National Farm Survey 2001

01 October 2002
Type Report

L. Connolly, E. Finnerty, A. Kinsella, G. Quinlan

Introduction

The objectives of the National Farm Survey (NFS) are to

determine the financial situation on Irish farms by measuring the level of gross output, costs, income, investment and indebtedness across the spectrum of farming systems and sizes,
to provide data on Irish farm incomes to the EU Commission in Brussels (FADN),
measure the current levels of, and variation in, farm performance for use as standards for farm management purposes, and
provide a database for economic and rural development research and policy analysis.

To achieve these objectives, a farm accounts book is recorded for each year on a random sample of farms throughout the country. For 2001, 1167 farms are included in the analysis.

Farms falling into the Pig/Poultry System are not included in the sample, due to the inability to obtain a representative sample of this system.

The methodology for calculating depreciation costs changed in 2001, as outlined on page 3 and revised estimates for 1998, 1999 and 2000 are presented in Appendix A, Tables 15 to 17, to facilitate comparisons with previous years.

The National Farm Survey is designed to collect and analyse information relating to farming activities as its primary objective. Information and data relating to other activities by the household are considered secondary and as such where this information is presented it should be interpreted with caution.

All financial data in this report are presented in euros.

Summary

Average Family Farm Income (FFI) in 2001 was €15,840, an increase of 17.3% on 2000. The increase in the value of gross output contributed 34.2% points of the rise in income with higher costs accounting for a reduction of 16.9%.
FFI from the market place (i.e. FFI less direct payments) showed an increase of 22%.
Total direct payments per farm increased by 16% between 2000 and 2001 but direct payments, as a percentage of FFI, declined from 73% in 2000 to 72% in 2001.
The average FFI varied across farming systems ranging from €7,278 in the Cattle Rearing System to €34,426 in the Dairying System. The average FFI in the Mainly Tillage System and Sheep System were €24,105 and €12,126 respectively.
Approximately 40% of all farms had an income from farming of less than €6,500 compared to 42% in 2000. On an estimated 45% of these farms the farmer held an off-farm job.
10% of farms had an FFI exceeding €40,000; 77% of these were in Dairying.
The Dairying System had an income increase of 33% per farm, due in large part to increased output from milk and cattle plus a 34% rise in direct payments.
Both the Cattle Systems showed increases in family farm income, 3% in the Cattle Rearing System and 11% in the Cattle Other System.
Average FFI on Mainly Sheep farms increased by 38%.
Due mainly to a decline of 15% in market output and 6% in direct payments, average FFI in the Tillage System declined by 13%.
Average net new investment was estimated at €4,117 per farm in 2001, compared to €4,477 in 2000.
20% of farms achieved a gross margin of over €1,000 per hectare in 2001 and the majority of these were in the Dairying System.
On 45% of farms the farmer and/or spouse had an off-farm job. On 33% of farms a job was held by the farmer, with the highest incidence of off-farm employment occurring in the Drystock Systems. Overall on 64% of farms the farmer and/or spouse had some source of off-farm income be it from employment, pension or social assistance.

Overview of 2001

Family Farm Income (FFI) increased from €13,499 in 2000 to €15,840 in 2001 - an increase of 17.3%. This increase in 2001 farm incomes was due mainly to increased output from the Dairying, Sheep and Cattle sectors resulting from higher prices and increased direct payments. Despite the problems caused by Foot and Mouth Disease, incomes on Cattle Rearing farms and the Other Cattle System increased by 3% and 11% respectively, mainly attributable to the support measures introduced by Department of Agriculture and Food (DAF). Total production costs increased by 16.9%. In 2001 net new investment accounted for €4,117 or 26% of farm income. In relation to off-farm activity the farmer and/or spouse had an off-farm job on 45% of farms. On 33% of farms a job was held by the farmer only with the highest incidence of off-farm employment occurring in the drystock systems.

Depreciation

Depreciation in the NFS is calculated on replacement cost on a declining balance basis. The rate of depreciation used is 10% for farm machinery and 5% for buildings and land improvements. The farm car is excluded as capital investment, but depreciation is calculated on a farm car at 20% and allocated to overhead farm costs on a percentage used basis. The basic methodology followed to calculate depreciation is that used by G.P. Hill (Calculating Machinery Depreciation on Farms during a Period of Inflation - F.B.U. Occasional Paper 2, Wye College, 1978) and outlined in detail in the 1989 National Farm Survey Report. As it is a replacement cost method, it involves revaluing the assets each year taking into account inflation. The CSO Price Index of Transportable Goods for use in Agriculture was used for revaluing both farm machinery and farm buildings. From 2001 onwards farm buildings will be revalued using the CSO Price Index of Farm Buildings and this index is also used in the revised estimates for 1998, 1999 and 2000 shown in Appendix A, Table 15 to 17. In the 1998, 1999 and 2000 National Farm Survey reports, machinery used for over 10 years on the farm and all buildings exceeding 20 years old were excluded from list of assets which were used to calculate depreciation, thereby reducing estimates of depreciation. In 2001 depreciation methodology has reverted to the original Hill method, with all machinery and buildings used being included and depreciated regardless of age. The revised estimates for 1998, 1999 and 2000 as shown in Appendix A include all machinery and buildings in use.

Average Family Farm Income

In this report, the principal measure of the income which arises from the year's farming activities, is Family Farm Incomeper Farm (FFI). This is calculated by deducting all the farming costs from the value of farming gross output. FFI represents the financial reward to all members of the family, who work on the farm, for their labour, management and investment. It does not include income from non-farming sources and thus may not be equal to household income. But where it does represent all the income of the farm family it is expected to provide for that family's living expenses as well as being a source of future investment in the farm business.

The data in Table 1 summarises the average levels of Family Farm Income per farm, which were achieved in 2001 across the range of farming systems and size groups. When evaluated in conjunction with the main tables at the end of this report (Appendix A), the following conclusions can be drawn.

Table 1: Family Farm Income by System and Farm Size (UAA) - 2001
Size (Ha)	<10	10-20	20-30	30-50	50-100	> 100	Hill Farms	All
€/Farm *
Dairying	-	19000 (52)	26600 (51)	35100 (47)	53500 (45)	75100 (49)	22800 (101)	34400 (66)
Dairying/ Other	-	-	9600 (88)	25100 (63)	44100 (50)	60900 (41)	11800 (89)	27100 (90)
Cattle Rearing	3500 (70)	4200 (107)	7100 (77)	11600 (78)	16100 (55)	-	7400 (99)	7300 (101)
Cattle Other	-	3300 (126)	4400 (122)	11000 (102)	18900 (77)	34500 (36)	7000 (67)	7800 (129)
Mainly Sheep	-	3700 (112)	9620 (56)	14500 (72)	30400 (66)	31400 (62)	12400 (90)	12100 (108)
Tillage Systems	-	-	-	15500 (62)	35900 (62)	73200 (72)	29800 (48)	24100 (129)
All	4800 (84)	5300 (125)	10600 (104)	19800 (82)	36000 (68)	55000 (72)	11900 (112)	15800 (125)

(Figures in brackets are coefficients of variation - these show that within each group there is considerable variability)
* FFI Figures rounded to €100.

As in previous years there is a positive relationship between farm size and income. In many instances, particularly in the intermediate size groups, income per hectare also increases with farm size. In these circumstances, smaller farms cannot compensate for their lack of scale.
There is wide disparity in the levels of average FFI across the farming systems. The average FFI on the Dairy and Tillage based systems are notably higher than those on the Drystock based systems. Income on the smaller Cattle Rearing System was €3,500 per farm compared to €75,100 on the larger Specialist Dairying System.
The average FFI for many sub-groups, especially in the Cattle and Sheep Systems is below the average agricultural wage rate of €12,177 so that those farm families do not receive a return for their labour, management or investment.

Income Distribution

The variation in incomes within the farm sector is further reflected in the distribution of income as shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Distribution of Family Farm Income 1999-2001
(€000)	< 6.5	6.5 - 13	13 - 20	20 - 25	25 - 40	> 40
% Farms
1999	51	20	10	5	9	5
2000	42	22	12	6	10	8
2001	40	22	12	5	11	10

For 2001, 40% of farms had an income of less than €6,500 compared to 42% in 2000.
21% of farms had an income from farming greater than €25,000. This represents an increase of 3% from 2000. The average farm size for this group was 66.1 ha compared with the overall average size of 35.7 ha. The holder was younger than average at 47 years and 81% were married compared with 67% in the overall farming population. The majority of farms in this group (72%) were in Dairying Systems.
In the lowest income group, i.e. less than €6,500 per farm, 63% of farms were in Drystock Systems. For this group, on 75% of farms the farmer and/or spouse had some source of other income either from off-farm employment, pension or social assistance. Therefore, there were about 12,000 farms which had a FFI of less than €6,500 and the farmer/spouse had no stated off-farm income from the sources mentioned above.
Also in the lowest income group the farmer and/or the spouse had an off-farm job on 48% of farms, and on 43% of farms the farmer held an off-farm job.
In the highest income group - those with an income of over €40,000 - 77% of farms were in Dairying, a further 13% were Tillage farms and the remaining 10% were in Drystock farming.

Comparison of Family Farm Income with Previous Years

Overall Analysis

Average family farm income per farm in 2001 was €15,840, an increase of 17.3% on the 2000 figure of €13,499. There are many ways of looking at the composition of this increase and the following three approaches, which are summarised in Table 3 have been chosen for the report.

The changes in output and costs.
The changes in enterprise outputs.
The analysis of cash income and inventory changes.

Table 3: Analytical Breakdown of FFI Change - 2001
Approach 1: Changes in Output and Costs %		Approach 2: Changes in Enterprise Outputs %		Approach 3: Cash Income and Inventory Changes %
Gross Output	+ 34.2	Dairying	+ 11.3	Cash Income	+ 12.2
Direct Costs	- 9.3	Cattle	+ 1.0	Depreciation	- 1.4
Gross Margin	+ 24.9	Sheep	+ 7.8	Inventory Change	+ 6.5
Overhead Costs	- 7.6	Other Livestock	- 0.8
		Total Livestock	+ 19.3)
		Crops	+ 2.9
		Other	+ 11.9
		Total Output	+ 34.1)
		Direct Costs	- 9.3
		Overhead Costs	7.6
Family Farm Income + 17.3		Family Farm Income + 17.3		Family Farm Income +17.3

The increase of 17.3% in FFI resulted from an increase of 34.2% in gross output with direct payments contributing 11.5% of this. The increase in direct and overhead costs contributed 9.3% and 7.6% respectively.
Output from the Dairying enterprise was the most significant contributor to the increase in FFI. It accounted for 11.3%, with Crops contributing a further 2.9%. The Sheep and Cattle sectors contributed 7.8% and 1% respectively. The "Other" category showing an increase of 11.9% is due mainly to the change in the headage payment from an animal basis to an area based payment 1from 2000 to 2001. The 11.9% increase therefore reflects the change in allocating these payments to the farm rather than to the livestock enterprises.
An analysis of the increase in FFI from the cash income and inventory change approach showed that cash income contributed 12.2%, inventory change contributed 6.5 percentage points, whilst changes in depreciation reduced FFI by 1.4%.
Analysis by Farming System:

Average FFI per farm on the Specialist Dairy farms increased by 33% in 2001. This was due to increased value of output from milk and cattle plus a 34% rise in direct payments. The EU decision to change payment of headage from a livestock basis to an area basis contributed a major portion of this increase. Direct and overhead costs increased by 15% and 10% respectively from 2000 to 2001.
In the Dairy/Other System, FFI per farm increased by 22% due to increased output of 16%. The output from milk increased by 22% with cattle output increasing by 2%.
Income on Cattle Rearing System was €7,278 per farm in 2001, an increase of 3% in 2000. This was due to an increase in output from the market place of 10%, and in direct payments of 7% whilst total costs increased by 12%. Income on Cattle Other System increased by 11% as a result of output going up by 11% and a total cost increase of 10%, but was still only €7,822 per farm.
Income on the Mainly Sheep System increased from €8,779 in 2000 to €12,126 in 2001 an increase of 38% following an increase of 24% from 1999 to 2000. Output from sales increased by 35% whilst direct payments increased by 18%. Total costs of production increased by 20%.
Average FFI in the Tillage System declined by 13% in 2001, due to a decline of 13% in gross output. Market output fell by 15% and direct payments fell by 6%. Direct costs declined by 10% whilst overhead costs declined by 15%.

The above summary in relation to farming systems refer to changes in per farm output, costs and incomes and does not allow for year to year changes in farm size. However the effect of changes in farm size is shown in Table 4 which shows average return per ha of land farmed across the different farming systems. Average FFI/Ha in 2001 at €444 shows an increase of 10% on the 2000 figure.

Table 4: Family Farm Income per Hectare 2000 - 2001
	FFI/Ha 2000 €	FFI/Ha 2001 €	% Change 2000/01
Dairying	715	867	+21
Dairying/Other	476	555	+17
Cattle Rearing	292	267	-9
Cattle Other	259	266	+3
Mainly Sheep	244	316	+30
Tillage Systems	442	428	-3
All Systems	403	444	+10

Direct Payments

The impact of direct payments on farming incomes has increased significantly in the aftermath of Agenda 2000. In 2001 these payments accounted for 72% of average farm income as the full payments agreed under Agenda 2000 came into effect. A further aspect of these annual payments is that their rates and timing can be adjusted so as to have a bearing on farm incomes within any particular year. Thus when payments are made in two moieties and in separate financial years, the size and timing of the first moiety can be adjusted to support farm incomes in the year in which it is paid. This occurred in 2000 when a greater proportion of the premia payments due were paid, 80% in 2000 compared to 60% in 1999. This process was repeated in 2001 to alleviate difficulties caused by Foot and Mouth Disease. In addition to this the DAF also introduced a range of market supports to counteract the income problems on dry stock farms caused by BSE and Foot and Mouth Disease, which helped sustain beef prices and profit margins. The overall result of this was an increase in average direct payments per farm from €9,931 in 2000 to €11,473 in 2001.

A more detailed presentation of the impact and incidence of direct payments can be seen in the Appendix A tables.

Table 5: Direct Payments as a Percentage of Family Farm Income - 2001
Size (Ha)	<10	10-20	20-30	30-50	50-100	> 100	Hill Farms	All Farms
%
Dairying	-	18	16	23	21	28	30	22
Dairying/ Other	-	-	52	46	47	59	-	51
Cattle Rearing	99	135	134	133	148	-	144	135
Cattle Other	-	171	187	146	130	-	-	146
Mainly Sheep	-	131	104	100	111	111	119	111
Tillage Systems	-	-	-	115	81	83	-	85
ALL	84	101	74	67	60	80	99	72

Note: direct payments account for more than 100% of income whenever market based output is not sufficient to cover total costs.

The main elements as summarised in Table 5 are:

Although the total amount of direct payments increased by 16% in 2001, direct payments as a percentage of FFI decreased by 1%.

Direct payments accounted for 135% and 146% of average FFI in the Cattle Rearing and Cattle Other Systems respectively, rising to over 187% in some subgroups. In the Mainly Sheep System direct payments accounted for 111% of FFI in 2001, showing a decline from 130% in 2000. This reflects the strong returns from the market place for sheep in 2001.

The contribution of direct payments to average FFI in the Tillage Systems increased from 79% in 2000 to 85% in 2001.

At present the concept of direct payments as a proportion of income does not have the same relevance for Dairying as for the other major systems. Since these payments are not used as a mechanism under CAP for supporting Dairy farm incomes - the combination of supply management and the pricing system is used instead. As a result, direct payments only account for 22% of average FFI on Specialist Dairy farms in 2001, compared to 20% in 2000. Dairy farmers benefited from the shift of headage to an area based payment with the new Disadvantaged Area based Compensatory Allowance Scheme (DACAS) payments contributing €1,724 per farm on Specialist Dairy farms in 2001, compared to €538 under the old headage scheme in 2000. In the Dairying/Other System, where there was a substantial Cattle and/or Tillage enterprise in addition to the Dairy herd, direct payments accounted for 51% of average FFI in 2001, very similar to 2000 figure of 50%.

An estimated 31% of farms received REPS payments in 2001. The average FFI on those farms receiving REPS was €14,040 compared to €16,668 on non-REPS farms. Close to 77% of farms which participate in REPS are in the three drystock systems, namely Cattle Rearing, Cattle Other and Mainly Sheep. Family farm income was higher on non-REPS, Dairy specialist, Other Dairy farms and Tillage farms. As in previous years incomes on REPS cattle farms were higher than on non-REPS farms by approximately the average amount of the REPS payment. However in 2001, unlike previous years results, income per farm for the Mainly Sheep System was lower on REPS farms than non-REPS farms. A more detailed analysis of REPS farms will be compiled later in 2002.

The following tables present the key information in relation to farms participating in REPS (Table 5(a)) and those not participating in REPS (Table 5(b)).

Table 5(a): FFI, Direct Payments for REPS farms by farming system - 2001
	Dairying	Dairying/Other	Cattle Rearing	Cattle Other	Mainly Sheep	Tillage Systems	All
€/Farm
FFI	31430	25382	11301	9114	11749	15627	14040
Direct Payments REPS Contribution	12099 5413	17240 4628	15909 4469	13864 3130	13125 4103	18139 4608	14510 4107
Farm Size (UAA)	37.7	45.8	33.4	27.9	34.6	40.2	34.0

Table 5(b): FFI, Direct Payments for non-REPS farms by farming system - 2001
	Dairying	Dairying/Other	Cattle Rearing	Cattle Other	Mainly Sheep	Tillage Systems	All
€/Farm
FFI	35072	27572	5861	7064	12630	27555	16668
Direct Payments	6435	12847	7728	9924	13793	21534	10076
Farm Size (UAA)	40.1	49.7	25.2	30.2	43.5	62.9	36.5

Gross Output and Costs

The cost competitiveness of Irish agriculture is growing in importance with the potential movement towards a freer trade in international markets for agricultural products. The simplest expression of efficiency of production is the proportion of gross output which is absorbed by the costs of inputs into the production process.

On a national basis, 65% of gross output was absorbed by total costs in 2001. If direct payments are excluded from gross output, then costs as a percentage of the market based value of gross output in 2001 was 87%. The corresponding figure in 2000 was 88%.

In 2001 only 24% of farms were capable of keeping total costs below 50% of output whereas 37% of farms had costs which were above 70% of output. The corresponding figures for 2000 were 21% and 38% respectively.

Gross Margins

Gross Margin (gross output including direct payments, minus direct costs) provides a useful index of the relative profitability of the various farm systems.

Table 6: Distribution of Farms by Level of Gross Margin (€) Per Hectare (UAA) - 2001
Gross Margin/Ha	< 200	200-400	400-600	600-800	800-1000	1000-1200	> 1200	All*
% Farms
Dairying	-	1	4	10	15	20	50	100
Dairying/ Other	2	13	19	19	20	14	13	100
Cattle Rearing	11	29	36	17	6	-	1	100
Cattle Other	11	28	33	15	4	4	6	100
Mainly Sheep	8	23	26	17	14	7	4	100
Tillage Systems	-	4	34	30	20	9	4	100
ALL	7	20	27	16	10	8	12	100

^*Figures may not add to 100% due to rounding

Overall, 20% of farms achieved a gross margin of over €1,000 per ha (compared to 14% in 2000). The Dairying Systems once again show the higher returns to land, with over 70% of those farms that achieved a gross margin per ha of over €1,000 being in the Specialist Dairying System.
27% of farms had a gross margin per ha of less than €400 and the majority of these, about 90%, were in the drystock systems.

New Investment

Net investment on farms was €4,117 in 2001 - very similar to €4,477 in 2000.

Table 7: Average Annual New Investment - All Farms (€/farm) - 2001
	Dairying	Dairying/Other	Cattle Rearing	Cattle Other	Mainly Sheep	Tillage Systems	All
€/Farm
Gross New Investment	9301	9590	2177	2398	3027	11125	4926
Net New Investment	8424	8257	1716	1426	2642	9586	4117
Depreciation	7042	6290	1973	2384	2438	6946	3771
% of farms on which investment was made	78%	65%	34%	39%	34%	49%	47%

(Note: Net new investment is equal to gross new investment in machinery, buildings, quotas and land improvements (including Forestry) minus sales and capital grants received during the year.)

Overall net new investment in 2001 was equivalent to 26% of total income in farming. Dairying farms contributed 56% of the total new investment, although these farms comprise about 28% of the farming population. 78% of Dairying farms invested in new capital structures compared to 34% and 39% on Cattle Rearing and Cattle Other farms. Farms in the Tillage System contributed another 15% of the total net new investment, whilst comprising only 6% of the farm population.
The Drystock systems while comprising 66% of the farming population contributed only 29% of total net new investment.
47% of farms made some new investment in 2001. Average FFI on these farms which had new investment in 2001 was higher across all systems than for farms where no new investment occurred.

Other Gainful Activity

Data on family farm incomes, as presented in this report, are confined to the income earned from on-farm activity. In recent years off-farm employment has become more prevalent, making the situation quite different from earlier decades where the main sources of off-farm income would have been pensions and social assistance. The incidence of off-farm employment is shown in Table 8 by size and system of farming while further information is presented in Appendix A.

Table 8: Estimated Percentage of Farms Where Farmer and/or the Spouse has an Off-Farm Job - 2001 (%)
Size (Ha)	<10	10-20	20-30	30-50	50-100	> 100	Hill Farms	All Sizes
Dairying	-	50 (33)	49 (21)	31 (6)	35 (6)	36 (7)	39 (21)	38 (13)
Dairying/ Other	-	-	25 (17)	40 (8)	32 (5)	33 (7)	-	30 (9)
Cattle Rearing	46 (46)	47 (45)	65 (59)	61 (42)	56 (28)	-	59 (51)	55 (47)
Cattle Other	-	35 (35)	47 (47)	36 (31)	34 (14)	-	-	45 (41)
Mainly Sheep	-	56 (50)	67 (47)	42 (26)	61 (33)	30 (0)	39 (27)	50 (36)
Tillage Systems	-	-	-	45 (25)	37 (19)	25 (9)	-	39 (26)
All	49 (49)	45 (42)	52 (42)	42 (23)	40 (14)	37 (10)	46 (34)	45 (33)

(Figures in brackets refer to the farmer only)

In general the 2001 data reveal that, in relation to the farmer and /or the spouse:

An off-farm job existed on 45% of farms, which was identical to that of 1999 and 2000.
On 33% of farms the farmer held an off-farm job, also identical to 2000.
Similar to previous years the incidence of the farmer having an off-farm job is highest in the small farm size groups, while the spouse is most likely to have an off-farm job in the intermediate size groups.
The Cattle and Sheep Systems have the highest incidence of the farmer and/or the spouse having off-farm employment while the Dairy farms have the lowest; the same is true in relation to the farmer. However this distinction is not evident in relation to the spouse where the incidence of off-farm employment is similar across the farming systems, with an overall mean estimate of 24%.
On 64% of farms the farmer and/or the spouse had some source of off-farm income, be it from employment, pension or social assistance.

Revised estimates of off-farm employment data in relation to the farmer are shown in Table 9 (a) for the year 2000. The data in Tables 9 (a) and 9 (b) show estimates of the percentages of farmers with off-farm employment, the average off-farm income and the family farm income for 2000 and 2001 respectively. The data refer to farms where the farmer had an off-farm job and also similar data where farms had no off-farm employment. These farmers are further subdivided into full-time and part-time farms as defined in the NFS Glossary of Terms. These estimates should be regarded as indicative of relative levels rather than as accurate absolute levels.

Table 9(a): Estimates of Off-Farm Employment For Farmer Only - 2000.
	Sample Number	Population %	Average Off-Farm Income (1)	Average FFI (2) €	Income (1) + (2) €
Farmer has Off-Farm Job and Income Stated
All Farms	144	21%	€15,200	€6,400	€21,600
Full-Time Farms	36	3%	€13,100	€14,800	€27,900
Part-Time Farms	108	18%	€15,500	€5,200	€20,700
Farmer has Off-Farm Job - income not stated
All Farms	118	12%	-	€10,620	€10,620
Farmer has no Off-Farm Job
Full-Time Farms	635	33%	-	€29,400	€29,400
Part-Time Farms	231	34%	-	€6,200	€6,200

The estimates should be interpreted with caution because the underlying data are not always sufficiently robust, this is due to the problem of non-response and the fact that the information is received from respondents without documentary verification.

Table 9(b): Estimates of Off-Farm Employment For Farmer Only - 2001.
	Sample Number	Population %	Average Off-Farm € Income (1)	Average FFI (2) €	Income + (2) €
Farmer has Off-Farm Job - Income stated
All Farms	141	20	€18,900 (50)	€6,800 (96)	€25,700 (39)
Full-Time Farms	35	3	€15,300 (61)	€14,800 (62)	€30,100 (42)
Part-Time Farms	106	17	€19,400 (49)	€5,600 (90)	€25,000 (38)
Farmer - No Income Stated
All Farms	125	13	-	€9,700 (150)	€9,700
Farmer has no Off-Farm Job
Full-Time Farms	672	34	-	€32,800 (71)	€32,800
Part-Time Farms	229	33	-	€6,000 (118)	€6,000

(Figures in brackets are the coefficients of variation - these show that within each group there is considerable variability)

In 2001 there were 141 farmers (out of total 266 with off-farm jobs) who were willing to disclose their off-farm income of €18,900 compared to 144 farmers in 2000 with an off-farm income of €15,200. The average farm income in 2001 was €6,800 giving a combined income of €25,700 compared to €21,600 in 2000. In 2001, 17% of the population with off-farm employment were part-time farmers with an average off-farm income of €19,400, whilst only 3% were full-time farms with an average off-farm income of €15,300. In 2000 and 2001, 12% and 13% respectively, of farmers with an off-farm job refused to disclose their off-farm income.

In 2001, 77% of farmers had no off-farm employment and of those 33% were full time with FFI of €32800, whilst the remaining 34% were part-time (as defined in glossary) with a FFI of €6000.

Table 10 gives population estimates of the incidence of the farmer having an off-farm job broken down by FFI. On farms with FFI less than €6,500, 40% of farmers had off-farm employment compared to 5% where FFI exceeded €25,000. On farms where the FFI ranged from €6,500 to €13,000, 50% of farmers had an off-farm job.

Table 10: Estimates of Off-Farm Jobs (Farmer) by FFI - 2001
FFI	All Farms	Farmer with Off-Farm Job	Farmer no Off-Farm Job
€	%	%	%
<6500	40	16	24
6500 - 13000	22	11	11
13000 - 25000	17	5	12
>25000	21	1	20
Total	`	33	67

Footnotes

¹Disadvantaged Area based Compensatory Allowance Scheme (DACAS in Appendix Tables).