Table 5. Comparison of <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>come, costs and profits of eight different plant<strong>in</strong>g models Summary (NPV <strong>for</strong>mat) US$/hectare/year a Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Scenario 6 Scenario 7 Scenario 8 Garden (1 ha) Garden and <strong>sandalwood</strong> heartwood (1 ha) Sandalwood only (1 ha) Sandalwood sapwood (1 ha) Garden and <strong>sandalwood</strong> (10 ha) Sandalwood only (10 ha) Garden and <strong>sandalwood</strong> (1 ha) Garden and <strong>sandalwood</strong> (1 ha) 4 yr 4, 15, 20 yr 15, 20 yr 1 × 7 yr 4, 15, 20 yr 15, 20 yr 2 × 15 yr 1 × 30 yr Sandalwood gross receipts – $28,754.61 $28,754.61 $15,850.74 $194,353.07 $194,353.07 $14,878.83 $27,037.55 Garden gross receipts $12,219.51 $12,219.51 – – $26,266.08 – $14,878.83 $12,219.51 Total gross receipts $12,219.51 $40,974.11 $28,754.61 $15,850.74 $220,619.15 $194,353.07 $58,851.63 $39,257.06 less average variable costs of: – land preparation and plant<strong>in</strong>g $249.66 $2,467.50 $2,467.50 $6,489.79 $16,945.25 $16,945.25 $3,058.21 $2,467.50 – weed control $1,871.45 $2,553.13 $2,553.13 $2,221.12 $17,260.91 $17,256.67 $3,110.17 $2,566.84 – prun<strong>in</strong>g – $120.83 $120.83 – $476.70 $476.70 $152.65 $57.00 – fertiliser – $239.48 $239.48 $678.13 $1,618.67 $1,618.67 $296.81 $239.48 – pest and disease control – $383.03 $383.03 $226.81 $1,023.22 $1,227.00 $524.41 $516.80 – irrigation – $18.73 $18.73 $18.73 $126.60 $126.60 $23.66 $18.73 – harvest<strong>in</strong>g – $1,620.49 $1,620.49 $1,473.88 $5,517.48 $5,517.48 $2,296.36 $478.66 – garden<strong>in</strong>g $4,903.47 $4,903.47 – – $10,540.11 – $5,970.61 $4,903.47 Total average variable costs $7,024.58 $12,306.67 $7,403.20 $11,108.47 $53,508.96 $43,168.39 $15,432.87 $11,248.49 Gross marg<strong>in</strong> (receipts – variable $5,194.93 $28,667.44 $21,351.41 $4,742.27 $167,110.19 $151,184.68 $43,418.76 $28,008.57 costs) Capital purchases $3,601.75 $6,881.80 $6,881.80 $4,665.29 $7,730.64 $7,730.64 $7,585.03 $7,696.85 Total fixed costs $3,601.75 $6,881.80 $6,881.80 $4,665.29 $7,730.64 $7,730.64 $7,585.03 $7,696.85 Total costs $10,626.33 $19,188.47 $14,285.00 $15,773.76 $61,239.60 $50,899.02 $23,017.90 $18,945.33 Farm profit $1,593.18 $21,785.64 $14,469.61 $76.97 $159,379.55 $143,454.04 $35,833.73 $20,311.72 Internal rate of return 0.28 0.24 0.16 0.10 0.25 0.21 0.28 0.17 Benefit:cost ratio 1.15 2.14 2.01 1.00 3.60 3.82 2.56 2.07 Return to labour 1.76 4.70 5.74 1.27 7.64 9.33 6.02 4.98 NPV relative to scenario 1 1.00 13.67 9.08 0.05 100.04 90.04 22.49 12.75 – = not applicable; NPV = net present value a Figures are all <strong>in</strong> US$ based on <strong>the</strong> exchange rate of US$1 = 101.17 vatu on 2 August 2008 at a discount rate of 10%. 45
The data used to determ<strong>in</strong>e <strong>the</strong> size of <strong>the</strong> trees at ages 15 and 30 years were <strong>for</strong> trees grown under exist<strong>in</strong>g <strong>smallholder</strong>-managed systems with a mean annual basal <strong>in</strong>crement of approximately 1 cm. With trees managed more <strong>in</strong>tensely under commercial conditions, <strong>the</strong> mean annual basal <strong>in</strong>crement of 1.8 cm was significantly (P < 0.05) greater than <strong>for</strong> <strong>smallholder</strong> systems. Given that all trees measured under commercial conditions were 3 years old or less, it may be expected that <strong>the</strong>se growth rates would decrease. It is likely that trees managed more <strong>in</strong>tensively would atta<strong>in</strong> a greater size by year 15, compared with a <strong>smallholder</strong> system. It is not, however, possible to predict <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>fluence of a more <strong>in</strong>tensive management system on <strong>the</strong> development of heartwood <strong>in</strong> S. austrocaledonicum. 46
- Page 1 and 2: Opportunities for the smallholder s
- Page 3 and 4: The Australian Centre for Internati
- Page 5 and 6: of the Vanuatu sandalwood industry.
- Page 7 and 8: Socioeconomics of sandalwood produc
- Page 9 and 10: Acknowledgments The authors recogni
- Page 11 and 12: Summary Vanuatu is a developing cou
- Page 13 and 14: Introduction Sandalwood (Santalum s
- Page 15 and 16: (Fiji, Samoa and Tonga). The uncont
- Page 17 and 18: 140,000 Sandalwood oil production (
- Page 19 and 20: 120,000 Sandalwood oil production (
- Page 21 and 22: Percentage of total Vanuatu exports
- Page 23 and 24: the sustainability of wild-harvesti
- Page 25 and 26: 120,000 100,000 Seedlings planted 8
- Page 27 and 28: 25,000 Established sandalwood seedl
- Page 29 and 30: 400 350 Heartwood production (tonne
- Page 31 and 32: each of the three products, Summit
- Page 33 and 34: Productivity of planted sandalwood
- Page 35 and 36: 120 100 Heartwood yield (kg) 80 60
- Page 37 and 38: Socioeconomics of sandalwood produc
- Page 39 and 40: All input costs were expressed on a
- Page 41 and 42: heartwood rotation. This sandalwood
- Page 43 and 44: e beyond an individual smallholder
- Page 45: NPV accumulated cash flow (US$) (di
- Page 49 and 50: Table 6. Comparison of sandalwood o
- Page 51 and 52: 90,000 80,000 70,000 Price (A$/tonn
- Page 53 and 54: markets include growing consumer pr
- Page 55 and 56: It is also possible to publish draf
- Page 57 and 58: Box 2. Industry weaknesses and thre
- Page 59 and 60: development strategies are based on
- Page 61 and 62: or recognised through an accreditat
- Page 63 and 64: Conclusions and recommendations An
- Page 65 and 66: References AAG (Australian Agribusi
- Page 67 and 68: Mwang’ingo P.L., Tcklchaimanot Z.