Author
Listed:
- Ligia Gomez
- Julian Duran
- Isaias Tobasura
Abstract
Purpose - The purpose of this study is to estimate and analyze the production and export viability of organic cape gooseberry to Spain, cultivated by indigenous communities in post-conflict areas. Design/methodology/approach - Based on interviews with indigenous people who grow organic cape gooseberry in post-conflict areas and information from official platforms, the data are systematized, and a matrix of costs, expenses, productivity and income from the production and export of Cape gooseberry is calculated. Financial indicators of profitability are calculated: net profit, net present value (NPV) and internal rate of return (IRR). Finally, with a regression model, the trend of the behavior of the quantity and cost of Cape gooseberry exports from Colombia to Europe and Spain is estimated. Findings - The production and export of organic cape gooseberry is profitable for indigenous communities in post-conflict areas, favored by a special price on the European market and by the use of family labor in cultivation, which improves the profitability of the product. Because of these factors, it is likely to become an alternative to partially replace illicit crops in post-conflict areas. Research limitations/implications - This research was carried out in conflict areas, so conducting interviews in that territory put the integrity of the researchers at risk. Originality/value - Studies known about organic cape gooseberry production reveal the benefits of the fruit for human health, but not the viability of production and export to Spain. This study demonstrates the financial viability of the production and export of cape gooseberry grown by indigenous people and therefore constitutes an alternative for substituting illicit crops.
Suggested Citation
Ligia Gomez & Julian Duran & Isaias Tobasura, 2021.
"Economic study on the export of cape gooseberry produced by Colombian indigenous communities in post-conflict areas to Spain and Europe,"
International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 49(3), pages 372-388, December.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:ijsepp:ijse-08-2020-0558
DOI: 10.1108/IJSE-08-2020-0558
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:ijsepp:ijse-08-2020-0558. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.