23
Table 5: Mountain farms according to categories of difficulty (1995)
Mountain Farms |
total |
non-moun- area |
Mountain area sum |
Austria | ||||
Group 1 |
Group 2 |
Group 3 |
Group 4 | |||||
in % of Austria |
11.4 |
9.9 |
12.1 |
_______2.6 |
36.0 |
_______166 |
48.6 (1) |
__________100 |
Share of UAA |
15.3 |
12.0 |
13.8 |
3.0 |
51.7 |
8.6 |
48.8 |
100 |
Share of LU (in %) |
19.3 |
14.3 |
15.1 |
_______2.5 |
51.2 |
___________7.3 |
__________52.3 |
__________100 |
SGM per ha farm |
94 |
73 |
59 |
48 |
73 |
60 |
67 |
100 |
Farm income level |
87 |
84 |
78 |
61 |
82 |
- |
85 |
100 |
Household income |
92 |
88 |
85 |
79 |
88 |
- |
90 |
100 |
1) 10.141 mountain farm units are not situated in the mountain area but in general in adjacent less-favoured areas.
2) Standard Gross Margin (SGM) in relation to sum of UAA and forest area
Source: OSTAT, Dax 1997
More intriguing information
1. Unemployment in an Interdependent World2. Segmentación en la era de la globalización: ¿Cómo encontrar un segmento nuevo de mercado?
3. ISSUES AND PROBLEMS OF IMMEDIATE CONCERN
4. The name is absent
5. The name is absent
6. Locke's theory of perception
7. Evaluating the Success of the School Commodity Food Program
8. The name is absent
9. Climate change, mitigation and adaptation: the case of the Murray–Darling Basin in Australia
10. The name is absent