\documentclass[english,german]{scrartcl}
\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
\usepackage{geometry}
\geometry{verbose,a4paper,tmargin=1.75cm,bmargin=2cm,lmargin=2cm,rmargin=2cm,headheight=0.8cm,headsep=0.5cm,footskip=0.5cm}
\usepackage{babel}
\usepackage{url}
\urlstyle{same}
\newcommand\email{\begingroup \urlstyle{same}\Url}\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{units}
\usepackage{tabularx}
\usepackage{wasysym} % enable use of \permil instead of \textperthousand
\usepackage{marvosym}
\usepackage{arabtex}
\usepackage{hyphenat}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{mdwlist}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\relax}
\usepackage{index}
\newindex{key}{kdx}{knd}{Keywords}
\newindex{author}{idx}{ind}{Authors}
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\pagestyle{fancy}
\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}
\fancyfoot{}
\usepackage{ifpdf}
\ifpdf
%\usepackage[activate]{pdfcprot}
%\usepackage[owner=Tapioka, print=true, copy=true, edit=false, annotate=false,set]{pdfcrypt}
%encryption: not supported any more (since pdftex 1.10)
\usepackage[pdftex]{thumbpdf}
\usepackage[pdftex]{hyperref}
\hypersetup{pdftitle={Milk Production by Small"=scale Farmers in the South of Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil},pdfauthor={Aline dos Santos Neutzling, Alex da Rosa Neutzling, Meike Wollni, Eva Schlecht},pdfsubject={Tropentag 2011: Abstract},pdfkeywords={Cluster analysis, farm structure, farmer classification},pdfpagemode=None,colorlinks=true}
\else
\usepackage{ae}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\fi
\begin{document}
\ifpdf
\parbox[b]{2.5cm}{\resizebox*{2.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{dtt2011.jpg}}}
\else
\parbox[b]{2.5cm}{\resizebox*{2.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{dtt2011.eps}}}
\fi
\hfill
\parbox[b]{13.4cm}{\centering \large{\textbf{Tropentag, October 5-7, 2011, Bonn}}\\[1ex] \Large{``Development on the margin''\\[2ex]}}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\begin{center}
\Large{\textbf{Milk Production by Small"=scale Farmers in the South of Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil\footnote{\textbf{Contact Address:} Eva Schlecht, University of Kassel / Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Animal Husbandry in the Tropics and Subtropics, Steinstraße 19, 37213~Witzenhausen, Germany, \mbox{e-mail}: \email{tropanimals@uni-kassel.de}}\\[0.8ex]}}
\normalsize{\textsc{Aline dos Santos Neutzling$^{1}$, Alex da Rosa Neutzling$^{2}$, Meike Wollni$^{3}$, Eva Schlecht$^{1}$}}
\end{center}
\begin{itemize*}
\item[]{\small{\textit{$^{1}$University of Kassel / Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Animal Husbandry in the Tropics and Subtropics, Germany}}}
\item[]{\small{\textit{$^{2}$Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Faculdade de Veterinária, Brazil}}}
\item[]{\small{\textit{$^{3}$Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, Germany}}}
\end{itemize*}
\index[author]{dos Santos Neutzling, Aline}
\index[author]{da Rosa Neutzling, Alex}
\index[author]{Wollni, Meike}
\index[author]{Schlecht, Eva}
\begin{center}
\vspace{1.1cm}
\textbf{Abstract}
\begin{abstract}
\small{
In Brazil, a total of 807,587 farms are considered small"=scale (family farm) establishments, where land property is less than \mbox{100\,ha}, work is supervised by the producer, and family labour prevails over hired labour. Milk production is a socio"=economically relevant activity for many family farms and plays an important role for the regional development. 



The performance of small"=scale dairy farms differing in cattle management and milk marketing strategies was studied in the cities Cangucu (31°23'S 52°40'W), Pelotas (31°46'S 52°21'W), and Sao Lourenco do Sul (31°22'S 51°59'W) in Rio Grande do Sul state. A baseline questionnaire was administered to 200 farm households in summer 2010. Using categorical principal component analysis (CATPCA) and two"=step cluster analysis (SPSS 19.0), baseline data on farm assets and activities were used to classify small"=scale farmers into three groups: Group I milk producers; Group II cash crop and milk producers; Group III cash crop producers with surplus milk marketing. 



The size of the cattle herd (heads) was largest in Group I, averaging 114 (SD 71.9, n=7), followed by Group II (31 SD 13.4, n=74), and Group III (12 SD 7.5, n=118). Milk production of cows in lactation at the time of interview (l/day) averaged 11 SD 10.3 in Group I, 7 SD 4.1 in Group II and 5 SD 4.3 in Group III. Group I farmers had more pasture land (ha) available for their animals, namely 51 SD 49.4, than Groups II and III (9 SD 8.9; 5 SD 8.1). The contribution of livestock husbandry to family income (\%) averaged 71 SD 33.8 in Group I, 59 SD 25.1 in Group II and 16 SD 14.1 in Group III. A significant correlation was observed in Groups I, II and III between cattle herd size and pasture area (r=0.88; r=0.51; r=0.58). In Group III the income contribution of livestock was correlated with cattle herd size, pasture area and milk production (r=0.41; r=0.42; r=0.35). Overall, wide differences existed for the various variables between Groups I and III. Whether these affect the resource use efficiency and profitability of a farm's dairy unit will be determined by further bio"=economic analyses.}

\vspace{0.5cm}
\end{abstract}
\end{center}
\noindent \textbf{Keywords:} Cluster analysis, farm structure, farmer classification
\index[key]{Cluster analysis}
\index[key]{Farm!structure}
\index[key]{Farmer classification}
\end{document}