, to the role of institutions which play in supporting
livestock markets so that poverty reduction, environmental
sustainability, and food security can be achieved effectively.
The rehabilitation of animal husbandry has been a primary goal of
Caritas Switzerland. Since 2000 they have imported over 600 heifers
of the Tyrolean Grey Cattle Breed. In 2003 Caritas supported the
establishment and development of a local breeding association, called
“Graufi Breeders Association”. The main purpose of this cooperation is
to support and organize Graufi breeders to improve income generation
with animal husbandry.
Breeding associations must focus on comparative advantages, which
their particular breed has over other breeds so that higher prices may
be fetched at cattle markets. There is little information on factors
influencing price mechanism in Kosovo cattle markets. Neither is it
clear whether farmers have a particular knowledge on how they can
benefit and influence these factors.
This report is the result of a market study assignment, which UBO
Creations received from Caritas Switzerland, with the aim to generate
further know-how on Kosovo cattle markets.
General Background
Agriculture is one of the biggest economic activities in Kosovo. During
1995 it represented 30% of Kosovo’s GDP, or 35% with forestry and
food processing included. It also played an important role regarding
employment. In 1998, 60% of the population was employed in this
sector1.
Over the past decade this sector has undergone profound changes.
Prior to 1990/91, Kosovo’s cattle industry could be clearly defined as
an industry consisting of two sub-sectors: the Government owned
sector, producing at a commercial level comparable to the rest of
Europe; and a peasant private sector based on small herds, producing
mainly for home consumption and sale of surpluses. However, civil
unrest and war had a profound impact on this market, bringing
agricultural production to a standstill in 1999. Across the sector,
access to farm inputs remains limited. Crop and livestock yields are
low. There has been little investment in irrigation infrastructure except
for basic emergency repairs.
The Government owned sector does not operate anymore. In today’s
livestock industry only the private sector functions. Agricultural
production and agro-processing, which contributed significantly to pre-
conflict GDP and employment, suffered more than 50% loss of
livestock and other assets. At least two cropping seasons were lost. 2
The number of livestock dropped as a result of looting, killing and
destruction, which followed the 1999 war.
The rehabilitation of Kosovo’s agriculture after a decade of neglect and
negative effects is therefore a priority for the administration in Kosovo.
However, insufficient reliable data on the rural economy and
agriculture has hampered adequate programming and targeting of
emergency and post emergency interventions and now poses a serious
obstacle. 3
1 http://www.mac.doc.gov/ceebic/kosovo/market/agriculture.htm 2 http://www.usaid.gov/pubs/cbj2002/ee/yu/kosovo_index.html 3 http://www.sok-kosovo.org/pdf/agriculture/Introduction.pdf
Objectives of Study
Due to the lack of information on Kosovo’s cattle markets and price
mechanism which farmers may use for their production, Caritas
Switzerland decided to finance further market research. The first
objective of this study is to get an overview of the cattle market
situation in Kosovo. This study, however, does not cover the entire
Kosovo market, but was undertaken in four municipalities:
Gllogovc/Drenas; Malishevo; Dragash/Sharr and Prizren.
The second objective of the study is to test farmers’ knowledge on how
to fetch higher prices when producing and selling live animals. As
mentioned above, it is unclear whether farmers know how to profit
from factors influencing animal prices at markets. The study looks at
the current price situation, and identifies the main criteria for setting
the price of the cattle and how they influence price level.
A third objective of this research is to collect data on production costs
for cattle production. The survey aims to screen farmers’ situation on
production methods and production costs.
Methodology
To carry out this task UBO Creations chose a quantitative consumer
survey approach. Consumer surveys are tools commonly used to gain
an overview of a particular market or economic sector. Data was
collected using a questionnaire administered through personal
interviews. Respondents were divided into two groups. One group
included market participants (buyers and sellers) whilst the second
one consisted of farmers. The interviews were conducted directly at
their farms. All of the responses can be quantified.
The following topics were covered in the survey:
o Identifying the participant (buyer/seller, farmer,
municipality, number of cattle, etc.)
o Identifying market locations
o Estimation of the number of cattle offered and sold at the
market
o Methods of setting the market price for cattle
o Seasonal effects at the cattle market
o Factors influencing price level for cattle
o Farmers’ plans to expand
o Identifying advantages and barriers for farmers
o Plans and needs for financial instruments
o Use of labour force
Copies of the questionnaires are included as Appendix One.
Sampling Methodology
Since we did not have a list of all livestock sellers, farmers and buyers,
we used random selection criteria to choose our respondents. We
conducted interviews with different sellers, especially with those who
had extensive knowledge on livestock markets.
Our research concentrated in four municipalities: Malisheva,
Gllogovc/Drenas, Prizren and Dragash/Sharr.
Table 1. Structure of Market Participants
Table 1 shows the relative participation of sellers and buyers in each
municipality. From and overall analysis, Prizren has the highest
percentage representation by 64%. Malisheva is represented with 15
% and Gllogovc with 21%.
Farmers interviewed were chosen from three different villages in each
of above municipalities.
Table 2. Structure of interviewed Farmers
Municipality Village Nr. of interviews
Gllogovc Terstenik 3
Llapushink 3
Çikatovë 3
Malishevë Drenoc 3
Banja 3
Pagarush 3
Prizren Korish 3
Reçan 3
Jabllanic 3
Dragash Krusheva 3
Bresan 3
Bellobrad 3
Total 36
Municipalities Buyers Sellers Total
Prizren 28% 72% 100%
Gllogovc 39% 61% 100%
Malisheve 33% 67% 100%
Dragash*
Note 1:* Dragash municipality does not have an organized active livestock
market.
To ensure that all minorities groups of these regions were represented,
we deliberately picked villages that are inhabited by Boshnjak and
Goran farmers. Therefore, we have four municipalities represented at
the equal stake by 25%.
Results
As stated earlier we divided research into two parts: 1) Assessment of
the Cattle Market, and 2) Farmers’ knowledge.
Assessment of Cattle Markets
The cattle markets in all four municipalities had different trading
volumes. Malisheva had the largest market with more than 500 cattle
offered for sale. Prizren also had a big trading volume with more then
300 cattle. The Gllogovc market had a considerable lower volume with
about 100-150 cattle available for sale. Dragash did not have an
organized cattle market.
Assessments revealed that a high percentage of cattle offered are
actually sold. Collected data reveals that Malisheva has a larger rate of
transaction where about 80% of cattle offered are sold. We found that
local breeds (busha) enjoy a high demand with exception of Prizren
where the Simmental breed is preferred.
Figure 1 presents the percentage of cattle sold which were brought to
the market each week.
Figure 1. Percentage of cattle sold
It is interesting to note in all four municipalities that prices of different
animal categories remain on a similar level, with exception of heifers
of foreign breeds (Simmental and Swiss).
An important observation made is that imported heifers fetch a higher
price because farmers expect higher level of milk production. The
Brown Swiss breed in particular seems to be known for producing
more milk.
€ 0.0
€ 0.5
€ 1.0
€ 1.5
€ 2.0
€ 2.5
Domestic Simmental Swiss
Calves
Young Bulls
Heifers
Bulls
Cows
Figure 2. Price of livestock offered in the market
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
100% 120%
Gllogovc Malisheva Prizren
Calves Young Bulls Heifers Bulls Cows
Table 3 shows that an increase of trade occurs during winter and
spring. It is important to note the increase in sales of bulls in winter,
mainly caused by higher meat consumption. More cows are sold in
spring and summer because of the advantage of outside grazing.
Figure 3. Transactions according to the seasons
The main reason for selling/purchasing cattle is meat consumption,
stated by 26% of the respondents. Second most important reason for
selling is the lack of feed especially in winter and spring season. An
important reason for buying cattle in spring is better weather
conditions and the possibility of outside grazing. The least mentioned
reason for selling/purchasing cattle is milk production.
0%5%
10%15%20%25%30%35%
Spring Summer Fall Winter
Milk production
Outside feeding
Lack of feed
Meat consumption
Figure 4. Reasons of cattle sale according to the seasons
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
Spring Summer Fall Winter
Calves
Young Bulls Heifers
Bulls
Cows
Figure 5 illustrates the priority of factors effecting price determination
for cattle. It is clearly visible that beefiness (corpulence) is the most
frequent response for all types of cattle. The second most important
factor determining price is the weight of animal. Buyers and sellers
pay also close attention to the health condition of the animal, which is
therefore ranked as third most important factor. The age of the animal
another plays a crucial role in price determination. It is interesting to
mention that crucial factors are pregnancy with heifers and
accompanying calves with cows.
0
5
10
15
20
25
Calves Young Bulls
Heifers Bulls Cows
Beefiness Weight Healthy Age
Figure 5. Factors influencing the price of cattle
Farmers’ knowledge
As explained in the chapter on methodology, farmers represent the
second group of the study. The total number of interviewed farmers is
36. Since our research was conduct in the four municipalities Gllogovc,
Malisheve, Prizren and Dragash the interviewed farmers were from
those areas, too.
Table 3. Size and type of cattle owned by farmers
Race Calves Young
bulls
Heifers Bulls Cows
Gllogovc Domestic 47% 50% / 48%
Imported 53% 100% 50% / 52%
TOTAL 100% 100% 100% / 100%
Malisheva Domestic 60% / 29% / 53%
Imported 40% 100% 71% / 47%
TOTAL 100% 100% 100% / 100%
Dragash Domestic 82% 89% 50% / 72%
Imported 18% 11% 50% / 28%
TOTAL 100% 100% 100% / 100%
Prizren Domestic 82% / 100% / 26%
Imported 18% / / / 74%
TOTAL 100% / 100% / 100%
TOTAL Domestic 69% 73% 45% / 53%
Imported 31% 27% 55% / 47%
From the table above we see that farmers in Kosovo predominantly
own local breeds. However, we observed that a reasonable number of
farmers acquired imported cattle, indicating a shift of preference. The
reason for this change is that imported cows have a higher milk
production capacity. For dairy farmers this is one of the most
important factors when selecting a cow. Table 3 clearly shows this
occurrence.
Another issue looked at during our research were farmers’ plans to
increase their production capacity. From the answers we got, most of
them were very positive in this matter. This can be illustrated best
with the following chart.
0%20%40%60%80%
100%120%
Gllogovc Malisheva Dragash Prizren
YesNo
Figure 6. Plans for production increase
Some exception regarding this issue was found with farmers from
Dragash region. Farmers in Dragash, especially from minorities, have
shown signs of hopelessness about future prospects of farming
business in Kosovo.
Production increase was mostly planned to be achieved through an
increase of imported cattle. Table 4 indicates that farmers’ intentions
are obviously very decisive. The overwhelming preference for imported
cattle demonstrates their plans in the best way.
Table 4. Category and origin of cattle planned to be increased
Race Calves Young
bulls
Heifers Bulls Cows
Gllogovc Domestic /
Imported 100% 100% / 100%
Malisheva Domestic / / 6%
Imported 100% 100% / 94%
Dragash Domestic
Imported 100% 100% 100%
Prizren Domestic 11%
Imported 89%
TOTAL Domestic 0% 0% 0% 4%
Improved 100% 100% 100% 96%
There are different ways on how farmers in Kosova sell and purchase
cattle. We analyzed five of them: 1) Livestock Market; 2)
Slaughterhouse; 3) Butcher; 4) Delivery to trader; and 5) Trader at
the farm gate.
The most popular method is trading at the livestock market, was the
most popular one. 83% of the respondents stated that they do the
selling/purchase of their cattle at the livestock market. The second
most popular response was “Trader at the farm gate”, which
represented 58%. This means that interested traders go directly to the
farmer’s gate and buy the animal from them (table 5).
Table 5. Preferred ways of selling/purchasing cattle
Market Slaughterhouse Butcher Farmer sells to trader
Trader at the farm gate
Gllogovc 100% 11% 11% 22% 67%
Malisheva 100% 0% 33% 44% 89%
Dragash 56% 0% 56% 22% 67%
Prizren 78% 11% 0% 0% 11%
TOTAL 83% 6% 25% 22% 58%
Farmers in Dragash and Malisheva are better aware of increasing their
chances to fetch higher prices. Waiting for the right season is the
prefered approach. Achieving optimal animal condition is also shown
to be an important objective used by farmers to get a better price for
their cattle.
Table 6. Approaches used to get a better price
Right
Season Bargain
Optimal animal
condition
Livestock
market
Cooperate with
other farmers
Gllogovc 67% 11% 67% 33% 44%
Malisheva 33% 100% 89% 11% 33%
Dragashi 100% 89% 100% 67% 67%
Prizreni 22% 11% 22% 22% 22%
TOTAL 56% 53% 69% 33% 33%
0%20%40%60%80%
100%
Gllogo
vc
Malish
eva
Draga
sh
Prizre
n
Classical StableModern Stable
Figure 7. Methods of cultivating cattle
From the responses we see that an old fashioned traditional stable is
the most frequent method farmers keep their animals. Data shows
that in Gllogovc region more farmers upgraded their stable than in
other regions surveyed.
0.0%20.0%40.0%60.0%80.0%
100.0%
Feed
Labo
urFo
rce
Fuel
Vet
erin
ary
Ser
vice
s
Oth
er
GllogovcMalishevaDragashiPrizreni
Figure 8. Factors influencing breeding costs (average per year in %)
When we asked farmers to estimate their average costs of feeding and
keeping cattle, we received answers illustrated in the above chart.
Figure 8 shows that feeding expenses are the leading factors effecting
costs of cattle breeding. It is also evident that substantial costs are
associated with labor force. It is interesting to note that costs occurred
from veterinary services range between 4-10%.
Figure 9. Estimation of cash expenses per cattle in Euro
Figure 9 illustrates estimated of average cash expenses per cattle and
year. We see that cows lead the chart with €314.00 per year, followed
by calves with €219.00 per year. The least expensive category to grow
is heifers between six and two years of age.
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Hired outside Family Outside and family
Figure 10. Use of labor force on farms
From the above chart we see that farmers use mostly labor force from
their own family to keep their animals.
€0.00
€100.00
€200.00
€300.00
€400.00
Calves Colt Mule Bull Cow
0%20%40%60%80%
100%120%
Gllogo
vc
Malish
eva
Dragas
hi
Prizren
i
Yes No
Figure 11. Farmer’s interest for loan
Figure 11 shows that almost all farmers interviewed expressed interest
in receiving a financial loan.
25%36%
86%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
Short-term ( up to 1yr.)
Mid-term (1-3yrs) Long-term (more then 3yrs.)
Figure 12. Type of loan
86% of the farmers interviewed have stated that they are interested in
long-term loans. 36% of them preferred mid-term loans, whilst about
25% of farmers in Dragash expressed interest in a short-term loan.
0%20%40%60%80%
100%
Purchasecows
Purchasefeed
Stable andequipment
Other
Figure 13. Purpose of the requested loan
The main purpose for the loan is previewed for stable and equipment;
followed by the purchase of more cows and cattle feed.
31%
56% 61% 61%
19%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%
Perm
anen
tC
onsu
ltatio
n
Pro
fess
iona
l
Tech
nica
l
Fina
ncia
l
Oth
er
Figure 14. Expected support from the farmers association
When we asked farmers what their expectations are from farmers
associations, 61% of them stated that they expect financial and
technical assistance. 56% of the respondents stated that they would
like to benefit from specific extension services, whilst 31% of them
said they would be interested in benefiting from regular services and
infrastructures.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Conclusions
1. Price of the cattle maintained a similar level in all four
municipalities.
2. Imported heifers fetch a higher price because of higher milk
production.
3. More Cattle are sold in winter and spring season
4. Main reason for selling/purchasing is for meat consumption.
5. Beefiness is the most important factor, which determines the
price of the animal, followed by weight as the second factor.
6. The majority of farmers have expressed intentions to increase
production.
7. Production growth is preferably planned with imported breeds.
8. The most popular method to sell/purchase cattle is “livestock
market”, followed by “traders at the farm gate”.
9. A Selling/purchasing of cattle in the right season is the most
frequent approach used by farmers to receive a better price.
10. The majority of farmers keep their animals in the old fashioned
stables.
11. Feeding expenses were mentioned as leading cost factor.
12. Most of the farmers interviewed showed interest for a long term
loan.
13. Preferred purpose of loans is for stable and equipment.
Recommendations
Other than analyzing data, the survey helped to identify benefits
expected by farmers. Based on their answers our recommendations fall
into two groups:
- Increased direct support to farmers
- Stronger cooperation between Governmental institutions
1. Increased direct support to farmers
Farmers’ associations can support members directly by providing them
technical and financial support.
Technical support - includes activities such as: extension services on
working conditions and working methodology. Framers have shown a
low level of technical knowledge of new and efficient ways to cultivate
cattle; therefore it is necessary for and active support to improve this
situation.
Financial support - involves creating access to different financial
instruments, and managing current assets. From the survey it was
clear that farmer’s are eager to increase their capacity. It is essential
to assist them in acquiring better knowledge of the financial
instruments and what are the best possibilities for them.
2. Stronger cooperation between Governmental institutions
Government institutions need to have stronger co-ordinate in order to
provide effective support and improve current infrastructure for
farmers. It is necessary to create a favorable climate for the farmers
to breed cattle in Kosova, as this is one the few sectors that have a
bright future. Farmers have stated that they need continuous
professional assistance, improving the infrastructure and providing
extension services that are crucial for their success.
Annex 1
Table 7. Cost of production per cattle in average per year: (in %)
Calves Young Bulls
Heifers Bulls Cows
Municipality in % in % In % In % in % Gllogovci Feed 91.9 - 94.1 - 92.7 Labor Force 1.8 - - - 1.8 Fuel 1.8 - 2.6 - 1.70 Veterinary
Services 2.9 - 2.7 - 2.90
Other expenses 1.6 - 0.6 - 0.90 Total 100.0 - 100.0 - 100.0Malisheva Feed 69.1 62.2 56.3 62.5 67.2 Labor Force 6.9 0.0 19.9 18.8 14.4 Fuel 6.9 27.6 12.7 6.3 8.7 Veterinary
Services 11.0 5.1 11.1 6.3 9.2
Other expenses 6.1 5.1 - 6.3 0.6 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Dragash Feed 10.9 51.4 83.2 - 73.2 Labor Force 28.7 1.9 5.3 - 9.9 Fuel 30.3 - - - - Veterinary
Services 14.9 - - - -
Other expenses 15.2 46.7 11.6 - 16.90 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 - 100.0Prizren Feed 41.7 - 82.1 - 60.9 Labor Force - - 7.5 - 15.9 Fuel - - 10.4 - 12.20 Veterinary
Services 58.3 - - - 7.20
Other expenses - - - - 3.70 Total 100.0 - 100.0 - 100.0Total Feed 18.9 56.6 74.9 62.5 69.2 Labor Force 25.4 1.0 10.0 18.8 12.4 Fuel 26.9 13.2 5.8 6.3 8.3 Veterinary
Services 15.3 2.4 4.6 6.3 6.2
Other expenses 13.5 26.8 4.7 6.3 3.7 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Table 8. Estimation of number of cattle for sale in a market in a specific market day within municipalities
Calves Young Bulls Heifers Bulls Cows
Municipality Sold Sold Sold Sold Sold
Type of cattle Total Piece In %
Total Piece In %
Total Piece In %
Total Total In %
Total Piece In %
Gllogovci Domestic (busha) 20 20 100 10 10 100 5 5 100 18 6 33.3 25 25 100.0
Simental 48 25 52.1 22 10 45.5 6 4 66.7 13 10 76.9 23 9 39.1
Hollstein
Swiss
Other
Total 68 45 66.2 32 20 62.5 11 9 81.8 31 16 51.6 48 34 70.8 Malisheva Domestic (busha) 22 16 72.7 2 2 100.0 6 5 83.3 6 6 100.0 14 13 56.5
Simental
Hollstein
Swiss
Other 3 2 66.7 2 1 50.0 3 2 66.7
Total 25 18 72.0 4 3 75.0 6 5 83.3 6 6 100.0 17 15 88.2 Prizren Domestic (busha) 24 19 79.2 19 17 89.5 11 10 55.6 10 9 90.0
Simental 37 23 62.2 18 15 83.3 25 20 80.0
Hollstein
Swiss
Other
Total 61 42 68.9 18 15 83.3 19 17 89.5 11 10 55.6 35 29 82.9 Total Domestic (busha) 66 55 83.3 12 12 100.0 11 10 90.9 24 12 66.7 49 47 95.9
Simental 85 48 56.5 40 25 62.5 25 21 84.0 24 20 83.3 48 29 60.4
Hollstein
Swiss
Other 3 2 66.7 2 1 50.0 3 2 66.7
Total 154 105 68.2 54 38 70.4 36 31 86.1 48 32 66.7 100 78 78.0
Table 9. Factors that influence the setting of price, according to the cattle category
Priorities Calves Young Bulls Heifers Bulls Cows
Priority In % Priority In % Priority In % Priority In % Priority In % Domestic 2 1.4 2 1.0 Simental 1 0.7 7 8.4 4 5.1 4 4.3 12 5.9 Hollstein 13 9.0 2 2.4 1 1.3 2 2.2 1 0.5 Swiss 2 1.4 1 1.3 1 1.1 1 0.5 Sex 8 5.6 8 9.6 11 13.9 8 8.7 14 6.9 Age 24 16.7 14 16.9 12 15.2 15 16.3 21 10.4 Weight 26 18.1 17 20.5 10 12.7 20 21.7 15 7.4 Beefiness 32 22.2 19 22.9 17 21.5 17 18.5 23 11.4 Milking cows 1 0.7 1 1.3 1 1.1 36 17.8 Breeding cows 11 13.9 11 5.4 Health 27 18.8 15 18.1 8 10.1 18 19.6 21 10.4 Cows with calve 1 0.7 1 1.1 33 16.3 Cows without calve
7 4.9 1 1.3
Veterinary certificate
1 1.2 2 2.5 5 5.4 11 5.4
Other 1 0.5 TOTAL 144 100.0 83 100.0 79 100.0 92 100.0 202 100.0
Table 10. Number of cows according to the category that interviewed farmer possess
Municipality
Type of cattle Calves Young Bulls Heifers Bulls Cows
nr. % nr. % nr. % nr. % nr. %
Domestic ( busha ) 7 46.7 0 0.0 2 50.0 0 0.0 10 47.6
Imported 8 53.3 1 100.0 2 50.0 0 0.0 11 52.4
Simmental 7 87.5 1 100.0 1 50.0 0 0.0 9 81.8
Holstein 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 9.1
Swiss 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Other 1 12.5 0 0.0 1 50.0 0 0.0 1 9.1
Gllogovc
Total 15 100.0 1 100.0 4 100.0 0 0.0 21 100.0
Domestic ( busha ) 12 60.0 0 0.0 2 28.6 0 0.0 18 52.9
Imported 8 40.0 1 100.0 5 71.4 0 0.0 16 47.1
Simmental 5 62.5 0 0.0 4 80.0 0 0.0 12 75.0
Holstein 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Swiss 3 37.5 1 100.0 1 20.0 0 0.0 4 25.0
Other 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Malishev
Total 20 100.0 1 100.0 7 100.0 0 0.0 34 100.0
Domestic ( busha ) 23 82.1 8 88.9 5 50.0 0 0.0 28 71.8Dragash
Imported 5 17.9 1 11.1 5 50.0 0 0.0 11 28.2
Simmental 2 40.0 1 100.0 5 100.0 0 0.0 6 54.5
Holstein 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 9.1
Swiss 1 20.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 18.2
Other 2 40.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 18.2
Total 28 100.0 9 100.0 10 100.0 0 0.0 39 100.0
Domestic ( busha ) 9 81.8 0 1 100.0 0 0.0 6 26.1
Imported 2 18.2 0 0 0.0 0 0.0 17 73.9
Simmental 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 7 41.2
Holstein 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Swiss 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 7 41.2
Other 2 100.0 0 0 0 0.0 3 17.6
Prizreni
Total 11 100.0 0 1 100.0 0 0.0 23 100.0
Domestic ( busha ) 51 68.9 8 72.7 10 45.5 0 0.0 62 53.0
Imported 23 31.1 3 27.3 12 54.5 0 0.0 55 47.0
Simmental 14 60.9 2 66.7 10 83.3 0 0.0 34 61.8
Holstein 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 3.6
Swiss 4 17.4 1 33.3 1 8.3 0 0.0 13 23.6
Other 5 21.7 0 0.0 1 8.3 0 0.0 6 10.9
TOTALI
Total 74 100.0 11 100.0 22 100.0 0 0.0 117 100.0
Table 11. How do you sell your cows
1. In the market 2.Farmer takes them to slaughterhouse
3.Butcher buys them at the farm
4.Farmer sells them to a trader
5.Trader buys them at the farm
Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No
% % % % % % % % % % Gllogovc
100.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 11.1 88.9 22.2 77.8 66.7 33.3
Malisheva
100.0 0.0 0.0 100 33.3 66.7 44.4 55.6 88.9 11.1
Dragash
55.6 44.4 0.0 100 55.6 44.4 22.2 77.8 66.7 33.3
Prizren
77.8 22.2 11.1 88.9 0.0 100 0.0 100 11.1 88.9
T O T A L I
83.3 16.7 5.6 94.4 25.0 75.0 22.2 77.8 58.3 41.7
Table 12. What kind of support do you expect from farmers
Permanent consultation
Professional Assistance
Technical Assistance
Financial Assistance OTHER
YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO % % % % % % % % % %
Gllogovc 33.3 66.7 77.8 22.2 33.3 66.7 55.6 44.4 0.0 100.0
Malishevë 22.2 77.8 66.7 33.3 77.8 22.2 100.0 0.0 22.2 77.8
Dragash 66.7 33.3 77.8 22.2 55.6 44.4 44.4 55.6 55.6 44.4
Prizren 0.0 100.0 0.0
100 77.8 22.2 44.4 55.6 0.0 100.0
Total 30.6 69.4 55.6 44.4 61.1 38.9 61.1 38.9 19.4 80.6
Annex II
Table 1. Structure of Market Participants............................................................................. 8 Note 1:* Dragash municipality does not have an organized active livestock
market........................................................................................................................................ 8 Table 2. Structure of interviewed Farmers .......................................................................... 8 Figure 1. Percentage of cattle sold ...................................................................................... 10 Figure 2. Price of livestock offered in the market ........................................................... 10 Figure 3. Transactions according to the seasons ............................................................ 11 Figure 4. Reasons of cattle sale according to the seasons......................................... 11 Figure 5. Factors influencing the price of cattle............................................................... 12 Table 3. Size and type of cattle owned by farmers ........................................................ 13 Figure 6. Plans for production increase ............................................................................... 14 Table 4. Category and origin of cattle planned to be increased................................ 14 Table 5. Preferred ways of selling/purchasing cattle ..................................................... 15 Table 6. Approaches used to get a better price ............................................................... 16 Figure 7. Methods of cultivating cattle ................................................................................ 16 Figure 8. Factors influencing breeding costs (average per year in %)................... 16 Figure 9. Estimation of cash expenses per cattle in Euro ............................................ 17 Figure 10. Use of labor force on farms ................................................................................ 17 Figure 11. Farmer’s interest for loan.................................................................................... 18 Figure 13. Purpose of the requested loan .......................................................................... 19 Figure 14. Expected support from the farmers association ....................................... 19 Table 7. Cost of production per cattle in average per year: (in %).......................................... 22 Table 8. Estimation of number of cattle for sale in a market in a specific market day
within municipalities ................................................................................................................. 23 Table 9. Factors that influence the setting of price, according to the cattle category ........... 24 Table 10. Number of cows according to the category that interviewed farmer possess ...... 25 Table 11. How do you sell your cows ........................................................................................... 27 Table 12. What kind of support do you expect from farmers .................................................... 28