Protected Cultivation of Vegetables in Moldova Report

8/3/2019 Protected Cultivation of Vegetables in Moldova Report

1/80

PROTECTED CULTIVATION

OF VEGETABLES INMOLDOVA

(CENSUSREPORT)

Chisinau, 2009


2/80

AGRIBUSINESS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Protected Cultivation of Vegetables in Moldova PAGE ii

CZU:635.1/.8:631.544(478)

This publication was developed and printed by the Agribusiness Development Project in Moldovaimplemented by CNFA

, with financial support provided by the U.S. Agency for International

Development.

This report provides results of a two-phase national survey of vegetable crop cultivation underprotective cover. It represents an in depth analysis of the data collected from a two-phase survey ofthe Moldovan greenhouse sector. The publication is unique in that and it represents the first evernational census (Phase I) that provides detailed information on the actual area under different types ofprotected constructions for indoor production of vegetables in Moldova. The Phase II sample surveyreflects the particularities of the sector and identifies the producers, the type of legal organizationstheir location, crops grown, equipment and technology used, access to information and finances andproblems faced. This report can be used by various groups of readers including: policy makers,financial organizations, local administrations, educational and research institutions, greenhousegrowers, input suppliers, students and other organizations and experts working in field related toprotected cultivation of vegetables.

Authors:

Victor ROSCA, PhD, Agribusiness Development Specialist, ADP Team Leader

Ludmila GOGU, Agribusiness Development Advisor, ADP

Alexandru BELSCHI, Agribusiness Development Advisor, ADP

Nicolae ZAHARIA, Agribusiness Development Advisor, ADP

Conrad FRITSCH, Chief of Party, ADP Project

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to thank the local community administration and cadastral office specialists from theMoldovan mayoralties for their cooperation and assistance in carrying out this study.

We thank Ministry of Agriculture and Food Industry staff, Mr. Anatol Spivacenco, First-Deputy Ministerand Mr. Mihai Suvac, Head of the Field Crops, Seed Production, Horticulture and Nursery Departmentfor their support in coordinating survey activities with local authorities and providing approval for theADP staff to carry out the study.

We appreciate the work done by Magenta Ltd for developing the second phase sampling frame andcollecting the data and providing the initial statistical analyses for this phase of the study.

We would also like to thank Ms. Rodica Miron, Agreements Officer Technical Representative, USAID

Moldova, for her valuable comments and guidance during the implementation of this study.

The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessary reflect the views of theU.S. Agency for International Development.

2009 by ADP project. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in aretrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,recording, or otherwise, without the written permission of the publisher and the authors


3/80


Protected Cultivation of Vegetables in Moldova PAGE iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY....................................................................................................................................................1

PHASE I: GREENHOUSE SECTOR INVENTORY- QUANTITATIVE RESULTS.......................................4

CHAPTER I: GROWERS AND AREA UNDER PROTECTED CULTIVATION OF VEGETABLES ..........4

CHAPTER II: DISTRIBUTION OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF PROTECTED CULTIVATION AREA BYZONE AND ADMINISTRATIVE-TERRITORIAL UNITS (RAYON)..............................................................6

CHAPTER III: DISTRIBUTION OF PROTECTED COVER CULTIVATION AREA BY TYPE OFBUSINESS ORGANIZATION.....................................................................................................................11

PHASE II: INVENTORY OF THE GREENHOUSE SECTOR - QUALITATIVE STUDY OFCONSTRUCTION, INPUT USE, FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS AND PROJECTIONS ..........................19

CHAPTER V: GREEN HOUSE CONSTRUCTION TYPE..........................................................................19

5.1. Basic crops grown in greenhouses .......................................................................................19

5.2. Greenhouse construction types ............................................................................................20

5.3. Greenhouse covering material..............................................................................................22

5.4. Greenhouse age profile.........................................................................................................23

5.5. Origin of greenhouse construction material in Moldova........................................................24

5.6. Type of fuel used for greenhouse heating ............................................................................26

5.7. Period of use for greenhouse structures...............................................................................27

CHAPTER VI: INPUT SUPPLY LEVEL AND QUALITY OF PRODUCTION MATERIALS......................28

CHAPTER VII: MAJOR GREENHOUSE PRODUCTION CONSTRAINTS...............................................29

CHAPTER VIII: PRODUCTION OF VEGETABLES ..................................................................................308.1. Preference of the greenhouse growers for local and foreign varieties .................................30

8.2. Use of seedlings for vegetable production in greenhouses ..................................................31

8.3. Media for growing vegetables in greenhouses .....................................................................31

8.4. Number of crops cultivated per year .....................................................................................32

CHAPTER IX: GROWERS EDUCATION AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION.....................................34

9.1. Level of professional/technical education .............................................................................34

9.2. Growers attendance at specialized training courses ............................................................35

9.3. Possession and availability of specialized literature for greenhouse growers......................359.4. Availability of consulting services..........................................................................................37

9.5. Visits to other greenhouses growers.....................................................................................39

9.6. Sources of information related to greenhouse production and marketing of vegetables......40

CHAPTER X: FINANCIAL RESOURCES..................................................................................................41

10.1. Possession of the Information about sources of financing ...............................................41

10.2. Sources of finance for capital investment in greenhouse construction.............................42

10.3. Grants obtained.................................................................................................................43

10.4. Farmers plans to use Bank loans in the future.................................................................44

10.5. Leasing..............................................................................................................................45


4/80


Protected Cultivation of Vegetables in Moldova PAGE iv

CHAPTER XI: GREENHOUSE PRODUCT SALES...................................................................................48

11.1. Sales method ....................................................................................................................48

11.2. Transportation to the place of sale....................................................................................50

11.3. Sales mechanisms............................................................................................................50

11.4. Payment method for delivered vegetables........................................................................52

11.5. Major grower problems in selling greenhouse vegetables................................................53

CHAPTER XII: DEVELOPMENT PLANS ..................................................................................................55

12.1. Greenhouse production area expansion plans .................................................................55

12.2. Projection for extension of different types of green house construction...........................57

12.3. Subvention use..................................................................................................................57

12.4. Crops that farmers intend to grow in the future in greenhouses.......................................58

ANNEX I PHASE 1 SURVEY INSTRUMENT.............................................................................................60

ANNEX II PHASE 2 SURVEY INSTRUMENT............................................................................................61ANNEX III STATISTICAL TABLES............................................................................................................68

Table 1 Growers and administrative units using protected cover technologies, 2008......................68

Table 2 Villages with major areas using protected cover technologies, 2008..................................69

Table 3 Distribution of per capita protected cover production area by population base, 2008.........70

Table 4 Distribution of glass greenhouse growers by size of production unit, 2008.........................71

Table 5 Distribution of plastic greenhouse growers by size of production unit, 2008.......................72

Table 6 Distribution of low tunnel growers by size of production unit, 2008.....................................73

Table 7 Distribution of growers using Spotbond (agril) cover by size of production unit, 2008........74


5/80


Protected Cultivation of Vegetables in Moldova Page 1 of 76

SUMMARY

According to Moldovan statistical data, the area of protected vegetable cultivation prior to 1990 was576 ha. At that time, the area of the constructions for growing vegetables covered with plastic wasmuch larger than that of glasshouses: 410 ha compared to 66 ha. Collective farms (kolkhozes) ownedmost plastic covered greenhouses and nearly 100% of glass greenhouses were owned by Statecompanies. In 1990, almost all glass greenhouse vegetables were exported and most production fromplastic greenhouses was consumed locally.

When the process of agricultural privatization started, kolkhozes were restructured into new entities,and former kolkhoz assets (land and machinery) were distributed to eligible citizens as a participatoryshare. The plastic greenhouses owned by collective farms (kolkhozes), were distributed to formerkolkhoz members. As a result, most of the plastic greenhouses were dismantled or destroyed.

Most of the glass greenhouses were not privatized, and remain in state ownership. Little investmenton renovation or upgrading technology for growing winter vegetables has taken place. At this momentfunctional glass greenhouse constructions are used as unheated facilities which allow them to beused for production only from the April to October period.

Under these conditions, Moldova rapidly became an importer of fresh vegetables, produced by foreigngreenhouse growers. Currently, Moldova imports over 25,000 MT of greenhouse vegetables.

Government has taken several steps in recent years to rehabilitate the greenhouse sector and tosubstitute fresh vegetable imports in spring and autumn. Government policy initiatives include:subsidies to growers for new greenhouse construction, improvement of legislation to supportformation of associations and cooperatives, training and technical assistance, etc. However, whilethese interventions have been useful they have not been sufficient to attract the large investmentfunds needed to address the existing constraints.

To address these constraints, the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Industry in cooperation with otherinstitutions and organizations is in the process of preparing a Ten Year Strategy for Development ofGreenhouse Sector (SDGS) in Moldova. They approved the undertaking of the current survey and the

results of the National Protected Cover Crop Area Census (completed during the January to May2009 period) and the follow-on sample survey to provide the baseline and technical analysis fromwhich to identify actions for further development of the Moldovan greenhouse sector.

The study identified and analyzed all types of constructions for protected cultivation of vegetablesincluding glass and plastic greenhouses, high and low tunnels, and temporary protected cropscovered with Spotbond (agril). Survey data indicates that vegetable producers in areas under someform of protected cover are located in 51% of Moldovan mayoralties. In total, the survey identified8,141 vegetable growers with protected cover area. About half of them (4,295 growers) are in Criulenirayon. The other rayons with a large number of growers using protected cover productiontechnologies are Dubasari, Cahul and Anenii Noi.

The survey identified 40 growers using glass covered green houses along with 7,896 growers using

plastic covered greenhouses. Criuleni rayon has the largest number of growers using plasticgreenhouses (4,288) with Dubasari, Cahul and Anenii Noi following with 611, 392 and 209 growersrespectively. It is important to mention that about 87% of all vegetable producers with plasticgreenhouses are small-scale growers with less then 500 m

2of production area.

Total covered area for production of vegetables in 2008 was 544 ha, which includes 40.4 hectares ofglass greenhouses; 412.33 hectares of greenhouses and high tunnels covered with plastic foil; 9.7hectares of low tunnels and 81.9 hectares of fields covered with Spotbond (agril). The area underprotected cover vegetable production represents about 1.59 m

2per person.

Family Farms (FF), Individual Enterprises (IE) and Physical Persons (PhP) /home gardens, own about77% of the area used for protected cultivation of vegetables. Legal entities like Ltds hold about 19% ofall covered area in Moldova. The survey identified that 54% of all area for indoor production of

vegetables are represented by Physical persons (PhP) that grow indoor vegetables for their ownfamily consumption and for sale on the local market. They operate over 275 ha or 66.8% of the area


6/80



under plastic greenhouses that are located on home garden plots or on land plots received near thefamily home during the land privatization. Usually, this group of growers does not hire outside laborand family members do all operations for growing vegetables.

Analysis of greenhouse type reveals that 58% of the greenhouses are single arched, covered withone layer of polyethylene plastic (87%). Most of the greenhouses are of metal construction (53%),

with the remaining 47% of wood construction. Vegetable producers using their own materials (88%)build most plastic greenhouses and the remaining 12% are built of frames supplied by outsidecompanies. About 43% of plastic greenhouses were constructed or reconstructed within the past 5years.

Glass and plastic greenhouses are used mainly from March until October. In 47% of the cases, greenhouses are heated with wood, while 43% do not have any heating systems. In addition, the majority ofheated greenhouses heat only the air (95%). Ground heating is provided as well in the remaining fivepercent of the greenhouses.

Most of the planting materials used by respondents are of foreign origin (54%). About 41% ofgreenhouse growers use local varieties, and the remaining 5% grow vegetables using both foreignand local varieties. Seedlings used for future planting are in the majority of cases grown by the

farmers themselves (83%). Those who grow seedlings themselves in 58% of the cases stated thatthey grow seedlings in pots. Nutritive mixtures are used as substrata for vegetable production in 51%of cases, the other 47% use soil that is available under the greenhouse conditions, while 2% useartificial substrates. Over the calendar year, the majority of farmers grow one crop (52%) while 36%grow two crops per year and remaining 12% grow three crops per year.

Thirty-two percent of the respondents have completed vocational training and 68% of farmers have noformal training in the field. However, 77% of the respondents read specialized literature and of thosewho do not have access to these materials 94% are interested in having access to them. Regardingthe sufficiency of specialized literature half of the respondents consider that there is not enoughedited technical literature, while at same time 40% stated that there is enough technical literature.

The majority of greenhouse growers build protected cultivations and operational costs from their own

financial resources (90%). The rest finance their activity using grants subsidies or bank loans.

The in depth analysis shows that only a minority of farmers indicated that they are sufficientlyinformed about different financing sources, including: governmental subsidies (41%) and bank loans(23%). As regards International donor financing programs including RISP, IFAD and CFR, they arevery poorly understood by respondents, respectively 13%, 8% and 5%.

Most (60%) of those that obtained grants mentioned that the value of the grant covers from 51% to75% of the investment amount for construction of greenhouses. Another 32% obtained grantscovering less than 20% of the financial need. Moreover, 35% of the interviewees are open to obtainbank loans to finance their activity. Those who do not want to get a bank loan, give as reasons for thispreference, that interest rates are too high (62% cases) and they consider that there is a high risk ofnot being able to pay it back (17% cases).

About 34% of interviewed people are interested in purchasing a new greenhouse via leasing.

Product marketing in 95% of the cases is done without a formal contract or informal agreement. Mostgreenhouse producers (72% of cases) sell some of their greenhouse vegetables on the retail market.The main problems reported by interviewees are low prices (67%) and high levels of competitionespecially with regard to imported products (49%).

Over 60% of the respondents indicated that they are interested in expanding their greenhouse areaand a majority of these respondents (77%) would prefer to use polyethylene plastic cover, which iscurrently the most common covering material.

The majority of respondents are willing to continue growing tomatoes (86%), cucumbers (70%) andhalf of the respondents would consider growing sweet pepper. However, only 35% of the respondentsare willing to grow seedlings for own use and for sale to other growers.


7/80



METHODOLOGY

To obtain the most accurate and full information on the state of the greenhouse sector in Moldova thesurvey was completed in two phases.

The first phase represented a census inventory of the greenhouse sector. ADP staff developed a

questionnaire (annex 1), which was completed by the cadastral officer of each mayoralty. From thetotal number of 897 Mayoralties in Moldova 98% provided the basic statistical information regardingthe approximately eight thousand resident greenhouse vegetable producers. The informationcollected provided a geographical distribution of producers, total surface of the protected area by typeof greenhouse, cultivated corps and their yield, basic problems facing producers, and plans fordevelopment.

The Phase II in-depth questionnaire (annex 2) consisted of closed ended questions prepared in twolanguages Romanian and Russian, and addressed the following topics:

Identifying the types of glass construction,

Determining construction materials used, their source, availability and accessibility, and availability of

heating;

Determining greenhouse production technologies;

Determining the major sources of information and of the level of information to support greenhousecrop cultivation;

Identifying financial sources used for greenhouse crops cultivation;

Identifying the marketing modalities for greenhouse products;

Determining the trends for the greenhouse expansion;

The Phase I study provided the population list of villages and the concentration of greenhouse surfacearea in each village that served as the basis for the Phase II stratified random sample to selectvillages and interviewees for the in depth qualitative producer survey.

The specialized survey agency Magenta Consulting Ltd was engaged to select a random sample of350 respondents from the village population list stratified by three levels of greenhouse surface area:less than 300 m

2, 300-1000 m

2and more than 1,000 m

2to provide a sampling error of 5% with a

probability of 95% at the national level. This survey was conducted in all rayons of the Republic ofMoldova regions to obtain a significant territorial representation. No more than two interviews werecompleted in any one village to retain a representative sampling distribution. The primary datainterpretation was made using SPSS statistical software with descriptive statistic and multilateralinterpretation.


8/80



Phase I: Greenhouse Sector Inventory- QuantitativeResults

CHAPTERI: GROWERSANDAREAUNDERPROTECTEDCULTIVATIONOFVEGETABLES

Moldova is located on the 5th Light Zone, which ensures favorable climatic conditions for growing

vegetables in protected area in all regions of the country. Moldovas climate is moderately continental,

with some modification from its proximity to the Black Sea. The summers are warm and long, with

temperatures between 20C and 25C, but can sometimes reach 35-40C during heat waves in July

and August. The winters are moderately cold and dry, with daytime January temperatures between -

4C and -7C, with occasional spells with temperatures -20 to -23C. Intensive sunshine and many

sunny days in winter and spring are good preconditions for vegetable growing in covered areas.

Results of the inventory show that the population of Moldova uses the climate condition advantages

and protected cultivation of vegetables is done in all 35 territorial-administrative units. Most of the

vegetables produced in greenhouses and other forms of protected field cover are sold on local

(community) and regional markets, thus, it was important to determine the size of the local population

that is provided with locally produced vegetables and the degree of community self-sufficiency.

Survey results indicated that producers of vegetables in protected area (Annex III table 1) are located

in just over half of the communities (51.34%).

The survey identified 8,141 growers using some form of protected cover technology including, glass

and plastic greenhouses, low tunnels and Spotbond (agril) which is material used to cover open field

crops in early spring to protect them against frost (Annex III table 1). Criuleni has the largest number

of growers using protected cover technology with 4,295, representing more than half the total number

of in the country. The other three rayons with a large number of growers using protected cover

technologies are Dubasari (612 growers), Cahul (466 growers), and Anenii Noi (214 growers). These

rayons have a historical tradition of growing early vegetables and supply retail markets in main

Moldovan cities located close to the production area. In each of these rayons there are well-known

villages specializing in production of greenhouse vegetables including Dubasarii Vechi, Corjovo,

Slobozia Dusca in Criuleni rayon, Pirita village in Dubasari rayon, Pugaceni, Serpeni village in Anenii

Noi, etc. In some of these villages there are more than 600 growers using plastic cover technology.

Figure 1 provides a visual display of covered production density by rayon.

The number of growers using greenhouse technology differs from the total number using protected

cover technology as some growers use only low tunnels or Spotbond (agril) which are open field

technologies and others use a combination of these technologies. The survey identified 7,896

growers with plastic greenhouses, 919 using low tunnels and 4,417 growers using Spotbond (agril).

As most of the greenhouse grown vegetables are sold in local markets it was important to identify the

distribution of covered area production by administrative territory units (rayon) population base. The

national average per capita covered production area is 1.59 m2.

However, this indicator is very high in

some rayons for example, Criuleni: 23.83 m2

per capita, Anenii Noi: 8.87 m2

per capita, Dubasari:

5.72 m2

per capita. The lowest distribution was registered in Gagauzia: 0.20 m2

per capita, Causeni:


9/80



0.24, Basarabeasca: 0.28 m2, Leova: 0.28 m

2per capita which 5 8 times lower than the average

country indicator. The distribution for all rayons is shown in Annex III table 3.

Fig. 1 Number of greenhouse growers per rayon, Moldova, 2008


10/80



CHAPTER II: DISTRIBUTION OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF PROTECTED CULTIVATION AREA BYZONEANDADMINISTRATIVETERRITORIALUNITS(RAYON).

The data show that largest number of villages in which there are covered area vegetable producers

are located in the North (187) and Center (177), while in the South (97) there are less than half thenumber of mayoralties with production of greenhouse vegetables or vegetable production under other

types of covered area (table 2.1). In spite of the fact that the number of villages in which there are

vegetable producers in covered area is nearly the same in the North and Center, 75.4% of all covered

area growers are located in the center, compared with 14.8% in the North and 9.8% in the South.

Table 2.1 Protected cultivation of vegetable in different geographic zones

Mayoralties withproducers ofcovered area

vegetables

Growers of covered areavegetables

Area of protected vegetablecultivationGeographic

zone

Number% of

total percountry

Number% of total

percountry

ha% of total per

country

North 187 40.56 1205 14.80 98.33 18.07

Center 177 38.40 6,138 75.40 383.70 70.50

South 97 21.04 798 9.80 62.23 11.43

TOTAL 461 100.00 8,141 100.00 544.26 100.00

The Ministry of Local Public Administration (http://www.mapl.gov.md) estimates the Moldovan

population at 3,419,430 inhabitants1

(table 2.2). Nearly 50% of the population lives in the Central zone

of Moldova (1,616,370 inhabitants) and this zone contains about 70% of the total area under covered

greenhouse production. Viewed on a per capita distribution this zone contains 2.37 m2

of covered

greenhouse production per person, compared to 0.88 m2

and 0.92 m2

in the North and in the South

respectively. In some rayons in the Center zone this indicator is very high: 23.8 m2

in Criuleni and, 8.9

m2

in Anenii Noi (fig. 2). These producers provide fresh vegetables to the nearby large population

centers and have access to good sources of irrigation water and other input supplies and access to a

sufficient supply of well-trained labor and professional managers.

The existence of a relatively large number of vocational schools, colleges, institutions of higher

education and research centers can more easily provide training and other assistance to greenhouse

vegetable growers than is the case in other geographic zones. However, the Southern zone provides

better lighting and temperature conditions to grow early vegetables in covered constructions.

1 The figure excludes the population of Transnistria and Moldovan citizens working out of the country.


11/80



Table 2.2 Per capita provision with area for protected cultivation of vegetables

Geographiczone

Population ('000persons)

Protected cover area (m2)

Protected cover area per capita(m

2)

North 1,126.66 983,269 0.88

Center 1,616.37 3,837,069 2.37

South 679.4 622,347 0.92

TOTAL 3,419.43 5,442,684 1.59

At the other extreme, the per capita area distributions in the North and South are considerably lower,

reaching a maximum of 4.4 m2 per capita in Soldanesti in the North and a maximum of 2.9 m2 per

capita in Cahul in the South. However, as in the Central zone these maximum distributions

correspond to major population centers in each of these regions.

Central zone North zone South zone

Fig. 2 Per capita distribution of area for protected cultivation of vegetables in different

Moldovan geographic zones, m2

/per capita


12/80



As seen in table 2.3 over 97% of the glass greenhouses are located in the center geographic zone

primarily in Anenii Noi rayon and in Chisinau. They are mostly very old constructions (35-45 years

old), were formerly used for winter vegetable production but are no longer suitable for this purpose.

The remaining 3% are located in the Northern and Southern zones. They are small-scale units, are

not industrial frame constructions and are only used for vegetable production starting in the February-March period. Figure 3 shows a typical glass greenhouse of Soviet era construction located in Anenii

Noi.

Table 2.3 Distribution of different types of construction for protected cultivation of vegetables, by

geographic zone, 2008

Glass greenhousearea

Plastic greenhousearea

Low tunnels areaArea covered withSpotbond (agril)Zone

Totalprotectedcovered

area

Ha % Ha % ha % Ha %

North 98.33 0.26 1 67.26 16 2.60 27 28.21 34

Center 383.71 39.19 97 300.16 73 4.79 50 39.57 48

South 62.23 0.93 2 44.91 11 2.25 23 14.16 17

Total 544.27 40.37 100 412.33 100 9.64 100 81.93 100

Fig. 3 Glass greenhouse Speia village, Anenii Noi


13/80



Table 2.3 also shows that 73% of all plastic greenhouses, and 50% of low tunnels are also located in

the Central zone with 27% and 23% located in the North and South zones, respectively. Low tunnels

(fig.4) are very simple and cheap construction used by growers for temporary protection of vegetables

for spring frosts. This type of protected cultivation area is not very common in Moldova (9.64 ha) and

is used mainly by small-scale vegetable producers.

Fig. 4 Vegetable production in low tunnels. Vindex-agro Ltd, Malaesti village, Orhei

In the past 4-5 years, very rapid growth has been experienced in the use of a new covering material

called Spotbond or agril, which is applied over early-planted seedlings planted without any supporting

frame to protect them against late spring frosts (fig 5). While growers in the Center zone use 48% of

the agril material, growers in the North use twice as much agril covering than in the South (34%

compared to 17%). The greater use in the Center and North is most likely because late frosts are

more common in these areas so open field growers are more likely to need protective cover to reduce

losses due to low temperatures. In 2008 about 82 hectares of land was covered with agril, compared

with 28 hectares in the North, 40 hectares in the Center and 14 hectares in the South. It is expected

that this type of protected production area will continue to increase significantly in the future.


14/80



Fig. 5 Early cabbage under Agril cover, Sant Agro Ltd, Cunicia village, Floresti rayon

The Inventory also identified about 17 hectares of other type of construction for protected cover

vegetable production area. This includes greenhouses covered with other materials including grass

and film (polycarbonate, plastic panels, 2-3 combined cover materials on one and the same

construction) and other small scale constructions such as hotbeds covered with polycarbonate. They

are not typical constructions, some of them will disappear in the near future, and thus all are included

in this report as other constructions. More detailed information on types of construction used by

vegetable producers is described in Phase II of this report.


15/80



CHAPTER III: DISTRIBUTION OF PROTECTED COVER CULTIVATION AREA BY TYPE OF

BUSINESSORGANIZATION.

All indoor growers of vegetables belong to two groups by legal statute: legal entities and physical

persons. Four main types of business organizations are identified: Agriculture/Production

Cooperatives (Coop), Private Company limited by shares (Ltd), Family Farms (FF) and Individual

Enterprises (IE). Individual growers that have no legal registration are considered as Physical persons

(PhP). Other business organizations such as Research Stations, Institutes, Universities, Joint Stock

Companies, etc. were included in one separate group under the general name Other.

All legal business entities engaged in covered vegetable productionare organized based on the Law

of Entrepreneurship and Enterprises, adopted on 3 January 1992.

One of the most widely used forms of legal commercial business activity is the Limited Liability

Company (Ltd). It can be organized by one or more individuals, and its equity is divided between the

owners (if applicable) based on the amount of invested capital. The financial responsibility of the

owner or owners is limited to the value of the capital invested in the Ltd.

The Individual Enterprise (IE) is a legal commercial business entity organized by one or more

individuals. This form of business activity is organized under the Law of Entrepreneurship and

Enterprises, adopted on 3 January 1992. Unlike a Limited Liability Company, the company owner is

financially responsible with all his/her property for the activity of the owned company.

Family Farm (FF) is a form of Individual enterprise specific only for agribusiness. [Art.14/1] and

owners of FF are financially responsible with all his/her property.

The Cooperative (Coop) is a commercial organization (enterprise) acting under the status of a legal

entity, whose members are legal and/or physical entities that conduct entrepreneurial activity.

1. The main goal of the cooperative is to contribute to obtain profit by its members.2. The cooperative operates based on the present law, its charter and regulations.3. The cooperative may be created on primary principles (without legal predecessors) as well as

by reorganization of other enterprises or unions (with legal predecessors).4. The cooperative shall be created by at least five legal and/or physical entities.5. If the number of cooperative members diminishes under the limit provided in item (4), the

cooperative shall be obligated, within 3 months from the date of this diminishing, to:

(a) enlarge the number of members up to the limit provided in item (5); or(b) reorganize into a different legal form of organization or into a union of enterprises; or(c) liquidate based on the decision of the general meeting.

The survey identified that Physical persons (PhP) that grow vegetables for their own family

consumption and for sale to the local market (fig. 6) represent 54% of all area for covered production

of vegetables. Over 275 ha or 66.8% of the covered production area accounted for by plastic

greenhouses are operated by physical persons. They grow vegetables in protected constructions that

are located on home garden plots or on land plots received near the family home during the land

privatization process. Usually, this group of growers does not hire outside labor and family members

do all vegetable growing operations.


16/80



19%

21%

2%

54%

3% 1%

COOP Ltd FF IE PhP OTHER

Fig. 6 Structure of indoor vegetable production area by type of business organizations

FF and Ltds farm about 40% of the area dedicated to indoor cultivation of vegetables. These

commercially oriented legal entities produce vegetables to supply both local and export markets.Nearly 80% of glass greenhouses are organized as Ltds and about 15% by IE. Cooperatives take

about 1% of the total area designated for protected cultivation of vegetables.

12.58%

0.25%

85.71%

0.27%

0.99%0.18%

COOP Ltd FF IE PhP Other

0.99%0.18% 12.58% 0.25% 85.71% 0.27%

Fig. 7 Structure of indoor growers by type of business organization

The PhP group represents almost 86% of growers when sorted by type of business organization andanother 12.6% are FF growers. The remaining types of business organizations are represented by

less then 1% of growers per each (fig 7).

The Center zone of Moldova is characterized by the highest concentration of different types of

business organizations involved in indoor vegetable production (fig. 8) and this zone has the largest

number of indoor producers. It is also the closest to large urban markets, has a higher level of

commercial development and owners have an advanced knowledge of different types of business

organization and management practices.


17/80



0.00

50.00

100.00

150.00

200.00

250.00

COOP Ltd FF IE PhP Other

Type of business organization

ha,vegetable

indoorproduction

North Center South

Fig. 8 Geographical distribution of different types of business organizations producing

indoor vegetables

2%

23%

28%

2%

44%

1%

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

C OOP L td FF IE PhP Other

Fig. 9 Distribution of area for protected cultivation of vegetables by type of business

organization, North zone of Moldova


18/80



1%

20% 19%

3%

54%

4%

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000


Fig. 10 Distribution of area for indoor cultivation of vegetables by type of business

organization, Center zone of Moldova

Cooperatives and Individual enterprises are less popular, among indoor vegetable producers in all

zones, compared with other types of business organizations (fig. 9, 10, 11) with only 1-3% of area of

protected cultivation of vegetables in each zone of the country managed by Coop or IE organizations.

PhP farm the largest indoor area of vegetable production in all parts of Moldova: North -44%, Center -

54%, South-71%. The second largest group of producers is FF and Ltd. These legal entities are

present in all zones: FF in the North 28%, Center 19%, South 21%, Ltd in the North -23%, Center

20%, South -5%. Since PhP operations, are not legally registered organizations and do not provide

reports to regional Statistical Departments, they are generally excluded from data reported by official

statistical sources. However, as identified in this survey they account for more than two-thirds of the

total plastic greenhouse production area in Moldova, and therefore need to be taken into account

when making national development plans and when implementing the Food Safety System on indoor

production of vegetables and supply local consumers.

0%5%

21%

0%

71%

3%

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000


Fig. 11 Distribution of area for protected cultivation of vegetables by type of business

organization, South zone of Moldova


19/80



The largest area (in hectares) of glass greenhouse (79.8%) is used by Ltd type of legal entities, while

the majority of plastic greenhouse area (66.8%) is farmed by PhP (table 3.1). FF more often uses low

tunnels and land covered with agril, 45.8% and 41.9% respectively.

Table 3.1 Distribution of different types of construction area for indoor cultivation of vegetables by type

of business organization, ha

Type of business organizationsType of construction

COOP Ltd FF IE PhP OtherTOTAL

0.10 32.22 1.02 6.00 0.99 0.05 40.38Glass greenhouse

0.2% 79.8% 2.5% 14.9% 2.4% 0.1% 100%

6.4 45.9 73.5 2.7 275.5 8.3 412.3Plastic greenhouse

1.6% 11.1% 17.8% 0.6% 66.8% 2.0% 100%

1.2 1.1 4.4 0.4 2.5 0.0 9.6Low tunnels

12.5% 11.6% 45.8% 3.9% 25.9% 0.3% 100.0%

2.0 26.3 34.4 2.3 14.9 2.1 81.9Area covered with

Agril 2.4% 32.1% 41.9% 2.7% 18.2% 2.6% 100%9.7 105.6 113.3 11.3 293.8 10.5 544.3

TOTAL1.8% 19.4% 20.8% 2.1% 54.0% 1.9% 100%


20/80



Chapter IV: Growers and production area distribution by type of constructionfor covered cultivation of vegetables and farm size

For strategic development and efficient interventions to revitalize the Moldovan greenhouse sector, it

is important to identify the current target group of greenhouse growers and to analyze their distribution

by production area size. The table below shows the number of growers producing under different

types of construction and their distribution by size of production area (table 4.1).

Table 4.1 Grower distribution by type of covered area and production area size, 2008

Number of growers distribution by size of production areaType of protected

covered areaTotal

growers < 500 m2

500-999 m2

1000-4999m

2

5000-9999m

2

>1 ha

40 19 11 3 1 6Glass greenhouses

100% 47.5% 27.5% 7.5% 2.5% 15.0%

7,896 6,832 505 495 33 31Plasticgreenhouses 100% 86.5% 6.4% 6.3% 0.4% 0.4%

910 867 17 23 2 1Low tunnels

100% 95.3% 1.9% 2.5% 0.2% 0.1%

4,417 52 44 3,687 18 616Area covered withAgril 100% 1.2% 1.0% 83.5% 0.4% 14.0%

13,266 7,172 577 4,810 54 654Total

100% 54.1% 4.4% 36.3% 0.4% 4.9%

The inventory results show that there are only 40 glass greenhouses growers in Moldova. Of this total

26 are located in the center zone including nine in Ialoveni rayon, five in Anenii Noi, and four in

Chisinau. Eight glass greenhouses are located in the Southern zone: seven in Stefan Voda, and one

in Causeni (Annex III, table 4). Most of these glass greenhouse growers (30 farms) are very small

(


21/80



land plots received during the privatization process (Annex III, table 5). Only a very limited number (31

growers) of plastic greenhouse growers have covered areas that are larger than one hectare in size.

Fewer than 1,000 growers use low tunnels for production of early vegetables (table 4.1). Low tunnels

are simple and inexpensive constructions, which make them affordable for small growers. This type of

construction is used for temporary crop protection against late spring frosts. It is important to mention

that the largest number of growers (867 growers or 95, 3%) that use low tunnels operate small land

areas of 1 ha

40.38 0.31 0.71 0.75 0.50 38Glassgreenhouses

100% 0.8% 1.7% 1.9% 1.2% 94.4%

412.3 213.46 32.29 79.04 20.31 67.22Plasticgreenhouses 100% 51.8% 7.8% 19.2% 4.9% 16.3%

9.6 2.07 1.08 4.49 1.00 1.00Low tunnels

100% 21.4% 11.2% 46.6% 10.4% 10.4%

81.9 1.28 2.59 15.89 9.40 52.78Area coveredwith Agril 100% 1.6% 3.2% 19.4% 11.5% 64.4%

544.27 217.12 36.66 100.16 31.21 159.12Total

100% 39.9% 6.7% 18.4% 5.7% 29.2%


22/80



The majority (51%) of plastic greenhouse area is operated by very small growers that have less than

500 m2

production area. Growers that have a total production area greater than one hectare use only

16.3% of plastic greenhouse area.

Low tunnels are most common for mid size growing areas, with 46.6 % used by growers with

production area from 1000 to 4999 m2.


23/80



Phase II: Inventory of the greenhouse sector - qualitativestudy of construction, input use, financial requirementsand projections

CHAPTERV:

GREEN

HOUSE

CONSTRUCTION

TYPE

This section describes issues related to the qualitative aspects of the Moldovan greenhouse sector as

identified by owners and managers included in the Phase II interviews. As the bulk of the indoor

vegetable production area is represented by glass and plastic greenhouse construction information

relating to low tunnels or area covered with agril is excluded. Information in this section is most useful

for the specialists in production and marketing of fresh market vegetables and for potential investors.

5.1. Basic crops grown in greenhouses

Tomato was the most common crop grown by greenhouse growers in 2008 (64% of the growers)

followed by cucumber (17%), sweet pepper (7%), early cabbage (4%) and radish (1%) (fig. 12). The

final seven percent of growers grew crops including lettuce, parsley, dill, egg plants, etc. It is useful to

mention that in 1980s cucumber was the main greenhouse crop (65-70%). That was the

parthenocarpic long type of cucumber sold mainly to export markets in other Soviet Union countries.

After Moldovan independence, the

market for this type of cucumber was

lost and local markets required more of

the short type cornichons or gherkins.

Profitability of these varieties is lower

than for the parthenocarpic cucumber

leading to the increase in tomato as the

major product supplied to the local

market.

Fig. 12 Basic crops grown in greenhouses, N=350

As it can be seen from table 5.1, the central geographical zone has the largest share of tomato grown

in greenhouses (72% of the respondents) compared to 57% in the South and 54% in the North.

Table 5.1 Basic crops grown in greenhouses, by zone

Total Cabbage Tomato Radish CucumbersSweetpepper

OtherGeographical Zone

Count %Count

%Coun

t% Count % Count % Count %

Count

%

North 123 100 0 0 70 57 0 0 29 24 7 6 17 14

Center 144 100 4 3 104 72 3 2 14 10 11 8 8 6

South 83 100 11 13 45 54 0 0 18 22 8 10 1 1

64%

17%

7%

4%1%

7%Tomato

Cucumbers

Sweetpepper

Cabbage

Radish

Other


24/80



5.2. Greenhouse construction types

Moldovan growers use different frame types, shapes and sizes. Construction materials selected by

farmers take into consideration the crop to be grown, production season, heating possibilities and

financial resources. Moldova growers use a large number of different types of greenhouse

constructions and for easy classification they are grouped by shape of the frame: arch and gable

shape. Each of these frames can be erected as single construction or can be gutter connected (block

type).

Fig. 13 Single arched greenhouse. Interconsult-MD Ltd, Criuleni

Analysis of the type of greenhouses construction reveals that 58% of greenhouses are single arch

shaped frame (fig.13). Another 28% are single greenhouse with gable roof, and 13% are arched

gutter connected (block type) constructions (fig.14). Only 1% of greenhouses are block type with a

gable roof (fig.15).

Fig. 14 Distribution of greenhouse by type of construction, N=350

58%

13%

28%

1%Archedsingle

Archedblocktype

Singledoubleslant

Doubleslantblock type


25/80



Fig. 15 Plastic covered arched block type of greenhouse, Asconi Ltd. Geamana village,Anenii Noi

As shown in table 5.2 the preferred type of greenhouse construction differs from one geographical

zone to another. The great majority of greenhouses in North (56%) are of the single construction with

gable roof, which is much more than the average in the country (28%). The share of the single arched

greenhouses in North is a little lower than the average in the country (42% compared to 67% in the

center and 65% in the South). Single greenhouse construction with gable roof are less used by large

growers (18% vs. 28% on average) and more often by small and medium ones.

Table 5.2 Greenhouses type, multi-factor analysis

Single withgable roof

Block typegable roof

Single archedBlock type

archedTotal

Count N % Count N % Count N % Count N %Coun

tN %

Center 18 13 3 2 96 67 27 19 144 100

North 69 56 - - 52 42 2 2 123 100Geographical

ZoneSouth 10 12 2 2 54 65 17 20 83 100

Small 56 31 - - 97 53 29 16 182 100

Medium 32 27 3 3 72 61 11 9 118 100Size

Large 9 18 2 4 33 66 6 12 50 100

Metal 27 14 2 1 150 80 8 4 187 100Green HouseStructure Wood 70 43 3 2 52 32 38 23 163 100


26/80


27/80



Tomato producers tend to use double-layered polyethylene film more often than producers of other

vegetables (24% vs. 2-5%). The extra insulating protection provided by the double layer enables

growers to start the season about 15-20 days earlier than with single layer film.

Building materials such as: metal, wood, plastic posts, concrete are used for greenhouse construction.

The most common greenhouse construction frame is made of metal pipe/profile and wood bars. The

data indicates that in 53% of the cases the greenhouse frame is made of metal, and in 47% of wood

(fig.17).

53% 47%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Metal Wood

Fig. 17 Greenhouses frames construction material, N=350Large producers tend to use metal frame more often (60%) than wood (table 5.4). This is because

large greenhouses are designed for long-term commercial production and entail a larger initial

investment cost that is depreciated over a longer time period and managed in a more professional

manner than the smaller ones that represent a lower investment and less intensive production.

Table 5.4 Size of the farm and material used for greenhouse construction*

Total Metal Wood

SizeCount % Count % Count %

Small 182 100 93 51 89 49

Medium 118 100 64 54 54 46

Large 50 100 30 60 20 40

Less than one present of all metal greenhouse frames are galvanized, the rest of the metal

constructions are covered with paint or are unpainted, which reduces significantly the expected life of

the plastic covering.

5.4. Greenhouse age profile

More than 90% of the greenhouses were built since Moldova gained independence. Forty-three

percent were built from 1 to 5 years ago, and an additional 27% were built 5 to 10 years ago.

Eighteen percent were built 10 to 20 years ago and other 7% are more than 20 years old (fig.18) and

were built during the Soviet era. Finally, 5% of the greenhouses were less than one year old.

Unfortunately, the collected data does not permit developing a trend of the total greenhouse area

construction size during the last years, because of the absence of the reliable information on the

reference point and also a lack of information about the area of greenhouses that were demolished.


28/80



5%

43%

27%

18%

7%Lessthan1year

15years

510years

1020years

Morethan 20years

Fig. 18 Greenhouses age, N=350

No new greenhouses were constructed during the past year in the Southern zone. In the Center, the

number of new constructed greenhouses in the last year is twice high as in the North (table.5.5). In

addition, there were no recently built gable block type greenhouses and greenhouses covered with

polycarbonate. Currently most growers prefer to build arched roof greenhouses covered with one

layer of plastic film. New greenhouses built by small growers between 2003 and 2007 were twice as

numerous as medium sized growers, but the number of new greenhouses completed by small and

medium size growers during the past year are the same.

Table 5.5 Greenhouse age, multi-factor analysis

Less than 1year

1-5 years 5-10 years 10-20 yearsMore than 20

years

Count % Count % Count % Count % Count %Center 12 8 65 45 31 22 22 15 14 10

North 5 4 54 44 31 25 25 20 8 7Geographical

ZoneSouth - - 33 40 32 39 16 19 2 2

Small 8 4 89 49 50 27 26 14 9 5

Medium 8 7 42 36 33 28 27 23 8 7Size

Large 1 2 21 42 11 22 10 20 7 14

Arched single 11 5 94 47 45 22 36 18 16 8

Arched block type 4 9 23 50 11 24 5 11 3 7

Single double slant 2 2 35 36 35 36 20 21 5 5

Green HouseType

Double slant block type - - - - 3 60 2 40 - -

One layer polyethylenemembrane

12 4 139 46 82 27 53 17 19 6

Double layeredpolyethylene membrane

4 10 13 32 11 27 9 22 4 10

Glass 1 33 - - - - 1 33 1 33

Coveringmaterial

Polycarbonate - - - - 1 100 - - - -

5.5. Origin of greenhouse construction material in Moldova

Most greenhouses were built mainly using own materials (88%), and another 10% were bought ready-

made (fig. 19). Current owners received only 2% of the greenhouses as part of the privatization

process.


29/80



88%

10%2% Assembledfromownmaterials

Boughtreadymade

Recieveditasprivatizationshare

Fig. 19 Origin of greenhouse construction materials, N=350

The above figures are consistent with data presented earlier showing that smaller scale growers who

make up the large majority of growers tend to use their own construction materials. It may alsoindicate that the supply infrastructure of greenhouse frames is not sufficiently developed or offered by

commercial companies greenhouse constructions or are too expensive. Multi-factor analysis of the

data shows that growers from the North (table 5.6) are more likely to buy ready made greenhouses

than the average in the country (14% vs. 10%).

Table 5.6 Greenhouse construction material origin, multi-factor analysis

Bought readymade

Assembledfrom ownmaterials

Received it asprivatization

shareTotal

Count % Count % Count % Count %

Center 20 14 119 83 5 3 144 100

North 9 7 111 90 3 2 123 100Geographical

ZoneSouth 6 7 77 93 - - 83 100

Small 8 4 171 94 3 2 182 100

Medium 14 12 103 87 1 1 118 100Size

Large 13 26 33 66 4 8 50 100

Arched single 30 15 169 84 3 1 202 100

Arched block type 1 2 42 91 3 7 46 100

Single double slant 2 2 93 96 2 2 97 100

GreenhouseType

Double slant block type 2 40 3 60 - - 5 100

Less than 1 year 3 18 13 76 1 6 17 100

1-5 years 12 8 138 91 2 1 152 100

5-10 years 9 10 85 90 - - 94 100

10-20 years 8 13 53 84 2 3 63 100

Greenhouseage

More than 20 years 3 13 18 75 3 13 24 100

Gable block type greenhouses are more likely to be purchased than other types (40% vs. 2-15%).

This can be explained by the fact that these are more complex constructions that are difficult to build

with own producers materials. Growers with large areas under greenhouse cover, also tend to buy

ready-made greenhouses more often (26% vs. 10% on average). In addition, the share of purchased

greenhouses is higher among the recently constructed ones (18%) so we can suggest that it may be

a trend in future to buy greenhouses rather than to build them.


30/80



82%

7%

5%5% 1%

W o od Natu ralG as S tra w C oa l D ies elOil

5.6. Type of fuel used for greenhouse heating

Nearly half (43%) of the respondents indicated that their greenhouses are unheated (fig. 20). The rest

of growers are heating the greenhouses mainly for temporary crop protection against late spring

frosts. It is important to understand the type of fuel being used and the expectation for future types of

fuel use. The data indicates that 82% of respondents heat with wood. In addition, heating fuel used

includes natural gas (7%), straw (5%) and coal (5%) and diesel oil about 1% (fig. 21).

Fig. 20 Growers use of heat Fig. 21 Type of fuel for heating greenhouses

As shown in table 5.7 producers from South tend to heat greenhouses less than average in the

country (53% not heated vs. 47% in average). This can be explained by higher average temperature

in the region and growers need less energy to produce early vegetables.

Table 5.7 Multi-factor analysis of fuel used for greenhouse heating in Moldova

Wood Natural Gas Straw Coal Diesel Oil Not heated Total

Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Count %

Center 70 49 7 5 6 4 8 6 - - 53 37 144 100

North 64 52 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 53 43 123 100Geographic

al ZoneSouth 32 39 4 5 2 2 1 1 - - 44 53 83 100

Small 85 47 6 3 5 3 2 1 1 1 83 46 182 100

Medium 62 53 2 2 3 3 7 6 - - 44 37 118 100Size

Large 19 38 6 12 1 2 1 2 - - 23 46 50 100

Cabbage 10 67 - - - - - - - - 5 33 15 100

Tomato 95 43 10 5 5 2 5 2 - - 104 47 219 100

Radish 1 33 - - 1 33 - - - - 1 33 3 100

Cucumbers 32 52 - - 3 5 4 7 - - 22 36 61 100

Sweetpepper 17 65 1 4 - - - - - - 8 31 26 100

Basic Crop

Other 11 42 3 12 - - 1 4 1 4 10 38 26 100

One layerplastic film

144 47 11 4 7 2 5 2 1 - 137 45 305 100

Doublelayered film

22 54 3 7 2 5 5 12 - - 9 22 41 100

Glass - - - - - - - - - - 3 100 3 100

Coveringmaterial

Polycarbonate

- - - - - - - - - - 1 100 1 100

Large producers more often than average heat greenhouses with natural gas (12% vs. 4%).

Greenhouses with double layered polyethylene film are heated more often (78%) compared with

greenhouses covered with other type of material. It is also worth mentioning that 95% of growers thatheat their greenhouses heat only the air while the remaining 5% heat both air and soil (fig 22). Subsoil

57%

43%

Heated Unheated


31/80



heating systems are very efficient methods of heating substrata where the plant roots are developing,

but they are rather expensive, which explains the limited number of growers heating the soil in which

they grow vegetables.

95% 5%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Air Air and Soil Soil

Fig. 22 Greenhouse media that is heated, N=200

5.7. Period of use for greenhouse structures

Only 6% of the greenhouse growers indicated that their greenhouses were used in January to initiate

the winter-spring crop. Almost half of the respondents (47%) start using greenhouses in March,

another 28% start their activity in April, 14% start in February and 4% in May (table 5.8).Table 5.8 Period when growers start greenhouse use for growing different vegetable crops, 2008

Month when starting greenhouse useCrop

Jan Feb Mar Apr Mai

Cabbage 21% 42% 37% 0% 0%

Tomato 5% 8% 43% 39% 4%

Radish 4% 43% 52% 0% 0%

Cucumbers 5% 5% 60% 29% 2%

Sweet pepper 0% 0% 59% 18% 24%

Other 13% 31% 50% 6% 0%

All 6% 14% 47% 28% 4%

Efficient greenhouse use during the season is the key to successful greenhouse production. Of the

growers that plant cabbage, 21% indicate that planting starts in January with 42% planting in

February and 37% in March. Most other vegetables are first planted in March, including 43% of

tomato; 52% radish; 60% of cucumbers and 59% of sweet pepper. In addition, 43% of radish growers

start planting in February. Most frequently respondents end greenhouse production activity in October

(24%) and November (23%). Another 35% of interviewed farmers complete greenhouse cropping in

July, August and September (fig. 23).

9%

4%

11%

13%

11%24%

23%

5% 5th

month6thmonth

7thmonth

8thmonth

9thmonth

10thmonth

11thmonth

12thmonth

Fig. 23 The ending month of greenhouse use, N=350


32/80



CHAPTERVI:INPUTSUPPLYLEVELANDQUALITYOFPRODUCTIONMATERIALS

This chapter identifies grower perceptions of the availability of suppliers of ready-made greenhouses,

types of available greenhouses, quality and price factors, frame and covering materials, availability of

seeds, fertilizers and pesticides and identifies major problems related to production inputs including

water and greenhouse heating. Respondents were asked to evaluate supply levels on a 5-point scale,

where 1 represents extremely poor and 5 represents excellent.

Table 6.1 Availability and quality of inputs for greenhouse production

Input DescriptionNumber

ofsuppliers

Assortment Quality Price

1 Readymade greenhouses frames 4.01 4.03 4.03 2.03

2 Materials for the building greenhouse frames 4.24 4.18 4.10 1.98

3 Covering materials 4.39 4.39 4.23 2.034 Seeds 4.45 4.47 4.06 2.11

5 Pesticides 4.12 4.15 4.13 2.06

6 Fertilizers 4.21 4.19 4.20 2.13

Table 6.1 provides scores for the perceived availability of suppliers and all production inputs, their

assortment and quality. All scores are higher than 4.0, suggesting that growers have a high

perception of the availability of input supplies and their quality. However, the consistent low ranking of

the price variable indicates that the majority of respondents believe that prices are too high (averaging

2.05).

Producers estimation of the availability of suppliers differs minimally from region to region and

averages 4.2. An exception is the three Southern rayons (Gagauzia, Cahul, Taraclia), where

respondents scored the availability of pesticides at 3.0.


33/80


34/80



CHAPTERVIII:PRODUCTIONOFVEGETABLES

This chapter describes greenhouse sector production issues including seedling production and use,

method of cultivation and number of crops grown per year. The information can be useful for the

sector professionals and marketing specialists.

8.1. Preference of the greenhouse growers for local and foreign varieties

Foreign varieties of vegetable are more popular for greenhouse growers than local varieties: more

than half of the respondents (54%) buy foreign seeds (fig. 24). Only 5% of growers indicated that they

use both foreign and local varieties.

41%

54%

5%Localsorts

Foreignsorts

Bought,localandforeignsorts

Fig. 24 Preference of greenhouse growers for local and foreign varieties

A correlation between geographical zone and preference of greenhouse growers for local or foreign

varieties was not identified (table 8.1). However, small-scale producers tend to use more local

varieties/ hybrids 54%, while the large producers tend to use more foreign ones 74%. In addition,

local cabbage and cucumber varieties are less popular than foreign varieties (87% foreign cabbage

varieties and 72% foreign cucumber varieties). All radish varieties are foreign along with 58% of

tomato varieties, but foreign sweet pepper the foreign seedlings are used often than local varieties

(38% foreign varieties).

Table 8.1 Local and foreign variety use, multi-factor analysis

Local varietiesForeign

varietiesNCount % Count %

Center 144 73 51 81 56

North 123 54 44 70 57Geographical Zone

South 83 34 41 56 67

Small 182 99 54 94 52

Medium 118 46 39 76 64Size of farm

Large 50 16 32 37 74

Cabbage 15 2 13 13 87

Tomato 219 106 48 127 58

Radish 3 - - 3 100

Cucumbers 61 19 31 44 72

Sweet pepper 26 17 65 10 38

Basic Crop

Other 26 17 65 10 38


35/80



8.2. Use of seedlings for vegetable production in greenhouses

Most farmers grow seedlings themselves (83%), the rest buy young plants from other growers or from

specialized nurseries.

Greenhouse growers use seedlings produced by different methods. The majority use seedlings grown

in containers, but 17 % responded that they use bare root seedlings (fig. 25). Most seedlings (58%)

used for greenhouse production of vegetables are grown in plastic pots, being strong and well

developed plants at the nursery stage. In addition, 30% of farmers use tray seedlings.

30

9

58

17

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Tray seedlings Claettes

seedlings

Pot seedlings Bareroot

seedlings

%

Fig. 25 Type of seedlings used for planting vegetables in greenhouses.

8.3. Media for growing vegetables in greenhouses

In the majority of cases (51%) substrata for growing vegetables in greenhouses consist of nutritive

mixtures of different organic and mineral ingredients, and another 47% use the natural soil on which

the greenhouse was built (fig. 26). It is worth noting that only 2% of respondents use artificial

substrate (fig. 27) such as perlite or rock wool.


36/80



Fig. 26 Glass greenhouse tomato in soil culture, Pro Caspar Ltd, Speia village

2%

47%51%

Soil Soil mixture Artificial substrate

Fig. 27 Substrates used for growing vegetables in greenhouses

8.4. Number of crops cultivated per year

More than half (52%) of greenhouse growers cultivate only one crop per year (fig. 28). Another 36%

of respondents grow two crops per season and 12% stated that they grow three crops.


37/80



36%

12%

52%

One crop Two crops Three crops

Fig. 28 Distribution of greenhouse growers by number of crops grown per year

The primary crop for first rotation or grown during an entire season is tomato, cultivated by 56% of

respondents, another 15% grow cucumber (fig. 29). Tomatoes and cucumbers are planted 41% and

27% of the time respectively as a second crop. Growers that successively grow three crops per year

most often plant cabbage, tomato or sweet pepper (22% each) as the third crop. Another variation is

planting a first crop of seedlings for sale to other growers followed by vegetables for fresh market

sales. Tomato is the main crop under these rotations as well.

7

5

22

56

41

22

7

4

8

15

27

19

5

16

22

10

6

8

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Oneculture,

N=348

Twocultures,

N=164

Threecultures,

N=37

Cabbag e Tom atto R adish Cucum bers S weetpepper Other Fig. 29 Share of different vegetables grown per each crop

Tomato t


38/80



CHAPTERIX:GROWERSEDUCATIONANDSOURCESOFINFORMATION

This chapter describes the professional/technical skill levels of greenhouse vegetable producers, their

level of specialized studies and the possibility to access professional technical information. This

information can be useful for the providers of extension services, educational institution and mass

media.

9.1. Level of professional/technical education

The level of professional/technical knowledge of greenhouse growers can influence overall business

efficiency. The data indicates that the majority of greenhouse growers (68%) do not have any

professional/technical education (fig. 30). At the same time, 18% have graduated from an agricultural

college and 13% hold a university degree in agriculture or related agricultural science.

68%

18%

13%

1%

No studies Collage education University education Other

Fig. 30 Distribution of greenhouse growers by level of professional/technical education

A higher proportion of greenhouse vegetable producers from the North do not have specialized

technical education than in the Center or South (75% compared with 66% and 60% respectively)

(table 9.1). Moreover, 12% of growers in the North have university education compared with 17% in

the Center and only 7% in the South.

Table 9.1 Professional education of greenhouse growers, multi-factor analysis

No studies CollegeUniv.

educationOther Total

Count % Count % Count % Count % Count N%

Center 82 66 21 17 21 17 - - 124 100

North 88 75 16 14 14 12 - - 118 100Geographical

ZoneSouth 44 60 21 29 5 7 3 4 73 100

Small 129 73 30 17 16 9 1 1 176 100

Medium 68 64 21 20 15 14 2 2 106 100Size

Large 17 52 7 21 9 27 - - 33 100

Large-scale greenhouse growers more often have a higher education and hold a university diploma

(27%), than do small and medium growers (9% and 14% respectively). This suggests that larger scale

growers are more commercially and market oriented and regularly tends to hire specialists with higher

education and professional knowledge.


39/80



9.2. Growers attendance at specialized training courses

Fifty-three percent of the respondents indicated that they attended specialized courses on growing

vegetables in protected areas, the other 47% did not attend any kind of training (fig. 31). It is worth

mentioning that of all 350 respondents only one person showed no interest in attending such courses.

53% 47%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Yes No I don't need

Fig. 31 Participation of greenhouse growers on professional training courses

The detailed analysis (table 9.2) shows that all greenhouse producers from the North indicated that

they attended specialized courses in greenhouse management compared with 24% in the Center and

31% in the South. One reason for the high attendance may be that there are fewer growers in this

region and extension service providers may also be more active and able to organize courses for a

larger proportion of growers. As discussed earlier while there is a high concentration of greenhouse

growers in the Center the available consulting and training providers can not cover all of them.

Table 9.2 Grower participation on professional training courses, multi-factor analysis

I don't need No Yes Total

Count % Count % Count % Count %

Center - - 109 76 35 24 144 100

North - - - - 123 100 123 100Geographic

al ZoneSouth 1 1 56 67 26 31 83 100

Small - - 91 50 91 50 182 100

Medium 1 1 51 43 66 56 118 100Size

Large - - 23 46 27 54 50 100

One layer polyethylene membrane 1 0 152 50 152 50 305 100

Double layered polyethylenemembrane

- - 10 24 31 76 41 100

Glass - - 2 67 1 33 3 100

Coveringmaterial

Polycarbonate - - 1 100 - - 1 100

Mainly small producers attend specialized courses (91%) and there is an opposite correlation in

dependence of the greenhouse size (66% of medium and 27% of large producers attended such

courses). This can be explained by the fact that larger companies can afford to directly hire more

university prepared professional staff and fewer growers require additional consulting or training.

It is also interesting to note that 76% of the producers who use double-layered polyethylene film

attended specialized courses. Possibly, the choice of this covering is a result of attending of training

courses and receiving useful information about this type of cover as efficient method of saving energy

on greenhouse vegetable production.

9.3. Possession and availability of specialized literature for greenhouse growers

Not all of farmers can participate on training courses, but having technical reference material at home

can assist them to improve their greenhouse business. Specialized literature includes guides,


40/80



textbooks, recommendations, information newsletters and periodical publications. About 77% out of

350 respondents mentioned that they have specialized literature at home, but 23 % stated that they

have no any literature on vegetable production in covered areas (fig. 32).

77% 23%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Yes No

Fig. 32 Possession of professional literature

The figures from table 9.3 show that 92% of producers from the North said that they have specialized

literature available, which is far above the average of 73%.

Table 9.3 Possession of specialized literature, multi-factor analysis

Yes No Total

Count % Count % Count %

Center 96 67 48 33 144 100

North 113 92 10 8 123 100Geographical

ZoneSouth 59 71 24 29 83 100

Small 133 73 49 27 182 100

Medium 89 75 29 25 118 100Size

Large 46 92 4 8 50 100

Large companies have more specialized literature than the smaller ones (92% vs. 73% on average)

Of those not having literature, only 6% declared that they do not need specialized literature (fig. 33).

94% 6

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

I need I don't need

Fig. 33 Interest of greenhouse growers to have specialized literature

It was observed that half of the large-scale growers said they do not need additional literature,

because most of them already have sufficient specialized literature.

To the question regarding the sufficiency of specialized literature 40% of respondents stated that

there is enough, while other 50% think the opposite (fig. 34).


41/80



40%

10%

50%

Yes

Don'tknow

No

Fig. 34 Availability of professional literature

The data shows that 64% of producers from the North indicate that local bookstores carry an

insufficient amount of specialized technical literature (table 9.4) compared with 34% in the Center and

57% in the South. Table 9.4 shows that producers from the North have more literature in their private

libraries than producers from the rest of the country. This reinforces previous information that growersin the North attend more specialized training courses than growers from the other zones. The

combination of an already quite high access to technical literature with the indication of a lack of

availability suggests that growers in the North have a higher professional interest and willingness to

improve their knowledge than growers in the other two regions.

Table 9.4 Availability of specialized literature, multi-factor analysis

Yes Don't know No Total

Count N % Count N % Count N % Count N %

Center 70 49 25 17 49 34 144 100

North 37 30 7 6 79 64 123 100Geographical

ZoneSouth 34 41 2 2 47 57 83 100

Small 63 35 25 14 94 52 182 100

Medium 52 44 8 7 58 49 118 100Size

Large 26 52 1 2 23 46 50 100

Cabbage - - 3 20 12 80 15 100

Tomato 107 49 22 10 90 41 219 100

Radish 1 33 2 67 - - 3 100

Cucumbers 17 28 4 7 40 66 61 100

Sweet pepper 8 31 - - 18 69 26 100

Basic Crop

Other 8 31 3 12 15 58 26 100

A somewhat different picture emerges when the availability of specialized literature is sorted by crops

as 80% of those who cultivate cabbage, 69% of those cultivating sweet pepper and 66% of those

cultivating cucumber indicate that there is insufficient literature available. However, only 40% of

tomato producers are not satisfied with the amount of available technical literature.

9.4. Availability of consulting services

The study also obtained some indications about the main consulting service providers to greenhouse

growers using a multiple response question. At the aggregate level growers indicate that they rely

mostly on individual experts and consultants for technical information (45%) or on ACSA regional

offices (35%). In addition, 12% of the respondents address AGROinform offices, and other 16%

address universities and agricultural research institutions (fig. 35).


42/80



8

2

8

1

36

12

5 5

45

28

0

10

20

30

40

50

Agr.

University

Agr.

Colledges

Inst.of

Scientific

Research

Academyof

Sciences

ACSAOffices Agroinform

Offices

PDBA/CNFA

Project

Farmers

Federation

Consultants/

Individual

Experts

Other

Fig. 35 Consulting services provided to greenhouse growers, %, N=260

Table 9.5 provides a disaggregated analysis of grower access to consulting services. Growers from

the Center and the North (55% and 51%) hire individual consultants compared to 23% in the South.

However, 49% and 42% respectively of growers in the North and South also rely on ACSA regionalconsultants, compared to only 23% in the Center. By size, 49% of the large-scale growers, 45% of the

mid-scale growers, but only 35% of the large-scale growers rely on individual experts or consultants.

However, large-scale growers are more likely to use University experts (14%) compare to 9% of mid-

scale growers and 6% of small-scale growers.

Table 9.5 Grower access to consulting services, multi-factor analysis

Agra.University

Agr.Colleges

Inst. ofScientific

Res.

Academyof

Sciences

ACSAOffice

s

Agra.Office

s

PDBA/CNFA

Project

FarmersFed

Consultants/

IndividualExp.

OtherN*

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %Center 115 14 12 2 2 16 14 1 1 27 23 11 10 3 3 8 7 63 55 32 28

North 79 5 6 2 3 4 5 - - 39 49 17 22 9 11 2 3 40 51 21 27Geographical

ZoneSouth 66 2 3 2 3 1 2 1 2 28 42 2 3 1 2 3 5 15 23 21 32

Small 131 8 6 4 3 10 8 2 2 41 31 17 13 5 4 4 3 64 49 35 27

Medium 92 8 9 2 2 8 9 - - 39 42 9 10 6 7 6 7 41 45 27 29Size

Large 37 5 14 - - 3 8 - - 14 38 4 11 2 5 3 8 13 35 12 32

* N count, number of respondents

These data further support the higher use of available technical resources in the North where 51% of

respondents use individual experts and consultants and 49% used ACSA consultants. In the Center

55% used independent experts but only 23% used ACSA regional consultants while in the South only

23% indicated that they used independent consultant but 42% used ACSA regional consultants.

Somewhat surprisingly, however, 49% of the small-scale growers indicated that they used

independent experts and 31% of them used ACSA consultants in comparison to 45% and 42%

respectively for mid-size growers and 35% and 38% for large-scale growers. While ACSA advisors

have a reasonably good reputation among medium size vegetable growers (42%), at the same time

they need to increase their exposure to small-scale growers, as only 31% of small growers stated that

they use at present ACSA service.


43/80



9.5. Visits to other greenhouses growers

A good source of new experience and knowledge are visits to other growers, which can be individual

visits or visits to field days, seminars or other training events. Visiting other growers enables

producers to share experiences and progress with similar growers and this can lead to development

of grower networks that may be useful for developing common industry policy positions. At the

national level, 78% of respondents have made visits such aiming to acquire practical knowledge from

other greenhouse growers (fig 36). At the regional level, 82% of growers in the North and Center

indicate that they have visited other growers compared with 65% in the South.

78% 22%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Yes No

Fig. 36 Greenhouse growers making visits to other similar farmers, %, N=349

Table 9.6 Grower visits to other greenhouse growers, multi-factor analysis

Yes No Total

Count N % Count N % Count N %

Center 118 82 26 18 144 100

North 101 82 22 18 123 100Geographical

ZoneSouth 53 65 29 35 82 100

Respondents also indicated that most often they visit producers from the same region (67%) or other

regions of the country (53%) with 15% also visiting greenhouses abroad (fig. 37).

67

53

15

0

20

40

60

80

Local Inother

regions In

other

countries

Fig. 37 Location of greenhouse growers visited by respondents, %, N=252Table 9.7 Visits to other green house farmers, multi-factor analysis

LocalIn otherregions

In othercountriesN

Count N % Count N % Count N %

Center 119 81 68 62 52 14 12

North 90 75 83 46 51 19 21Geographical

ZoneSouth 43 13 30 26 60 5 12

Small 132 91 69 59 45 11 8

Medium 82 55 67 49 60 15 18Size

Large 38 23 61 26 68 12 32


44/80

AGRIBUSINESS DE

Documents

Protected Cultivation of Vegetables in Moldova Report