Introduction

Guava (Psidium guajava) is one of the fruits with great acceptance in the agro-food sector of Mexico, due to its high content of vitamin C and phenolic compounds. In the period from 2012 to 2015, the area planted with guava in the country was 21.15 thousand hectares (ha), with a production of 297.65 thousand tons (t). The regions with the highest production were located in the states of Michoacan with 46.4% of the fruit nationwide and had a yield of 14.75 t ha^-1, those of Aguascalientes and Zacatecas contributed 30.6 and 16.5% of the production and showed yields of 15.31 and 15.42 t ha^-1, respectively (^{SIAP, 2015}).

The production of Aguascalientes is developed in the Calvillo, listed as one of the most important regions of the country in the commercial production of guava. Data from the ^{SIAP (2015)}, indicate that from 2012 to 2015, this fruit tree occupied 6 256 ha in Aguascalientes, which was 29.6% of the national area planted. In the same period, there were on average 94.87 thousand tons guavas with a commercial value of 361.82 million pesos, equivalent to 27.9% of the value of the national production of guava, and 15.16% of the value of the production of the agricultural sector of the entity.

During the period from 2005 to 2015, the area planted and production of guava in Calvillo observed an annual average decrease of -0.86% and -1.2%, respectively. This situation denotes the loss of dynamism of the productive activity caused by: a) the reduction of the level of the aquifers that has generated scarcity and increased cost in the extraction of irrigation water; b) natural phenomena such as frost, hailstorms and droughts that affect the region; c) presence of pests and diseases; and d) lack of adequate technological packages for the agronomic management of guava (^{De Luna, 2003}).

In addition to the above, ^{Sangerman-Jarquin et al. (2013)} pointed out that the increase in production costs and the fall in real fruit prices have had an impact on the profitability of guava producers. For ^{Borja et al. (2016a)} the previous aspects, added to the little planning in the allocation of public and private resources, have caused the loss of profitability, competitiveness and sustainability of the economic activity of guava in the producing region. This problem is noted with the abandonment of orchards and productive reconversion by other species such as nopal vegetables, tomatoes and grasses.

In spite of the previous problem, due to its size, specialization, the amount of jobs it generates and the number of producers that are engaged in this activity, the guava chain is positioned as the one of greatest socioeconomic importance in the state (^{Borja et al., 2016b}), which fully justifies the search for opportunities to maintain or encourage the productive activity of guava in Aguascalientes.

For producers to find alternatives that allow them to increase their crop profits, it is necessary to perform a detailed analysis on the profitability and competitiveness of the production systems in Calvillo; as well as, determine the economic efficiency or competitive advantage of the activity. To do this, one must start from understanding that competitiveness is the dynamic capacity of a spatially located agri-food chain to maintain, expand and continuously improve and sustain its participation in the market (^{Romero and Sepulveda, 1999}); while, the comparative advantage refers to the efficiency with which a country can make a profit in trade with the production of goods, and this because prices relative to the interior of the country are not the same as regulating the relative value of products at the time of marketing them with other countries (^{Romo and Abdel, 2005}).

The MAP is a tool that allows measuring the competitiveness of guava production systems based on private and economic profitability, as well as evaluating economic efficiency or comparative advantage based on a comparison of private and economic costs, to measure results of the commercial opening in the producers and the economy of the country (^{Barrera-Rodríguez et al., 2011}). This type of analysis has been carried out for the production of guava in Michoacán, Mexico (^{Zamora and Kido, 2008}), for vanilla production systems (Vanilla planifolia J.) in the region of Totonacapan, Mexico (^{Barrera-Rodríguez et al., 2011}); as well as, in livestock production systems (^{Barrón-Aguilar et al., 2000}; ^{Lara-Covarrubias et al., 2003}; ^{Rebollar-Rebollar et al., 2011}).

The foregoing would provide first-hand information to those responsible for formulating the policies of the subsector and thereby designing strategies focused on maintaining or increasing the competitiveness of the activity in the region and related to the allocation of resources. Based on the foregoing and considering the importance of guava in the state, this work aimed to determine the competitiveness, policy effects and economic efficiency of guava production systems in the municipality of Calvillo, Aguascalientes.

Materials and methods

The investigation was conducted in the municipality of Calvillo, Aguascalientes, which is located in the southwestern part of the state between 21° 42’ 54.00’’ and 22° 06’ 25.20’’ north latitude and between 102° 31’ 26.40’’ and 102° 52’ 30.00’’ west longitude, at an average height of 1 630 meters above sea level, with an area of 908.23 km² and represents 16% of the state territory, in 2015 it had 56 thousand inhabitants (^{INEGI, 2015}).

In the research, the policy analysis matrix (MAP) developed by ^{Monke and Pearson (1989)} was used, with which a detailed analysis of the cost structure with private and economic prices was carried out. The MAP allows to evaluate the profitability for the producer and the economic efficiency of the systems; one of the objectives of the methodology is to measure the impact of government policies and market distortions on private profitability and efficiency in the use of resources.

The MAP is a product of two accounting indicators, one on profitability that defines the difference between income and expenses and the other is the measurement of the effects of divergences (policies and market failures) considered as the difference between the observed parameters and those that would exist if divergences were eliminated (Table 1).

Based on the MAP analysis, the indicator of the private cost ratio (RCP) that measures the capacity of the production system to pay domestic resources and the return to capital that represents the producer’s profit (^{Barrón-Aguilar et al., 2000}) and was the competitiveness indicator, which results from dividing the cost of the factors of production by the value added (difference between gross income and the costs of tradable inputs). If RCP< 1 means that the producer is efficient and has a private gain; if RCP= 1 no profits are generated and if RCP> 1, there will be no private efficiency (^{González and Alferes, 2010}).

The following indicators were used to determine the effect of economic policies: The nominal protection coefficient (NPC), which is the ratio of the price between the product at private prices and the price at economic prices. This indicator analyzes the pricing policies and lets you know if they encourage domestic production; establishes the degree of protection that production has due to policies.

The nominal input protection coefficient (CPNI) measures the degree of transfer in commercial inputs by trade policies and the exchange rate through prices (^{González and Alferes, 2010}); it is calculated using the quotient of the cost of marketable inputs at private prices and its corresponding at economic prices. If CPNI> 1 there is a subsidy and if CPNI< 1 there is an implicit tax on the internal price of inputs.

The effective protection coefficient (CPE) expresses the combined effect of transfers and tradable inputs derived from trade and exchange rate policies and is estimated by dividing the value added at private prices by economic prices.

The producer subsidy equivalent (ESP) measures the level of net transfer from or to producers in relation to other sectors of the economy (L). The positive value of the ESP indicates a global transfer from the company to the producer; while, a negative value means the global transfer of the producer to society and taxpayers (^{Adeoye and Oni, 2014}).

The cost ratio of internal resources (RCRI) is the ratio of dividing the cost of internal factors (G) valued at efficiency prices (without distortions) and value added at social prices (^{Monke and Pearson, 1989}). If RCRI< 1 the value of the internal resources used in production is less than the value of the currencies saved, so the country is economically efficient in the production of guava, otherwise if RCRI> 1 the country is inefficient in production (^{González and Alferes, 2010}).

To prepare the MAP, information was collected on technical coefficients (performance, and input requirements) and prices through 28 surveys applied to guava producers in the municipality of Calvillo, during October and November 2015. The producers surveyed were those who had the willingness to provide detailed information on cost records, harvests and fruit sales. From the information collected in the surveys, producers were classified into three groups based on the characteristics determined by ^{Borja et al. (2018)} (Table 2).

The technical coefficients of tradable goods were identified for each producer: chemical and organic fertilizers, pesticides, nematicides, herbicides, fungicides, biological control of pests and diseases, agricultural tools, fuel (occupied in the transfer of personnel to orchards, production and for the operation of equipment), containers and boxes for cutting and the factors of production: technical assistance, wages, certifications of the garden, water payment quotas (which included the fee for water and the consumption of electricity for the pumping of water), irrigation system, agricultural equipment (manual and motor sprayer, brush cutter and sorter), vehicle, warehouses, fences, fruit irradiation and administrative services.

The market prices of marketable goods and equipment came from the survey and inquiries made to the companies Agricenter SA of CV; Agricolas Guayaberos, SA of CV; Servi Agro de Calvillo and Ferquiagro, SA of CV and Tractores de Aguascalientes, SA of CV, the daily price and cost of irrigation water were provided by the producers. The survey asked about the quantity and price of family and hired labor; the information was used to estimate the total cost per labor force.

The cost of capital goods was determined as the cost of capital recovery considering its useful life, 20% of the acquisition cost as redemption value at a nominal interest rate of 3.34% which was the interbank equilibrium interest rate (TIIE) average at 91 days for 2015 (^{BANXICO, 2015}). The analysis did not include the rent of the garden, since only 7% of the producers made it; this activity is uncommon because it is a perennial crop that requires investment and the profits are reflected in the long term.

Based on the methodology proposed by ^{Salcedo (2007)}, import parity prices were calculated mainly for fertilizers (ammonium sulfate, calcium nitrate, potassium nitrate, superphosphate and triple 17), pesticides, herbicides, fungicides and agricultural equipment. Import parity prices were calculated with the Free On Board (FOB) prices reported by the International Trade Commission of the United States of America (^{USITC, 2015}) and the Via Internet Commercial Information System (SIAVI) (^{SE, 2017}) , then the CIF (Cost, Insurance and Freight) price was calculated, where the cost of maritime transport of the fertilizers that was obtained from quotes made to the international shipping company Containers with exit points in Florida and Miami and point was considered upon arrival at the port of Veracruz; the cost of rail transport from Veracruz to Aguascalientes was also calculated, for this the rates and distances of Mexican Railroad, SA of CV (FERROMEX) were consulted.

In the case of irrigation equipment and system, the cost per recovery was estimated at market and economic prices. For the conversion to national currency, the equilibrium exchange rate (TCE) was used, which was calculated for the period 2010 to 2015, taking as the base year 2013, the TCE was estimated using the purchasing power parity method (PPP) (^{Lara-Covarrubias et al., 2003}), for which the nominal exchange rate (^{BANXICO, 2015}) and the consumer price index of Mexico and the United States of America (^{INEGI, 2016}) were used.

The equilibrium exchange rate was $13.16 USD, with an overvaluation margin of 3.77% from January 2010 to December 2015. The economic price of the guava was estimated with the export parity price (^{Salcedo, 2007}) For this purpose, the CIF price reported by the International Trade Commission of the United States (^{USITC, 2015}) placed in McAllen Texas, United States, was deducted from the cost of transportation, insurance and costs generated by the irradiation of the fruit and local transportation from the orchards to the packaging, the information was provided by the guava packing companies that are located in the municipality of Calvillo and that are responsible for the commercialization of the fruit for the US market.

The subsidy granted by the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Rural Development, Fisheries and Food (SAGARPA) within the Special Program of Energy for the Field in the field of electric energy for agricultural use (^{SAGARPA, 2016}) was increased.

With the matrices of technical coefficients and prices, the private and economic budgets of guava producers were calculated. Since guava was a perennial crop, private and economic budgets were projected at 25 years on already established plantations and the base year was 2015. The evaluation period was determined when considering the experience of the producers, who mention that the trees with 25 years of age still maintain their vigor and high performance.

Subsequently, the net present value (NPV) for each budget was estimated; the average TIIE at 91 days (3.34%) and the Libor rate at 3 months (0.32%) for 2015 (^{BANXICO, 2015}) were used to update the budgets. The analysis was made with the information corresponding to an area of 1 ha of guavas for each type of producer.

Results and discussion

Conclusions

At private prices, guava producers in Calvillo, Aguascalientes, are profitable and competitive. In all three systems, value added covers the costs of internal factors and there is an extraordinary profit surplus, but intermediate producers are more efficient in production, followed by business and traditional ones. Producers can improve the profitability and competitiveness of their system by reducing costs in tradable inputs, through a more efficient and rational use of fertilizers and products for the control of pests and diseases; likewise, business producers must optimize the use of internal factors as labor.

At economic prices, the producers are profitable and obtain profits with respect to the private ones, which implies that the production of guava in Calvillo presents a comparative advantage with the outside and it is determined that the resources are well used because this activity generates wealth and contributes to saving foreign exchange for the country, which makes it a productive alternative for the region.

Guava producers are affected by economic policy through negative transfers translated into implicit taxes on some marketable inputs such as fertilizers, pesticides and fungicides, which are not compensated with the subsidies they receive in the purchase of other inputs and in the item of factors. internal there is a lack of protection in the production systems of guava in Calvillo, this effect results from the overvaluation of the exchange rate and its constant increase from 2015 and the high interest rates present in the national economy with respect to the interest rate international, factors that increase the prices of inputs and equipment used in production. Therefore, it is desirable that macroeconomic policy be managed in a consistent manner to contribute to the profitability and competitiveness of the guava production systems and the agricultural sector in general.