Final Thesis2

Pamantasan ng Cabuyao
Katapatan Subd., Banay-banay, City of Cabuyao
College of Business Administration and Accountancy 1
THE INTRODUCTION OF SNAP HYDROPONICS AS AN ALTERNATIVE WAY
OF FARMING TO AUGMENT INCOME
A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of College of Business
Administration and Accountancy
City of Cabuyao, Laguna
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree
Bachelor of Science in Accountancy
Gelyn C. Cruz
Mary Jelvie L. Evaristo
Kaycee C. Macutong
Maricar G. Punongbayan
Title Page

CERTIFICATION-AND-APPROVAL SHEET
CERTIFICATION
This thesis entitled THE INTRODUCTION OF SNAP HYDROPONICS AS AN
ALTERNATIVE WAY OF FARMING TO AUGMENT INCOME TO THE FARMERS
OF THE CITY OF CABUYAO LAGUNA : AS A SOURCE OFINCOME ,
prepared and submitted by GELYN C. CRUZ, MARY JELVIE L. EVARISTO,
KAYCEE C. MACUTONG and MARICAR G. PUNONGBAYAN, in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Bachelor of Science in
Accountancy, has been examined and recommended for approval for Oral
Examination.
Prof. FLORDELIZA EM
Adviser
APPROVAL
Approved by the panelist on the day of , 2017 at the
Oral Examination with the grade of
Chairman
Member Member
Approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Bachelor
Of Science in Accountancy.
PROF. NOEL B. HUNGRIA, CPA, MBA
Dean, CBAA

CERTIFICATION OF ORIGINALITY
This is to certify that the research work presented in thesis entitled : THE
INTRODUCTION OF SNAP HYDROPONICS TO THE FARMERS OF THE CITY
OF CABUYAO LAGUNA : AS A SOURCE OFINCOME for the degree Bachelor
of Science in Accountancy at the Pamantasan ng Cabuyao embodies the results
of the original and scholarly work read out by the undersigned.
This thesis does not contain words and ideas taken from public sources or
written works have been accepted as basis on the award of the from any higher
education institution, except where proper referencing and acknowledgment were
made.
The Researchers:
Gelyn C. Cruz
Mary Jelvie L. Evaristo
Kaycee C. Macutong
Maricar G. Punongbayan
March 2017
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The researchers would like to acknowledge and express their deepest
appreciation for the assistance, support and encouragement of the following :
First and foremost, to the ALMIGHTY GOD, for the wisdom, strength and
spiritual guidance all throughout the conduct of this study. We will not able to do
all these things without Him and His abundant blessings.
Mr. Noel B. Hungria, Dean, College of Business Administration and
Accountancy, for giving encouragements and constructive criticisms that
contributed to the development and growth of this study and for always reminding
us about important matters in doing the research.
Ms. Flordeliza Em, Adviser, for all the resistance, ideas, reminders and
encouragement . Also, for sharing her knowledge and time to guide us in making
this research possible.
Ms. Remedios Bucal, Professor, for being patient and understanding an
for consistently reminding us for our responsibilities and priorities with regard to
meeting the deadlines of research study.


To our parents, for always giving us unconditional love and support
emotionally an financially.
Our classmates and friends, for making us feel encouraged amidst the
hardships and for supporting us in every way possible to make our burden lighter.
And lastly, to our respondents, Farmers of City of Cabuyao, your
cooperation and warm acceptance is highly appreciated for they made the study
possible.
DEDICATION
First and foremost to our Almighty God, who gave us strength and wisdom
throughout the making of this study. He is our Savior. To our families especially
our parents for their love and support both emotionally and financially, we
dedicate this work. To our group mates, who we spent our hardships with and for
the memories that we shared and made us more intact. We will always be grateful
to all the persons who did not turn us down during the conduct of this study. This
study help us to achieve more knowledge that somehow we can use in the near
future. It was an extraordinary and enjoyable journey indeed!
G.C.C
M.J.E
K.C.M
M.G.P
ABSTRACT
THE INTRODUCTION OF SNAP HYDROPONICS TO THE FARMERS
OF THE CITY OF CABUYAO LAGUNA : AS A SOURCE OFINCOME
The main purpose of this study is to assess the respondents level of
acceptability on the SNAP Hydroponics in terms of quality of harvest and quantity
of harvest.
The objectives of the study are to identify the demographic profile of the
farmers,to determine the respondents level of acceptability on the SNAP
Hydroponics in terms of quality of harvest and quantity of harvest and to
determine the aspects to be considered in the introduction of SNAP Hydroponics
as a source of income in terms of Technical Aspects,Management Aspects and
Socio-Economic Aspects to the farmers of the City of Cabuyao as a source of
income.
This study was supported by researches of Dr. Primitivo Jose A. Santos
and Eureka Teresa M. Ocampo from Plant Physiology Laboratory, Institute of
Plant Breeding, College of Agriculture, UP Los Baos, College, Laguna.
Experiments were conducted by the Professors which results to the formulation

of nutrient solution or commonly known as SNAP. The goal is to help the farmers
to adapt a low-cost hydroponics system at the same time yield higher than the
usual.
The descriptive research method was applied in this study.The respondent
of the study includes farmers from Barangay San Isidro City because the
researchers believes that they can give an acurrate data for the study since they
have the most number of farmers in City of Cabuyao. The
frequency,percentage,weighted mean and t-test were used to evaluate the level of
acceptability of produced crops from SNAP Hydroponics as a source of income to
the farmers of Barangay San Isidro City of Cabuyao Laguna.
In this study, the level of acceptability of the farmers with regards to SNAP
hydroponics was assessed through the performance indicators adopted and
modified by the researchers.
Based on the result, farmers answered mostly maybe when asked
whether they know/aware of what a SNAP Hydroponics is. Most of them dont
have any idea of what hydroponics is but upon having a glimpse and simple
introduction and discussion of it, they've agreed that certain aspects are needed
to be considered. They also agreed that possibly SNAP hydroponics can compete
with the traditional way of gardening. Most of the hydroponics growers has
already tested and proven that they get higher many time greater than the
conventional method. Upon certain consideration, farmers also agreed that this
study is beneficial to the farmers of Barangay San Isidro and to the Barangay
itself. It indicates that due to the fact that greater yields can be made through
hydroponics which results to greater income, most of the farmers are willing to try
the SNAP hydroponics.
As evaluated, the level of acceptability of the farmers with regards to
quality of the harvest through traditional farming is acceptable and the quantity is
average. It indicates that the farmers are not satisfied on the quality and quantity
of crops due to pests, natural calamity and insects that most of the time destroy
their crops. Thus, this study aims to the help the farmers to adapt a low-cost
hydroponics system at the same time yield higher than the usual.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page...................................................................................................................i
CERTIFICATION-AND-APPROVAL SHEET............................................................ii
CERTIFICATION OF ORIGINALITY........................................................................iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT..........................................................................................iv
DEDICATION...........................................................................................................vi
ABSTRACT.............................................................................................................vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS............................................................................................x
LIST OF TABLES...................................................................................................xiii
LIST OF FIGURE....................................................................................................xv
Chapter 1 THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND
Introduction................................................................................................1
Background of the Study...........................................................................4
Theoretical Framework..............................................................................7
Conceptual Framework..............................................................................9
Statement of the Problem........................................................................11
Objectives of the Study...........................................................................13
Hypothesis of the Study...........................................................................15
Significance of the Study.........................................................................15
Scope and Delimitation of the Study.......................................................16
Definition of Terms...................................................................................17
Chapter 2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDY
Foreign.....................................................................................................20
Local........................................................................................................24
Chapter 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES
Research Methodology...................................................................................33
Research Design.............................................................................................34
Respondents of the Study...............................................................................34
Instrumentation...............................................................................................36
Validation of the Instrument............................................................................36
Sources of Data..............................................................................................36
Data Gathering Procedure..............................................................................37
Statistical Treatment........................................................................................38
Chapter 4 PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
Chapter 5 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND

..............................................................................................RECOMMENDATIONS
Findings...................................................................................................93
Conclusion.............................................................................................101
Recommendations.................................................................................103
BIBLIOGRAPHY..................................................................................................107
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: CPA's Certification.............................................................109
Appendix 2: Editor Certification..............................................................110
Appendix 3 : Survey Questionnaire........................................................111
Appendix 4 : Unstructured Interview......................................................116
Appendix 5 : Pamphlet...........................................................................118
Appendix 6 : Projected Demand and Supply........................................119
Appendix 7: Request Letters.................................................................143
Appendix 8 : Notes To Financial Statement..........................................145
Appendix 9 : Curriculum Vitae...............................................................151

LIST OF TABLES
Number Title Page
1.1.1 The frequency distribution of the farmers based 41

on their age
on their gender
on their civil status
on their monthly income
on the ownership of the cultivated land
on their land area
the type of vegetable that they raised
on the kilos of crops/vegetables produced per year
on the number of times they harvest crops within
a year
on the expenses they incurred in growing and
maintaining the crop production until the day

of harvest
on their start-up capital when raising vegetable
crops
on the return of capital per cropping
2.1 Traditional Way of Farming 53
2.2 SNAP Hydroponics 54
3 Significant Difference 55
4.1 Technical Aspects 57
4.2 Management Aspects 68
4.3 Socio Economic Aspects 70


LIST OF FIGURE
Number Title Page
1 Conceptual Paradigm 10
College of Business Administration and Accountancy

1
Chapter 1
THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND
Introduction
Nowadays, as advancement of technology strikes, the increasing need for space
is turning out to be an area of concern especially to many agricultural lands that
were turned into lands used in constructing commercial buildings or subdivision.
In this case, farmers need to think of possible solution to look for an area to plant
their crops that will serve as an alternative way of farming. Since there could be
no place in our lands and our country has a remaining 1830 sq.km being the total
water area, this could be a way to grow plants. This method is popularly known as
hydroponics.
Hydroponics is a subset of hydro culture and is a method of growing plants
using mineral nutrient solutions in water, without soil. Terrestrial plants may be
grown with their roots in the mineral solution which produces the same or much
better outcome for harvested crops than the traditional way of planting it in the
soil. SNAP (Simple Nutrient Additional Program) hydroponics solution is
composed of different levels of nutrients separated in two concentrates which are
the SNAP A and SNAP B. These SNAP's can act as fertilizers since the
developers of the product made it a point of what most the plants need for it to
survive.

2
This SNAP Technology could be done based on readily available materials
that are usually found in the regular households. The system uses passive
aeration, which does not require the use of electricity. By embracing practices
such as hydroponics, gardeners do not have to worry about weeding soil borne
diseases, when to fertilize, spraying pesticides, tilling, soil texture and the like. It
introduces the easy way of growing fruits and vegetables that are surely healthier
since it has been proven that vitamin content is 50% more in hydroponically grown
plants as compared to conventional ones. It is helpful to the farmers whose only
job is farming but do not have an enough location for it or only renting the land
they cultivate.
In 50-60 years, researchers believed that hydroponics farming will move
from being the trendy way to being the way of the future of urban cities. It is
advantageous since many pests are carried in soil, so doing without it generally
gives a more hygienic growing system with fewer problems of disease. The
science of hydroponics proves that the only thing headed to grow plants are water
nutrients, and a method of delivering the plants food to the root system. The soil
itself is simply the backbone for the roots so they have a stable space to grow.
With this, many people are utilizing the benefits of composting and growing their
own food, this trend to protect and sustain our fragile planet is one that will
continue to grow in the future. The movement towards a more health conscious
society on the rise, providing an opportunity for hydroponics and organic farming.

3
The main goal of this technology is to help the small scale farmers and the
households or urban gardeners to be more cost and space efficient when it comes
to both growing plants and environmental consciousness. It promotes hydroponics
as another source of income or as other means of livelihood and also for a
greener urban development. With the help of this, one is able to yield more crops
compared to traditional farming without depending on the size of space where
fertile soil and irrigation is available.


4
Background of the Study
Yearly losses in vegetable production are attributed to less-than-ideal
weather conditions, soil-borne diseases and high incidence of pests. Among the
other ways of agricultural systems, hydroponics appears to be a popular, fit and
acceptable solution for production under conditions of space restrictions or
unavailability of soil which is evident now in Cabuyao City particularly in Barangay
San Isidro because of residential development through construction of
subdivisions.
However, most hydroponics systems that are available in the country are
input-intensive, requiring a large amount of capital or with that of a greenhouse
which cost for a million. In response, Simple Nutrient Addition Program (SNAP)
hydroponics was conceived and designed to meet the need for a low-cost system
suited for household-level and small-scale commercial vegetable production. The
system employs passive aeration with no electricity required of the nutrient
solution and the ability of the vegetable crop to adapt to waterlogged conditions.
Vegetables such as lettuce, sweet pepper, cucumber and celery have been
successfully grown using SNAP hydroponics which is advised for the beginners
but for those who are into soil less gardening, plants like watermelon and eggplant

5
can also be. The bases and methodology for setting up SNAP hydroponics are
presented together with the results of production trials of selected crops. As an
example, growth of SNAP-grown lettuce is more rapid and harvest is earlier than
soil-grown plants.
Cost and return analysis for leaf-lettuce production indicates that profits
can be realized as early as the first year using the system, with returns on
investment averaging 57%. The system is ideal for restricted spaces typical in
urban areas, provided that there is sunlight, air movement and a rain shelter. The
potentials for widespread household adoption and small-scale commercial
application of SNAP hydroponics are high. According to Dr. Chito Protacio, who
heads the UPLB Institute of Plant Breeding, anyone can now start producing
vegetables, ranging from lettuce to high-end lettuce to the ordinary tomatoes,
eggplants using mineral nutrient solutions in water, instead of the traditional dirt
medium. Since it is not plant outdoors, this system is considered safe during
flooding and the typhoon months, provided that some pre-emptive measures were
taken. And when the dry months came, it is estimated that it only uses about 5%
of water required for growing the same vegetables in the soil. The UP LB-Institute
of Plant Breeding noted that SNAP hydroponics could actually be commercially
successful as a sustainable growing system in the country.


6
Dr. Primitivo said that according to observations, the earlier the roots were
subjected to anoxic conditions, the more likely they would grow as if they were
grown in an aerated environment. Early production of adventitious roots with
bigger intercellular spaces would enable them to survive waterlogging (Lopez &
Del Rosario 1983). The researchers conducted the study to promote to the
Barangay San Isidro of City of Cabuyao the benefits of the system we call SNAP
(Simple Nutrient Addition Program) Hydroponics to denote the ease by which the
technology can be used. It can help the Brgy. San Isidro farmers in earning
additional profit when it is not yet harvesting in the field and also give them
knowledge of the new agricultural technology who will engaged in this SNAP
hydroponics. The simplicity of this technology is that it make all year round home
vegetables production possible than the traditional way. It can be one of the better
alternatives for increasing the per capita intake of nutritious vegetables as well as
improving the household income. It suits well in urban areas and where space is
limited or the soil is not suitable for gardening. With the increased popularity of
hydroponics in the Philippines and its identification as an alternative crop
production system, SNAP hydroponics can serve as an inexpensive and less
intimidating introductory system for those who wish to venture into hydroponics.

7
Theoretical Framework
The bases for the identification and introduction of the benefits of this study
got its theoretical foundations from various theoretical works of different authors.
Ricardo (2005) believes that the key factor in economic growth is land. This
means that agriculture plays a major role in economic development and that
people cannot live without food and natural resources. But since the construction
of commercial buildings and subdivision arise and those lands that are allocated
for agriculture turned out to be an area shopping malls, the use for water as a
medium in planting is an alternative way.
Solow (1987) argued that half of economic growth cannot be accounted for
by the increases in capital and labor. This unaccounted for portion of economic
growth termed as the Solow residual is attributed to technological innovation.
Furthermore, Nicholas Kaldor (n.d.) claimed that technology is one of the key
factors of economic growth. His theory of growth explains the application of
modern technology in the operation of goods and services. He said that the use of
technologies is very important in economic development just like in hydroponics
technology as the farming of the future.


8
The Kaldor theory states that the key factor in economic growth is the
technology. This explains the application of the advancement of technology in the
production of goods and services like in the countries of United States of America,
Great Britain, France, Italy and Germany. Just like in the case of Japan, it can
raise vegetables without the use of soil. Only the fertilized water is used to grow
them which is an example of hydroponics as an urban gardening.
There are a number of theoretical explanations as to why people may want
to get involved in urban gardening related to personal interest and personal
needs. It is possible to relate these to the classical hierarchy developed by
Maslow (1943) who present five essential needs, with each representing a level
which has to be fulfilled before the next level can be satisfied. The levels are: (1)
physiological (2) safety (3) love and belonging (4) esteem and (5) self-
actualization.
Motives to engage in urban gardening can be related to Maslows need at
different levels. An example is that food production fits to the first need in the
hierarchy while on the contrary, socio-cultural relations related to love and
belonging. Also is the peoples inborn affinity to seek contact with other living
things such as plants and animals suggested by the biophilia hypothesis (Kellert
and Wilson 1993).


9
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework of the study is anchored on the different
theories discussed in theoretical framework. The integration of these theories to
form a single concept is exhibited in Figure 1.
The Input-Process-Output model is to outline the conceptual framework of the
study. The input box contains the input variables such as the edge of using
hydroponics as alternative way of farming and the factors that affect the growth of
hydroponics plants. The process box shows the methods done to analyze the
data about the input variables. It indicates that a survey was performed using a
self-structured questionnaire to gather primary data, and the statistical tools used
in data analysis. In addition, the output box demonstrates the final outcome of the
study. This is the introduction of SNAP Hydroponics to the farmers of City Of
Cabuyao Laguna as another way of farming. Also noted is the presence of a
feedback loop connecting the output box to the input box. This loop implies that
should changes on the output occur in the future, then it necessitate that a change
or modification on the input variables must be done. Thus, the cycle is
accomplished repeatedly.

10
Input Process Output
Demographic
Profile :
Age
Gender
Civil Status
Monthly Income
Data Gathering
The respondents Procedure
level of acceptability
on the SNAP Survey
Hydroponics in
terms of: Interview
Quality of Harvest
Quantityof Harvest Observation
Projected Business
Significant difference Data Analysis Plan
between traditional
and SNAP Percentage
hydroponics in terms
of: Weighted Mean
Qualityof Harvest
Quantity ofHarvest
T-test
The aspects to be
considered in the
introduction of SNAP
Hydroponics as a
source of income :
Technical Aspects
Management
Aspects
Socio-Economic
Aspects
FEEDBACK
Figure 1. The Conceptual Framework

11
Statement of the Problem
This study was conducted to determine the viability and feasibility of
introducing SNAP Hydroponics to the Farmers of the City of Cabuyao as a source
of income. Specifically, this study aimed to answer the following considerations
and problem:
1. What is the demographic profile of the respondents in terms of :
1.1 age
1.2 gender
1.3 civil status

1.4 monthly income?
2. What is the respondents level of acceptability on the SNAP Hydroponics in
terms of:
2.1 quality of harvest
2.2 quantity of harvest?


12
3. Is there a significant difference between the traditional and SNAP
hydroponics in terms of:
3.1 quality of harvest
3.2 quantity of harvest?
4. What are the aspects to be considered in the introduction of SNAP Hydroponics
as a source of income :
4.1 Technical Aspects
4.2 Management Aspects
4.3.Socio-Economic Aspects
4.4 Financial Aspect?
5. What business plan can be proposed based from the results of the study in
terms of:
5.4 Financial Aspect?


13
Objectives of the Study
1. To determine the demographic profile of the respondents in terms of :
1.1 Age
1.2 Gender
1.3 Civil Status
1.4 Monthly Income
2. To determine the respondents level of acceptability on the SNAP Hydroponics
in terms of:
2.1 Quality of Harvest
2.2 Quantity of Harvest
3. To determine if there is a significant difference between the traditional and
SNAP hydroponics in terms of:
3.1 Quality of Harvest
3.2 Quantity of Harvest


14
4. To determine the aspects to be considered in the introduction of SNAP
Hydroponics as a source of income:
4.3 Socio-Economic Aspects
4.4 Financial Aspects
5. Business plan can be proposed based from the results of the study in terms of:
5.4 Financial Aspect


15
Hypothesis of the Study
Null Hypothesis (Ho)
There is no significant difference between the traditional and SNAP
hydroponics in terms of quality.
Alternative Hypothesis (Ha)
There is a significant difference between the traditional and SNAP

hydroponics in terms of quantity.
Significance of the Study
The Researchers. This study helps them to acquire insights and useful
information on the essence of hydroponics to the extent that they can use it as a
source of income or supply of food in the near future.
Furthermore, this study helps future researchers to enhance and
widespread the information and benefits stated in the study and will serve as their
guide that can help the farmers who want to start up hydroponics as a way of
farming system.
Local Government. As they would make programs that may help the
farmers to improve their source of income and promote the technology on Simple
Nutrient Addition Program (SNAP) hydroponics for wider adoption and utilization.

16
To the Farmers. This study aims to improve the source of income of the
farmers. They will also be benefited because hydroponics system works efficiently
and cheaply. Most of the farmers dont have their own land to cultivate,
hydroponics can be performed as long as grown requirements are met.
Scope and Delimitation of the Study
This study focused to the introduction of an urban agriculture which is the
SNAP Hydroponics that is restricted only to the farmers of Brgy. San Isidro, City of
Cabuyao, Laguna. This study may also shows comparison between the qualities
and quantities of the plants produced in hydroponics or in planting at the soil.
Furthermore, this study only limits in the production of lettuce though there are
several crops can be produced through it.
The study was conducted during SY 2016-2017.


17
Definition of Terms
The following definition of terms is provided for better understanding to the
study:
Aeration - is the process by which air is circulated through, mixed with
or dissolved in a liquid or substance.
Biophilia hypothesis - suggests that there is an instinctive bond
between human beings and other living systems.
Farming - the practice of cultivating the land .
Fumigation - is a method of pest control that completely fills an area with
gaseous pesticidesor fumigantsto suffocate or poison the pests within.
Hydroponically grown - crop grown in mineral solution called Simple
Nutrient Addition Program or SNAP.
Hydroponics - is a subset of hydroculture and is a method of
growing plants using mineral nutrient solutions, in water, without soil.
Irrigation - is the method in which water is supplied to plants at regular
intervals for agriculture.


18
Management Aspect - it refers to a business plan on how the person in
charge sees things and runs things.
Medium - the material that your plant is growing in such as soil and coco coir.
Pesticides - are substances meant for attracting, seducing, and then
destroying any pest.
Produce - is a generalized term for a group of farm-produced crops and
goods, including fruits and vegetables meats, grains, oats, etc. are also
sometimes considered produce.
Simple Nutrient Addition Program or SNAP - is a low-cost hydroponics
nutrient solution that supply what the plant needs to grow.
Socio-Economic Aspect - it involves the relationship between social and
economic factors that influence how a particular group, or socioeconomic
class, act within society including their actions as consumers and may have
varying priorities regarding how they direct their funds.
Soil borne diseases - are caused by microorganisms that survive and move
about in the soil that makes the plant become sickly, stunted and near death.

19
Soil less - way of planting without the use of soil which is the common
medium in gardening.
Terrestrial plants - is a plant that grows on or in or from land
Technical Aspect - discussed the basic and operation flow of the project.
This includes the list of equipment, materials, structure plan and also the
source of the supplies use in the proposed project.
Tilling - is the agricultural preparation of soil by mechanical agitation of
various types, such as digging, stirring, and overturning.


20
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDY
Every piece of ongoing research needs to be connected with the work
already done to attain an overall relevance and purposes. The review of literature
thus becomes a link between the research and the studies already done.
Related Literature and Study
Foreign
Hydroponics is a system of agriculture that utilizes nutrient-haden water
rather than soil for plant nourishment. It is very helpful to those who are living in
urban areas for it does not require natural precipitation or fertile soil to become
effective. Hydroponics is emerging as a popular hobby since it provides many
advantages over traditional soil gardening. More gardeners are interested in
growing their food, indoors, all year round though with this soil less method
(McKelvey, 2013).
Hydroponics allow the plant to uptake its food with less effort compared to
the effect it uses to uptake its food from soil. This method does not require
pesticides, require less water and space that the traditional agricultural system. It
may be stacked in order to limit space use (Growing Power, 2011). In the

21
traditional way of gardening, theres a threat of water waste via poorly-timed
irrigation but in hydroponics, it can be a subject to limitation.
Hydroponically grown plants are more resistant to water with a high salt
content. Labor work such as tilling, cultivating, fumigation and watering is not a
requirement because it is a soil less method of gardening.
Hydroponics does not spoil the genetic characteristics of plants.
Regardless, of the growing method used, plant growth and fruit production will not
exceed what is genetically possible. This system does offer the ability to control
the water supply and the needed essential nutrients elements to plant roots,
thereby ensuring a continuous optimum supply which can in turn enhance a plant
performance (J. Benton Jones Jr.,2014)
Since hydroponics system is an effective way of increasing the crop
production and yield, it has been gaining popularity in todays agriculture industry.
Table 1 shows the crops grown in soil are less productive than the crops grown in
hydroponics.

22
Table 1: Comparative Yields per Hectare of Soil less Culture.
CROP SOIL SOILLESS

Soya 673kg 1.74 tons
Beans 12.3tons 52tons
Peas 2.5tons 22.2tons
Wheat 673kg 4.6tons
Oats 1ton 2.8tons
Potatoes 19.8tons 172.8tons
Cabbage 14.6tons 20.2tons
Lettuce 10tons 23.6tons
Tomatoes 12-25tons 158-741tons
Cucumber 7.9tons 31.4tons
All hydroponics system in temperate regions are enclosed inside
greenhouses for the protection of crops against strong winds and rain. It provides
a system for controlling temperature; reducing loss of water due to evaporation
and control of pest and diseases.
COMPONENTS OF HYDROPONICS SYSTEM
1. Growing Medium/Media
Aggregate type - use of soil substitute basically for root anchorage and
aeration.(e.g coco coir dust, volcanic cinder)


23
Non-aggregate (water culture) - growing of plants in hydroponics when the
roots are hanging and submerged in a firm or volume of a nutrient
solution.
2. Protective Shelter - protective structures can either be plastic film
greenhouse or a glasshouse.
3. Water Delivery System
Fertigation (aggregate) - uses a network of hoses with drippers laid on the
growing beds and run by a computer-controlled pump.
Nutrient Film Technique (water culture) - a form of nutrient solution runs
along a slightly inclined pipes that hold the growing plants.
Container Type (water culture) - a volume of nutrient solution is fed to the
plants manually or semi-manually.
Local
SNAP Hydroponics is a system that uses an inert media and nutrient
solution containing essential elements which are needed by the plants grow. This
system was developed by Dr. Santos together with Dr. Eureka Teresa M. Ocampo

24
of UPLB from a project funded by BAR. It was primarily designed for urban
farming and backyard vegetable farming systems (Rita dela Cruz,2011).
Dr. Santos explained that their objective was to develop a low cost
hydroponics system because most of the Filipino farmers cant afford the imported
one. Santos also said that SNAP technology is apt for leafy vegetables. These
plants are very easy to grow. Santos pointed out that the difference between
SNAP and other forms of hydroponics system is their nutrient solution, which
theyve developed. It is called the complete fertilizer because it contains all the
essential nutrients that the plants need. The SNAP nutrient solution is also
affordable. Based on their economic studies, a farmer can easily get around more
than 50% of their return-on-investment if they use this technology.
According to Dr. Primitivo, this type of farming is easy to set up and more
practical than the traditional farming system. It only occupies minimal space
hence it is doable in urban setting where small terraces or sometimes rooftops
can be used for growing crops. Aside from that, materials and supplies used can
be purchase in a cheaper value and can be sourced out from recyclable materials.
He stated that one could grow high-value vegetables such as lettuce, celery and
cabbage. Through this, people will have fresh and readily available vegetables in
their table.

25
SNAP hydroponics has features of the modern hydroponics but differ in terms of
the following:
1. Low cost - designed in such a way that farmers can reduce their
operating costs. Farmers can save in terms of energy requirement since
SNAP does not depend on electricity. It is not capital or input unlike the
modern hydroponics.
2. Environment friendly - 90% of the needed to set-up the system comes
from recyclable and reusable materials such as Styrofoam boxes and cups
(for seedling plug). Styrofoam boxes have a life span of about 5 years.
3. Promotes passive aeration - still water culture is incorporated in the
system, wherein the nutrient solution can be enriched with oxygen by
ensuring that the air flows freely into the pot and into the nutrient solution.
Energy is saved because the system is not dependent on electricity.
4. Good quality of harvest - SNAP-grown plants are more succulent and
tasty as compared to soil-grown plants. Grown of crops is more rapid, thus
harvest is also earlier. This implies that more cropping can be done in a
year, therefore high return on investments.


26
5. Pesticide free - since soil borne diseases are eliminated, there is no
room for the use of pesticides.
6. Simple to set-up, easy to maintain and operate - start-up is easy
because it has no major technicalities involved, farmers will easily
understand and operate the system. This system has also low
manpower requirement.
7. Ideal for limited spaces - promotes vegetable production even in urban
areas because it does not consume so much space. It is also typical for
home-based and small scale vegetable production.
Table 2. Serial production trials on lettuce conducted under SNAP & soil
culture during from October 2000 to March 2001

27
Variety Type Date of Trial Range of Yield

(grams/plant)
SNAP Soil
President Heading Oct - Dec 2000 11-321 -
Oct - Dec 2000 62-307 13-268
Seven Wonders Cos Jan - Feb 2001 7-131 19-108
Feb - Mar 2001 11-138 10-131
Denies Green Leaf Feb - Mar 2001 (a) 16-61 3-17
Feb - Mar 2001 (b) 13-62 8-49
Summer Gold Head Feb - Mar 2001 19-101 4-61

Seoul Green Leaf Feb - Mar 2001 9-47 7-85
Minetto Head Feb - Mar 2001 55-135 18-118
Box Hill Head Feb - Mar 20001 54-171 13-207
Table 2. Average plant weight for lettuce grown in SNAP hydroponics at
the IPB greenhouse from October to November 2002
Variety Average weight per plant

(grams)
Seoul Green 41.7

Denise Red 48.9
Lollo Bionda 28.7
Lollo Rossa 25.9
Seven Wonders 55.6
Mignonette Green 53.3
Summer Gold 106.6
President 79.4
Minetto 43.0

28
Table 3. Yield of five sweet pepper varieties under SNAP hydroponics at the
IPB greenhouse from February to May 2000
Variety Number of fruits Fruit size , Yield per plant,

per plant grams grams
All Season 10.1a 11.5c 106.7b
Bless 9.2a 14.2bc 111.1b
Maharlika 5.8b 37.8a 211.2a
Yolo wonder 4.5b 24.9abc 95.6b
California Wonder 4.3b 30.16ab 133.0b
Table 4. Yield of 5 varieties of cucumber grown in still water culture in

screenhouse
Variety Number of fruits Yield(grams/plant) Fruit length (cm)

per plant
Cu98-491 2.4 532.6 25.6ab
Cu98-492 2.3 669.7 27.3a

29
Cu98-490 1.5 166.4 21.2b

Cu98-289 1.0 276.3 27.0a
Cu98-288 1.0 169.3 24.3ab
NS NS *
NS= not significant, * - significant at P=0.05 (DMRT)
CROPS PRODUCED THROUGH THE TRADITIONAL WAY OF FARMING THAT
CAN BE PLANTED THROUGH THE SOLUTION NUTRIENT ADDITION
PROGRAM (SNAP) HYDROPONICS :
1. Lettuce
Lettuce (Lactuca sativa) is an annual plant of the daisy family, Asteraceae.
It is most often grown as a leaf vegetable, but sometimes for its stem and seeds.
Lettuce is most often used for salads, although it is also seen in other kinds of
food, such as soups, sandwiches and wraps; it can also be grilled.


30
Most lettuce varieties mature in 45 to 55 days, allowing many gardeners to
plant two or even three crops. But looseleaf and butterhead leaves can be
harvested at just about any time in their development. Heading varieties take
longer to mature. Romaine takes 75 to 85 days and crisphead 70 to 100 days.
Lettuce can be harvested any time after true leaves form. For the best
quality, better to pick early than late as lettuce allowed to grow too long may be
bitter and tough..
2. Pechay
Pechay (Brassica rapa L. cv group Pak Choi) is an erect, biennial herb,
cultivated as an annual about 15-30 cm tall in vegetative stage. Ovate leaves are
arranged spirally and spreading. The petioles are enlarged and grow upright
forming a subcylindrical bundle. Inflorescence is a raceme with pale yellow
flowers. Seeds are 1 mm in diameter and are reddish to blackish brown in color.
Pechay is used mainly for its immature, but fully expanded tender leaves. The
succulent petioles are often the preferred part. It is used as main ingredient for
soup and stir-fried dishes. In Chinese cuisine, its green petioles and leaves are
also used as garnish. Pechay can be grown from low to mid elevations throughout
the year. Production is best, however, during the dry season in sandy to clay loam
soil, with a pH of 5.5-6.5. Harvest as early as three weeks after planting or


31
between 30-40 days after sowing. Harvest preferably in the afternoon to minimize
postharvest losses.
3. Kangkong
Kangkong or Kangkung (Ipomoea aquatica) is a semiaquatic, tropical plant
that flourishes naturally in water and moist soil. Kangkong is an edible plant
harvested as a leaf vegetable. Kangkong thrives in tropical and subtropical
regions and is more commonly found in Southeast Asian countries. Kangkong
can grow rapidly spreading through waterways forming floating mats that can
block water flow and passage of small water crafts. The USDA categorized
kangkong as a noxius weed and is included in prohibited aquatic plant list.
Kangkong is a herbaceous trailing shiny vine with milky sap. The stems are
hollow, rooting at nodes, usually found trailing in moist soil or floating in aquatic
locations. Kangkong leaves are alternate, simple, in the shape of arrow heads
about 314 cm (16 in) long. The hollow vines float on water and the leaves are
held above the water line. Kangkong bears trumpet like flowers whose petals are
white or pink-lilac with mauve color at the center. Kangkong has oval or spherical
seed pods that contains 1 to 4 gray seeds which may be used for planting.

32
Chapter 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES
Research Methodology
This study was conducted to evaluate the level of acceptability of produced
crops from SNAP Hydroponics as a source of income to the farmers of Barangay
San Isidro City of Cabuyao Laguna. To gather the necessary data, the

33
researchers used the descriptive research method. The target respondents were
determined by inquiring to the Barangay officials the list of registered farmers in
the area. The study was only conducted in Barangay San Isidro.. The survey
methods are the primary research instruments that will be used for the data
gathering.
The chosen respondents have accomplished a self-constructed
questionnaire made by the researchers and the respondents were interviewed.
The results of the survey questionnaire were analyzed and interpreted.
This chapter is dedicated to describe the methods and procedures done in
order to collect the necessary data, how are they analyzed and interpreted, and
how the conclusions are met. This chapter presents the following: the
respondents of the study, sampling technique, research instruments, procedure of
data gathering and statistical treatment that will be used for accurate data analysis
and interpretation.
Research Design
This study utilized the descriptive research method.Descriptive research is
used to describe personal variables or essential features of the subject matter of
the research, especially in describing or analyzing exploratory data.An experiment


34
is a study in which a treatment, procedure, or program is intentionally introduced
and a result or outcome is observed. This study is focused on introducing the
SNAP Hydroponics to the farmers of Barangay San Isidro in the City of Cabuyao
Laguna and evaluating their level of acceptability, the descriptive method is the
most appropriate method to use.
Respondents of the Study
The respondent of the study includes farmers from Barangay San Isidro
City of Cabuyao Laguna. This is because the proponent of the research believes
that those chosen respondents can give the most accurate data about the
introduction of SNAP Hydroponics. All of the respondents are selected using
simple random sampling method. This sampling method is used because all
members of the population have an equal chance to become part of the sample.
Herein, there are 44 respondents for the questionnaire survey.
Slovins Formula:
Where:

35
n = sample size e = error N = population
To apply:
50
n= 1 50 ( 0.05) 2
n = 44
Instrumentation
The researchers used self- constructed questionnaires . The respondents
was given some time to answer the questionnaire. The researchers also used
unstructured interview that clarifies the answers given by the respondents in the
questionnaires and gathered additional information pertaining to the study. The
researchers used related books, journals, reports, and other unpublished thesis
and feasibility study found in the library.


36
Validation of the Instrument
The researchers consulted some knowledgeable persons on how to
prepare a questionnaire which was used as the primary research instrument by
the researchers. The questionnaire is formulated by the researchers and is
presented to their adviser and statistician for further improvement.
Sources of Data
Two types of data are used: the primary and secondary data. The primary
data are the first hand information obtained from the answers of the respondents
to the questionnaires and the information gathered from the unstructured
interview. The secondary data are the second hand information obtained from
documents such as books, feasibility study, reports and recent literature related to
the research study.
Data Gathering Procedure
The pertinent data and information was obtained through survey
questionnaires and unstructured interview.
The survey questionnaires are disseminated,answered by the respondents
then collected and the data will be tallied, tabulated and was presented to the
researchers statistician. With the used of the chosen statistical tools, collected

37
data are analyzed and interpreted mathematically and logically. Unstructured
interviews conducted, gives the researchers a chance to get first-hand information
from persons who are in position to assess the situation and at the same time
analyze the situation.
Statistical Treatment
1. Frequency and percentage distributions - is a tool for organizing data.
This statistical tool is to describe the parts in relation to its whole. It is used
by the researchers in presenting the demographic profile of the
respondents.
The formula is presented in this form:


38
f
x100
%= x
Where:
% = percentage
f = frequency
n = the sample size
2. Weighted Mean it is used when the options to the items of the
questionnaires are assigned points. This statistical tool is used by the
researchers to determine the benefits of growing plants using the SNAP
hydroponics system to the residents of City of Cabuyao, Laguna.
The formula is presented in this form
fxi
N
X=
Where:
x = arithmetic mean

39
= summation of response
f = frequency
xi = weighted
N = total population
3. T-test - T test is used to compare two different set of values. It is generally
performed on a small set of data. T-test is generally applied to normal
distribution which has a small set of values. This test compares the mean
of two samples. It uses means and standard deviations of two samples to
make a comparison. It is used to determine the significance.
The formula is presented in this form
x1 x2
T
s12 s22

n1 n2
Where:

40
X1= Mean of the first set of values
X2= Mean of second set of values
S1= Standard deviation of first set of values
S2 = Standard deviation of second set of values
N1= Total number of values in first set
N2= total number of values in second set
Chapter 4
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter presents the results and discussion of the important details of
the study. Tables and their respective description and interpretation are discussed
comprehensively.
1. What is the profile of the selected farmers in Brgy. San Isidro, City of
Cabuyao, Laguna in terms of:
1.1 Demographic Profile
1.1.1 Age
Table 1.1.1 The frequency distribution of the farmers based on their age

41
AGE F RF(%)
Below 20 0 0
20-29 2 4.55
30-39 3 6.82
40-49 11 25
50-59 15 34.09
60 or above 13 29.54
TOTAL 44 100.00
f frequency RF relative frequency
Table 1.1 .1 shows the frequency distribution of the farmers based on their
age. Majority of the farmers ages from 50-59 (15 or 34.09%), followed by farmers
with ages that range from 60 or above (29.54%), 11 farmers (25%) have ages of
40-49, 3 farmers having an age that range from 30-39, 2 farmers ranges from 20-
29 and none ranges from 20 below.
1.1.2 Gender
Table 1.1.2 The frequency distribution of the farmers based on their gender
GENDER F RF(%)
Male 34 77.27
Female 10 22.73
TOTAL 44 100.00

42
Table 1.1.2 shows the frequency distribution of the farmers based on their
gender. There are 34 male farmers (77.27%) and 10 female farmers (22.73%).
Majority of the farmers are male.
1.1.3 Civil Status
Table 1.1.3. The frequency distribution of the farmers based on their civil
status
Civil Status F RF(%)

Single 4 9.09
Married 32 72.73
Widow or Widower 8 18.18
Separated 0 0
TOTAL 44 100.00
civil status. There are 4 farmers (9.09%) who are single, 32 farmers are married
(72.73%) are married, 8 of them are widow or widower (18.18%) and none were
separated.

43
1.1.4 Monthly Income
Table 1.1.4. The frequency distribution of the farmers based on their

monthly income
MONTHLY INCOME F RF(%)

P 0 to P 5,000 35 79.55
P 5,001 to P 10,000 5 11.36
P 10,001 to P 15,000 4 9.09
P 15,001 to P 20,000 0 0
P 20,001 or above 0 0
TOTAL 44 100.00
monthly income. There 35 farmers (79.55%) who have P 0 - 5,000 monthly
income, 5 farmers (11.36%) who have P 5,001-10,000 monthly income, 4 farmers
(9.09%) who have P 10,001 - 15,000 and none of them have a monthly income of
P15,000 and above.


44
1.2 Farming
1.2.1 Ownership of the cultivated land
Table 1.2.1 The frequency distribution of the farmers based on the

ownership of the cultivated land
Particulars F RF(%)
Yes 4 9.09
No 40 90.91
TOTAL 44 100.00
Table 1.2.1 shows that majority of the farmers (90.91%) dont have their
own land and there are 4 farmers (9.09%) who have their own.

45
1.2.2 Land Area
Table 1.2.2 The frequency distribution of the farmers based on their land
area
Particulars F RF(%)
1000 sq.m and below 8 18.18
1001-3000 sq m 0 0
3001-6000 sq.m 2 4.55
6001-9000 sq m 4 9.09
Above 9000 sq.m 30 68.18
TOTAL 44 100.00
Table 1.2.2 shows that majority of the farmers (30 or 68.18%) have a total
land area that is above 9000sq.m. On the other hand, 8 farmers (18.18%) have
1000 sq.m land area, 2 farmers (4.55%) have 3001-6000sq.m and 4 farmers
(9.09%) have 6001-9000sq.m.


46
1.2.3 Type of Vegetable
Table 1.2.3 The frequency distribution of the farmers based on the type of
vegetable that they raised
Particulars F RF(%)
Lettuce 0 0
Pechay 6 13.64
Kangkong 2 4.55
Squash 11 25
Others ( legumes, rice 25 56.81
grain, okra, garlic and
upo)
TOTAL 44 100.00
Table 1.2.3 shows that 25 farmers (56.81%) have raised crops like
legumes, rice grain, okra, garlic and upo. There are 11 farmers (25%) who raised
squash, 6 farmers (13.64%) raised pechay and 2 farmers who raised kangkong
as crops.

47
1.2.4 Kilos of crops/vegetables produced per cropping
Table 1.2.4 The frequency distribution of the farmers based on the kilos of
crops/vegetables produced per year
Particulars F RF(%)
0 - 50 kilos 4 9.09
51 - 100 kilos 6 13.64
101 - 150 kilos 6 13.64
151 - 200 kilos 12 27.27
Above 200 kilos 16 36.36
TOTAL 44 100.00
Table 1.2.4 shows that majority of the farmers (16 or 36.36%) harvest more
than 200 kilos per cropping. There are 12 farmers (27.27%) who harvest 151-200
kilos of crops, 6 farmers (13.64%) who harvest 101-150 kilos per cropping, 6
farmers (13.64%) who harvest 51-100 kilos of crops and 4 farmers (9.09%) who
harvest 0-50 kilos of crops per cropping.
1.2.5 Number of times they harvest crops within a year


48
Table 1.2.5 The frequency distribution of the farmers based on the number
of times they harvest crops within a year
Particulars F RF(%)
13 42 95.45
4 -6 2 4.55
7 or above 0 0
TOTAL 44 100.00
Table 1.2.5 shows that 42 farmers (95.45 %) harvest crops 1-3 times a year
, 2 farmers (4.55%) harvest 4-6 times a year and none of them harvest 7 times or
above per year.
1.2.6 Expenses incurred in growing and maintaining the crop production until the
day of harvest

49
Table 1.2.6 The frequency distribution of the farmers based on the

expenses they incurred in growing and maintaining the crop production
until the day of harvest
Particulars F RF(%)
P 0 - 10,000 12 27.27
P 10,001 - 20,000 7 15.91
P 20,001 - 30,000 6 13.64
P 30,001 - 40,000 2 4.55
P 40,001 - 50,000 12 27.27
P 50,001 or above 5 11.36
TOTAL 44 100.00
Table 1.2.6 shows that 12 farmers (27.27%) incurred P 0 - 10,000
expenses per cropping, 7 farmers (15.91%) incurred P 10,001 - 20,000 expenses
per cropping, 6 farmers (13.64%) incurred P 20,001 - 30,000 expenses per
cropping, 2 farmers (4.55%) incurred P 30,001 - 40,000 expenses per cropping,
12 farmers (27.27%) incurred P 40,001 - 50,000 expenses per cropping and 5
farmers (11.36%) incurred P 50,001 or above expenses per cropping.
1.2.7 Start-up capital when raising vegetable crops
Table 1.2.7 The frequency distribution of the farmers based on their start-up
capital when raising vegetable crops
Particulars F RF(%)

50
P 0 - 10,000 12 27.27
P 10,001 - 20,000 7 15.91
P 20,001 - 30,000 6 13.64
P 30,001 - 40,000 2 4.55
P 40,001 - 50,000 12 27.27
P 50,001 or above 5 11.36
TOTAL 44 100.00
Table 1.2.7 shows that 12 farmers(27.27%) used P 0 - 10,000 as a start-up
capital, 7 farmers (15.91%)used P 10,001 - 20,000 as a start-up capital, 6
farmers (13.64%) used P 20,001 - 30,000 as a start-up capital, 2 farmers (4.55%)
used P 30,001 - 40,000 as a start-up capital, 12 farmers (27.27%) used P 40,001
- 50,000 as a start-up capital and 5 farmers (11.36%) used P 50,001 or above as
a start-up capital.
1.2.8 Return on Capital per one cropping
Table 1.2.8 The frequency distribution of the farmers based on the return of
capital per cropping
Particulars F RF(%)
P 0 - 10,000 8 18.18
P 10,001 - 20,000 6 13.64
P 20,001 - 30,000 7 15.91
P 30,001 - 40,000 2 4.55

51
P 40,001 - 50,000 7 15.91

P 50,001 or above 14 31.82
TOTAL 44 100.00
Table 1.2.8 shows that 8 farmers (18.18%) realized P 0 - 10,000 gain per
cropping , 6 farmers (13.64%)realized P 10,001 - 20,000 gain per cropping, 7
farmers (15.91%) realized P 20,001 - 30,000 gain per cropping , 2 farmers
(4.55%) realized P 30,001 - 40,000 gain per cropping, 7 farmers (15.91%)
realized P 40,001 - 50,000 gain per cropping and 14 farmers (31.82%) realized P
50,001 or above gain per cropping.
Table 2 : Level of Acceptability
The following scale was used in determining the knowledge of the farmers
regarding the aspect considered
SCALE INTERPRETATION
4.50 - 5.00 Highly Acceptable
3.50 - 4.49 Acceptable


52
2.50 - 3.49 Average
1.50 -2.49 Somewhat Acceptable
1.00 - 1.49 Not Acceptable
Table 2.1 Level of Acceptability of Farmers in Traditional Way of Farming
Traditional Way of Farming MEAN INTERPRETATION

1. Quality of Harvest 3.59 Acceptable
(Color, Weight, Organic)
2. Quantity of Harvest 3.06 Average
(No. of Yield per Cropping)
OVERALL ASSESSMENT 3.33 Average
Table 2.1 shows that the quality of harvest through traditional way of
farming is acceptable and the quantity of harvest is average. In the overall
assessment, the respondents level of acceptability on the traditional way of
farming in terms of quality and quantity of harvest is average.
It indicates that the farmers are not satisfied on the quality and quality of
the crops due to pests, natural calamity and insects that most of the time destroy
their crops.
Table 2.2 Level of Acceptability of Farmers in SNAP Hydroponics


53
SNAP Hydroponics MEAN INTERPRETATION

1. Quality of Harvest 3.55 Acceptable
(Color, Weight, Organic)
2. Quantity of Harvest 3.66 Acceptable
(No. of Yield per Cropping)
OVERALL ASSESSMENT 3.61 Acceptable
Table 2.2 shows that the quality and quantity of harvest through SNAP
Hydroponics is acceptable. In the overall assessment, the respondents level of
acceptability on the SNAP Hydroponics in terms of quality and quantity of harvest
is acceptable.
It indicates that the farmers are convinced that the SNAP Hydroponics can
become a source of income.
3. Is there a significant difference in quality and quantity of harvest in soil and in
SNAP hydroponics?
Table 3 Summary of t-Test Result on Significant Difference of Quality and

Quantity of Harvest in Soil and in SNAP Hydroponics
Tabulated Computed INTERPRETATION

Value Value
1. Quality of Harvest in 2.617 0.193 Accept Ho ; No
Soil and SNAP Hydroponics
significant difference
2. 2. Quantity of Harvest 2.617 3.148 Reject Ha ; There is
in
significant difference
Soil and SNAP Hydroponics

54
As shown in Table 3, in terms of quality of harvest a computed value of
0.193 is less than the tabulated value of 2.617; therefore the null hypothesis is
accepted. These means that there is no significant difference on the quality of
harvest in soil and in SNAP Hydroponics. In terms of the quantity of harvest a
computed value of 3.148 is greater than the tabulated value of 2.167; therefore
the alternative hypothesis is rejected. These means that there is a significant
difference on the quantity of harvest in soil and in SNAP hydroponics.
4. What are the aspects to be considered in the introduction of SNAP Hydroponics
as a source of income?
4.50 - 5.00 Strongly Agree


55
3.50 - 4.49 Agree
2.50 - 3.49 Maybe
1.50 -2.49 Disagree
1.00 - 1.49 Strongly Disagree
Table 4.1 Technical Aspects
Technical Aspects MEAN INTERPRETATION

1. I am aware of planting using Simple 3.14 Maybe
Nutrient Addition Program or SNAP
hydroponics.
2.The materials are essential to produce a 3.91 Agree
SNAP hydroponics
3.The materials used are affordable and can 3.50 Agree
be found easily.
4.Brgy. San Isidro is an effective and 3.59 Agree
efficient location to conduct SNAP
hydroponics.
OVERALL ASSESSMENT 3.54 Agree

56
Table 4.1 shows the technical aspects to be considered in the introduction
of SNAP Hydroponics as a source of income. Farmers answered mostly maybe
when asked whether they know/aware of what a SNAP Hydroponics is. Farmers
agree that materials are essential to produce a SNAP Hydroponics, affordable
and it can be found easily. They also agree that Brgy. San Isidro is an effective
and efficient location to conduct SNAP hydroponics.
In the overall assessment, the farmers agree that these technical aspects
are to be considered in the introduction of SNAP Hydroponics as a source of
income. It indicates that most of them dont have any idea of what hydroponics is
but upon having a glimpse of it, they've agreed that certain technical aspects are
needed to be considered.
SETTING-UP SNAP HYDROPONICS
A. Establish the Seedlings


57
Materials :
1.Sowing tray shallow box/basin with holes for drainage at the bottom
2.Growing media aged (not the new one) coconut coir dust or charcoaled rice
hull or their mixture; sawdust (possible with the old stock not the new ones), fine
sand (can be combined with coir dust and/or charcoaled rice hull)
3.Seeds
Procedure
1. Fill the sowing tray with a layer of the growing media (about 1 inch thick).
2. Level the media.
3. Scatter the small seeds uniformly and thinly (the amount depending on your
need).
4. Water liberally as needed (expect germination in 3 to 5 days).
5. Grow the seedlings for 10 days before transferring to individual growing
cups (called seedling plugs).
B. Prepare the Seedling Plugs


58
Materials
1. Styrofoam cups (8 to 10 oz)
2. Cutter or knife or hack saw blade
3. Growing media (coconut coir dust)
4. Seedlings
Procedure
1. Prepare the styrofoam cups by making 8 holes (about 1 inch long at the side
and inch at the bottom) using a knife or a cutter.


59
2. Fill the prepared holding cups with the growing media (about inch thick).
3. Transplant the seedlings from the sowing tray. Dig a hole in the middle of
the growing media in the cup. Use a small stick to uproot the seedlings
from the sowing tray with care. Transfer only 1 seedling per cup. Make the
transferred seedling stand firmly by replacing the dug media to the base of
the seedling.
4. Water the seedling plug lightly and carefully.
C. Prepare the Growing Boxes
Materials
A. Styrofoam boxes (example: boxes of imported grapes}


60
B. cutter or knife or used/broken hacksaw blade
Procedure
1. Draw 5 to 6 (for small styrofoam box) or 8 (for big styrofoam box) circles on the
lid/ cover of the box. The diameter of the circle
should be inch smaller than the top diameter of the styrofoam cup of the
seedling plug.
2. Cut out the drawn circles using a saw toothed knife or blade to make holes that
will hold the seedling plugs in place.
D. Running the SNAP Hydroponics


61
Materials
1.Seedling plugs
2.SNAP nutrient solution
3. growing boxes with 10 liters of water each
4. polyethylene plastic sheet
5. benches or stand (optional) where the growing boxes will be placed under a
shelter
6. rain shelter (optional during dry season) or roof awning facing east for the
earliest and longest sunlight duration possible)
Procedure
1. Choose a location where the SNAP hydroponics will be established. The
place should receive the morning sunlight, the earlier and the longer, the
better. Otherwise, do not expect good growth of vegetables when the
plants will just
receive sunlight late in the day. Also, the place should be protected from the rains
(e.g., roof awning) particularly during wet season.
2. Arrange the growing boxes on the bench (optional). Take off the cover/lid.

62
3. Lay in the plastic liner to cover the bottom and all the sides of the box.
4. Fill each growing box with about 10 liters of tap water.
5. Add 75 ml of SNAP A to each box with water then stir well.
6. Add 75 ml of SNAP B to each box then stir well.
7. Put back the cover of the box.
8. Place the seedling plugs on the holes of the cover. See to it that all cups are
inserted evenly and snuggly.
9. See to it that the bottom of the cup is touching the nutrient solution by
inch deep, not any deeper or shallower. If not, add more water until the
desired depth is reached.
10. Examine the boxes for leaks and make some troubleshooting if needed.
11. Visit the set up every morning as early as you can to catch any insect larva
that may eat the plants (the larva is visible in the early morning; after that
they tend to hide from the sun and may be harder to find).
FLOOR PLAN

63
Financial Assumption

64
Operating Schedule and Inventory Control
a The company will operate under fiscal year 2017, with an average of
28 working days per cropping within a year (8 croppings a year)
b Fixed asset are depreciated using the straight line method.
c Furniture and Fixtures assumed Php23,235 per year.
d Light and water will be increased by 5% every year.
e Supplies expense will be increased by 5% every year.
Project Cost
a Provision for income tax are 30% annually
Sales Schedule
a Sales revenue are based from the pedestrian survey as well as from
the average selling price of the menus expecting to increase by 5%
progressively. Selling price is estimated at 80% above cost.
b.Sales Volume is increased by 5% every year.

c.Accounts Receivable is 5% of Total Sales.
d.The gross profit rate is 40% based on selling price.
Labor Classification
a Salaries will be increased by 5% every year.


65
b Eight (8) workers each are based on estimated salary of Php9800 per
month fixed.
Materials
a Cost of direct materials are based from prices gathered in Hydroponics
Garden Supply in Brgy. Sala. The ending inventory is shown expected
of 10% of direct material cost.
b.Ending Inventory is 10% of Materials Required for Production.
Factory Overhead
a Prices of indirect materials are based on prices gathered from garden
supply. All other overhead had a growth rate of 5% per year
Cost of Goods Manufactured
a Raw materials ending are based on the 10% of Raw Materials
available for use. Each amount has a growth rate of 5% per year.
b There is no Work in Process Inventory


66
3.50 - 4.49 Agree
2.50 - 3.49 Maybe
1.50 -2.49 Disagree
Table 4.2 Management Aspects


67
Management Aspects MEAN INTERPRETATION

1.The SNAP hydroponics is easy to 3.73 Agree
conduct.
2.The SNAP hydroponics is less time 3.70 Agree

consuming.
3.The SNAP hydroponics is easier to 3.86 Agree
maintain compared to traditional way of
gardening.
4.The SNAP hydroponics plant growth is 3.64 Agree
faster compared to traditional way of
gardening.
5. Producing crops from SNAP Hydroponics 3.84 Agree
can compete with traditional way of
gardening.
6.The SNAP Hydroponics has a greater 3.52 Agree
yield compared to the traditional way of
gardening.
Table 4.2 shows the marketing aspects to be considered in the introduction
of SNAP Hydroponics as a source of income. Farmers have agree that it is easy
to conduct and is less time consuming. They also agree that it is easier to
maintain, plant growth is faster and has a greater yield compared to the traditional
way of planting and also producing crops from SNAP Hydroponics can compete
with the traditional way of gardening.


68
In the overall assessment, the farmers agree that these marketing aspects
income.
Hydroponic growers stated that they get yields many times greater when
they switch from the conventional method. And it is because hydroponically grown
plants dip their roots directly into nutrient-rich solutions, they get what they need
much more easily than plants growing in soil, so they need much smaller root
systems and can divert more energy into leaf and stem growth.
4.3 Socio-Economic Aspects
3.50 - 4.49 Agree
2.50 - 3.49 Maybe
1.50 -2.49 Disagree


69
Table 4.3 Socio-Economic Aspects
Socio-Economic Aspects MEAN INTERPRETATION

1.The study is beneficial to the farmers of 3.52 Agree
Brgy.San Isidro
2. The study is beneficial to the Brgy.San 3.68 Agree

Isidro.
Table 4.3 shows the socio-economic aspects to be considered in the
introduction of SNAP Hydroponics as a source of income. Farmers have agree
that this study is beneficial to the farmers of Barangay San Isidro and to the
Barangay itself.
It indicates that due to the fact that greater yields can be made through
hydroponics which results to greater income , most of the farmers of Barangay
San Isidro are willing to try the SNAP hydroponics.


70
4.4 Financial Aspect
FINANCIAL STATEMENT
SCHEDULE OF PRODUCTION
FOR THE FIVE-YEAR PERIOD


71

72
SCHEDULE OF OVERHEAD


73
SALES REVENUE


74
SCHEDULES OF SALARIES & WAGES


75
Computation for SSS,Pag-ibig & Philhealth


76

77

78

79
SCHEDULE OF OPERATING EXPENSE


80
SCHEDULE OF FIXED ASSET
FOR THE YEARS ENDING DECEMBER 31


81

82

83
CEMP HYDROPONICSFARM
INCOME STATEMENT
FOR FIVE-YEAR PERIOD


84
CEMP HYDROPONICS GARDEN
STATEMENT OF CASH FLOW


85
STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION
FOR THE YEARS ENDING DECEMBER 31


86

87
STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN EQUITY


88
STATEMENT OF COST OF GOODS SOLD


89
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

90

91

92
Chapter 5
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter presents the findings, conclusions and recommendation of the
study.
Findings
1. The demographic profile of the farmers in terms of :
1.1 Age
Majority of the farmers ages from 50-59 (15 or 34.09%), followed by
farmers with ages that range from 60 or above (29.54%), 11 farmers (25%) have
ages of 40-49, 3 farmers having an age that range from 30-39, 2 farmers ranges
from 20-29 and none ranges from 20 below.
1.2 Gender
There are 34 male farmers (77.27%) and 10 female farmers (22.73%).
Majority of the farmers are male.
1.3 Civil Status


93
There are 4 farmers (9.09%) who are single, 32 farmers are married
(72.73%) are married, 8 of them are widow or widower (18.18%) and none were
separated.
1.4 Monthly Income
There 35 farmers (79.55%) who have P 0 - 5,000 monthly income, 5
farmers (11.36%) who have P 5,001-10,000 monthly income, 4 farmers (9.09%)
who have P 10,001 - 15,000 and none of them have a monthly income of P15,000
and above.
1.5 Ownership of the cultivated land
Majority of the farmers (40 or 90.91%) dont have their own land and 4
farmers (9.09%) have their own.
1.6 Land Area

Majority of the farmers (30 or 68.18%) have a total land area that is above
9000sq.m. On the other hand, 8 farmers (18.18%) have 1000 sq.m land area, 2
farmers (4.55%) have 3001-6000sq.m and 4 farmers (9.09%) have 6001-
9000sq.m.
1.7 Kilos of crops/vegetables produced per cropping
There are 4 farmers (9.09%) who harvest 0 - 50 kilos per cropping , 6
farmers (13.64%) who harvest 51 - 60 kilos per cropping,6 farmers (13.64%) who

94
harvest 101 - 150 kilos per cropping,12 farmers (27.27%)who harvest 151 - 200
kilos per cropping and 16 farmers (36.36%) who harvest 200 kilos and above .
1.8 Number of times they harvest crops within a year
Majority of the farmers (42 or 95.45 %) harvest crops 1-3 times a year , 2
farmers (4.55%) harvest 4-6 times a year and none of them harvest 7 times or
above per year.
1.9 Expenses incurred in growing and maintaining the crop

production until the day of harvest
There are 12 farmers (27.27%) who incurred P 0 - 10,000 expenses per
cropping, 7 farmers (15.91%) incurred P 10,001 - 20,000 expenses per cropping,
6 farmers (13.64%) incurred P 20,001 - 30,000 expenses per cropping, 2 farmers
(4.55%) incurred P 30,001 - 40,000 expenses per cropping, 12 farmers (27.27%)
incurred P 40,001 - 50,000 expenses per cropping and 5 farmers (11.36%)
incurred P 50,001 or above expenses per cropping.
1.11 Start-up capital when raising vegetable crops
There are 12 farmers(27.27%) who have used P 0 - 10,000 as a start-up
capital, 7 farmers (15.91%)used P 10,001 - 20,000 as a start-up capital, 6
farmers (13.64%) used P 20,001 - 30,000 as a start-up capital, 2 farmers (4.55%)
used P 30,001 - 40,000 as a start-up capital, 12 farmers (27.27%) used P 40,001


95
- 50,000 as a start-up capital and 5 farmers (11.36%) used P 50,001 or above as
a start-up capital.
1.12 Return on Capital per one cropping
There are 8 farmers(18.18%) who realized P 0 - 10,000 gain per cropping
, 6 farmers (13.64%)realized P 10,001 - 20,000 gain per cropping, 7 farmers
(15.91%) realized P 20,001 - 30,000 gain per cropping , 2 farmers (4.55%)
realized P 30,001 - 40,000 gain per cropping, 7 farmers (15.91%) realized P
40,001 - 50,000 gain per cropping and 14 farmers (31.82%) realized P 50,001 or
above gain per cropping.
2. Level of Acceptability
2.1Traditional way of Farming
The quality of harvest through traditional way of farming is acceptable and
the quantity of harvest is average. In the overall assessment, the respondents
level of acceptability on the traditional way of farming in terms of quality and
quantity of harvest is average.
It indicates that the farmers are not satisfied on the quality and quantity of
the crops due to pests, natural calamity and insects that most of the time destroy
their crops.

96
2.2 SNAP Hydroponics
The quality and quantity of harvest through SNAP Hydroponics is
acceptable. In the overall assessment, the respondents level of acceptability on
the SNAP Hydroponics in terms of quality and quantity of harvest is acceptable.
It indicates that the farmers are convinced that the SNAP Hydroponics can
become a source of income.
3. Significant difference of quality and quantity of harvest in soil and
SNAP hydroponics.
The quality of harvest in soil and SNAP hydroponics shows a computed
value of 0.193 is less than the tabulated value of 2.617; therefore the null
hypothesis is accepted. These means that there is no significant difference on the
quality of harvest in soil and in SNAP Hydroponics. In terms of the quantity of
harvest a computed value of 3.148 is greater than the tabulated value of 2.167;
therefore the alternative hypothesis is rejected. These means that there is a
significant difference on the quantity of harvest in soil and in SNAP hydroponics.


97
4. The aspects to be considered in the introduction of SNAP
Hydroponics as a source of income.
There are certain technical aspects to be considered in the introduction of
SNAP Hydroponics as a source of income. Farmers answered mostly maybe
when asked whether they know/aware of what a SNAP Hydroponics is. Farmers
agree that materials are essential to produce a SNAP Hydroponics, affordable
and it can be found easily. They also agree that Brgy. San Isidro is an effective
and efficient location to conduct SNAP hydroponics.
In the overall assessment, the farmers agree that these technical aspects
income.
It indicates that most of them dont have any idea of what hydroponics is
but upon having a glimpse of it, they've agred that certain technical aspects are
needed to be considered.


98
There are certain marketing aspects to be considered in the introduction of
SNAP Hydroponics as a source of income. Farmers have agree that it is easy to
conduct and is less time consuming. They also agree that it is easier to maintain,
plant growth is faster and has a greater yield compared to the traditional way of
planting and also producing crops from SNAP Hydroponics can compete with the
traditional way of farming.
In the overall assessment, the farmers agree that these marketing aspects
income.
Hydroponic growers stated that they get yields many times greater when
they switch from the conventional method. And it is because hydroponically grown
plants dip their roots directly into nutrient-rich solutions, they get what they need
much more easily than plants growing in soil, so they need much smaller root
systems and can divert more energy into leaf and stem growth.
4.3 Socio-Economic Aspect


99
There are certain socio-economic aspects to be considered in the
introduction of SNAP Hydroponics as a source of income. Farmers have agree
that this study is beneficial to the farmers of Barangay San Isidro and to the
Barangay itself.
It indicates that due to the fact that greater yields can be made through
hydroponics which results to greater income , most of the farmers of Barangay
San Isidro are willing to try the SNAP hydroponics.


100
Conclusion
Based on the findings of the study, the researchers have arrived to the
following conclusions.
1. Majority of the respondents range from 50-59 years old, are males, married,
and has a monthly family income of P0-P5000.
Majority of the farmers are tenants of a land with an area of 9000 sq. m and
above. Most of them have raised crops like legumes, rice grain, okra, garlic and
upo. Most of them harvested 200 kilos and above of crops per cropping which is
1-3 times a year.
Farmers who are raising vegetables have a start-up capital and incurred
expenses of an equal amount of P0-P10000 and P40001-P50000. Based on the
survey, most of them have a return of capital of P50001 and above.
2. The respondents level of acceptability on the traditional way of farming in
terms of quality and quantity of harvest is average. It indicates that the
farmers are not satisfied on the quality and quality of the crops due to
pests, natural calamity and insects that most of the time destroy their
crops. On the other hand, the respondents level of acceptability on the
SNAP Hydroponics in terms of quality


101
and quantity of harvest is acceptable.It indicates that the farmers are convinced
that the SNAP Hydroponics can become a source of income.
3. In terms of quality of harvest there is no significant difference in soil and in
SNAP hydroponics while in terms of quantity of harvest there is a significant
difference in soil and in SNAP hydroponics.
4.In the overall assessment, the farmers have agree that the technical,
management and socio-economic aspects are essential to the Introduction of
SNAP Hydroponics as a source of income


102
Recommendations
In accordance with the findings of the study, Introduction of SNAP
Hydroponics to farmers of the City of Cabuyao : As a Source of Income, and on
the basis of the above conclusions, the following recommendations are made:
1. To inform the middle-aged people that SNAP Hydroponics is an ideal work for
them because it requires less labor, less time and less effort since the
traditional farming needs extra work like weeding, spraying of pesticides
which consumes a lot of time and effort.
2. To promote women empowerment since the connotation in farming is just for
man only.
3. To encouraged married people and those who have a monthly income of P0-
5000 to try SNAP Hydroponics because with this technology, their profit is
guaranteed.
4. To tell them that using this farming technology, they do not have to rent out
wider land because it only requires less space to earn an income similar or
above the income generated in a much greater space in the field.


103
5. To inform the farmers that they can produce greater yield of crops in this
technology.
6. To encouraged the farmers to invest their loaned money in this technology
which has an assured return of capital than in the farm that they arent sure if
it will only break even, experience loss or will just result to indebtedness.
7. The future researchers can conduct additional and further study with regards
to utilization of SNAP Hydroponics. Future researchers might improve the
proposed study.
8. To be engaged in production of lettuce in hydroponics because it will result in
a high return on investment than in land production.
9. The future researcher can establish an additional study on the crops that will
also give a higher yield and income as compare to traditional farming.
10. The government should build an organization that will support the farmers and
give them seminars to know more about the alternative way of farming which
is SNAP hydroponics. Through this seminars, farmers will be knowledgeable
in a farming system where they can still earn even there is a lack in supply of
water and some phenomena that might occur.


104
11. Farmers should not only focus on the minimal amount of crops they harvest
due to lack of water supply in the farm but also consider using that limited
amount of water to produce crops in a way hydroponics which will provide
greater yield of crops.
12. To use at least 150 sq m of their land area on adopting SNAP hydroponics
system that will lead to an income of P 143,650 while it is only P 73,650 in
land .
13. To broaden the dissemination of information about the program like
distributions of pamphlets in certain areas such as Barangay Halls that will
explain and provide them information regarding SNAP hydroponics. Through
this, residents and farmers of different barangays can perform SNAP
hydroponics as a source of income of for food supply.
14. To use recyclable materials such as styro boxes of fruits or used plastic
bottles as a growing box. This will help the barangay to promote the
technology of SNAP hydroponics for wider adoption and utilization at the
same minimize the waste that affects the human health and environment.

105
15. To use only 25 ml each growing boxes of SNAP solution to provide a good
quality crops since an excess or lack of it will lead to yellowish leaves.
16. To still plant vegetable crops even in their limited space at home when in time
of rile crops.
17. To use their vegetable crafts in the field or home or those they dispose
already like those of infected by disease or pests because it can still be
recovered or grow by making it root in glass of water and transfer it in
hydroponics system.
18. For further studies, the future researchers can conduct the study with a larger
number of respondents.
19. For further studies, the future researchers can conduct the study with a larger
number of respondents.

106
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Yangsheng, Z. (2010) The Economic Theory of Developing Countries'
Rise: Explaining the Myth of Rapid Economic Growth in China . United
States of America : University Press of America, Inc.
Primitivo J.S & Eureka T. O (19 June 2005). Snap Hydroponics :
Development and Potential for Urban Vegetable Production. Philippine
Journal of Crop Science, 3-11.
Specht, K. ,et.al. ( March 2014) Urban Agriculture of the Future : An
overview of sustainability aspects of food in and on buildings n,d. from
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10460-013-9448-4.
Opina, A. (28 November 2012) Writing Chapter 2 : Review of Related
Literature. n,d. from http://www.slideshare.net/arlene5162/chapter-215397993
Melgar, C. (2006) The Green Myle Agri Products, A simple Nutrient
Addition Program (SNAP) Hydroponics Farm: A Case Study. Uiversity of the
Philippines, Los Banos Laguna.
(2013) Benefits of Hydroponics. n,d. from
http://www.luckyroots.com/hydroponics/benefits.html

107
(2016) Harvest Time for Tomatoes : When to Pick Tomatoes. N,d. from
https://www.gardeningknowhow.com/edible/vegetables/tomato/harvest-time-
for-tomatoes.html
(2016) Pechay Production Guide. N,d. from

http://businessdiary.com.ph/6057/pechay-production-guide/#ixzz4ZSW2KfHc
(2017) All About Lettuce. N,d from

http://www.burpee.com/gardenadvicecenter/vegetables/lettuce/all-about-
lettuce/article10236.html
(2017) Lettuce, Lactuca Sativa,Wikipedia. N,d from

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lettuce

108
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: CPA's Certification
CPA's Certification
This is to certify that this thesis entitled THE INTRODUCTION OF SNAP
HYDROPONICS TO THE FARMERS OF THE CITY OF CABUYAO LAGUNA :
AS A SOURCE OF INCOME prepared and submitted by Gelyn C. Cruz, Mary
Jelvie L. Evaristo, Kaycee C. Macutong and Maricar G. Punongbayan has
been reviewed by the undersigned.
PROF.WERNAN PERALTA, CPA
Appendix 2: Editor Certification
Editor Certification

109
This is to certify that this thesis entitled THE INTRODUCTION OF SNAP
HYDROPONICS TO THE FARMERS OF THE CITY OF CABUYAO LAGUNA :
AS A SOURCE OF INCOME prepared and submitted by Gelyn C. Cruz, Mary
Jelvie L. Evaristo, Kaycee C. Macutong and Maricar G. Punongbayan has
been reviewed by the undersigned.
Editor

110
Appendix 3 : Survey Questionnaire
Questionnaire
Dear Respondents;
This questionnaire will enable the researcher to gather facts and

information for their research entitled: The Introduction of SNAP (Simple Nutrient
Addition Program) Hydroponics to the Farmers of the City of Cabuyao Laguna :
As a Source of Income. Please provide an appropriate answer to each question.
Thank you.
Name (Optional):
General Directions : Please put a mark (/) to the box provided for the choice
of your answer.
Part I : Demographic Profile
General Direction : Put a (/) mark on the box provided.
1.Which category below includes your age?

( Sa anong kategorya nabibilang ang iyong edad?)
20 below 30-39 50-59
20-29 40-49 60 or above
2.Gender
Male Female
3.Civil Status
Single Widow or Widower
Married Separated

111
4.What is the monthly income of your family? ( Magkano ang buwanang kita ng
iyong pamilya? )
P 0 to P 5,000
P 5,001 to P 10,000
P 10,001 to P 15,000
P 15,001 to P 20,000
P 20,001 or above
5.Do you own the land you are cultivating? (Sa iyo ba ang lupang iyong
sinasaka?)
Yes No
6. How much land area do you own/rented out? (Gaano kalawak ang iyong
lupang sinasaka?)
1000 sq.m and below

1001 3000 sq.m
3001 6000 sq.m
6001 9000 sq.m
Above 9000 sq.m
7. How many kilos of crops/vegetables can be produced in per cropping?
( Ilang kilo ng gulay ang iyong naaani sa isang anihan?)
Please Specify :

112
8. How many times do you harvest crops within a year?

(Ilang beses ka umaani sa isang taon?)
1-3 4-6 7 or above
9. .How much is your expenses incurred in growing and maintaining

the crop production until the day of harvest? (Magkano ang iyong
nagastos sa pagpapatubo hanggang sa pagaani?)
Please Specify :
10. How much is your start-up capital when raising vegetable crops?
(Magkano ang naging iyong puhunan sa pagsisimula ng iyong
pagtatanim?)
0 - P 10,000 P30,001 - P40,000

P10,001 - P20,000 P40,000 - P50,000
P20,001 - P30,000 P50,001 or above
11. How much is your Return on Capital per one cropping ? (Magkano ang
iyong kinikita sa isang anihan?)
0 - P 10,000 P30,001 - P40,000

P10,001 - P20,000 P40,000 - P50,000
P20,001 - P30,000 P50,001 or above
Please Specify :

113
Part II : Evaluation
Legend :
5 - Strongly Agree
4 - Agree
3 - Maybe
2 - Disagree
1 - Strongly Disagree
Technical Aspect 5 4 3 2 1
2. I am aware of planting using Simple Nutrient Addition
Program or SNAP hydroponics.
( Alam ko ang paraan ng pagtatanim gamit ang SNAP
Hydroponics.)
2. The materials are essential to produce a SNAP
hydroponics
( Ang mga ginagamit na materyales ay kinakailangan para
makagawa ng SNAP hydroponics. )
3. The materials used are affordable and can be found
easily.
( Ang mga materyales na ginamit ay abot kaya at madali
lamang matagpuan. )
4. Brgy. San Isidro is an effective and efficient location to
conduct SNAP hydroponics.
( Ang Brgy. San Isidro ay epektibo at mabisang lugar upang
maisagawa ang pagi-SNAP hydroponics.)
Management Aspect 5 4 3 2 1
1.The SNAP hydroponics is easy to conduct.
(Ang SNAP hydroponics ay madaling gawin.)
2.The SNAP hydroponics is less time consuming.
(Ang paggawa ng SNAP hydroponics ay nakakatipid ng oras.)
3.The SNAP hydroponics is easier to maintain compared to
traditional way of gardening.

114
(Ang SNAP hydroponics ay mas madaling alagaan kumpara

sa tradisyunal na pagtatanim.)
4.The SNAP hydroponics plant growth is faster compared to
( Ang pagtubo ng halaman sa SNAP hydroponics ay mas
mabilis kumapara sa tradisyunal na pagtatanim.)
5. Producing crops from SNAP Hydroponics can compete with
( Kayang makisabay ng SNAP hydroponics sa ibang paraan
ng pagtatanim. )
6.The SNAP Hydroponics has a greater yield compared to the
(Ang SNAP Hydroponics ay nagbibigay ng mas maraming ani
kumpara sa tradisyunal na paraan ng pagtatanim.)
Socio-Economic Aspect 5 4 3 2 1
1. The study is beneficial to the farmers of Cabuyao.
(Ang pag aaral ay makakatulong sa mga magsasaka sa
Cabuyao.)
2. The study is beneficial to the City of Cabuyao.
( Ang pag aaral ay makakatulong sa lungsod ng Cabuyao.)
Part III Level of Acceptability
Legend :
5 Highly Acceptable
4 - Acceptable
3 - Average
2 Somewhat Acceptable
1 Not Acceptable
Traditional way of Farming 5 4 3 2 1

1.Quality of Harvest (Color, Weight,Organic)
2.Quantity of Harvest (No. of Yield per Cropping)
SNAP Hydroponics 5 4 3 2 1

115
1.Quality of Harvest (Color, Weight,Organic)

2.Quantity of Harvest (No. of Yield per Cropping)
Appendix 4 : Unstructured Interview
The Introduction of SNAP Hydroponics to the Farmers of the City of
Cabuyao Laguna : As a Source of Income
(QUESTIONNAIRE FOR LETTUCE VENDORS)
Name (optional): _________________________________
Instruction: Please put a check that corresponds to your answer.
A. Current Practices
1. How many packs of lettuce are being sold in a week?
0-5
6 - 10
11 - 15
15 - 20
20 and above
2. How often you sell lettuce?
Daily
Two times a week
Three time a week

116
Weekly
(QUESTIONNAIRE FOR CONSUMER)
Name (optional): _________________________________
Instruction: Please put a check that corresponds to your answer.
Assessment(Consumer)
1. Do you buy and eat lettuce?
Yes No
2. How often you eat lettuce in a week?

Once
Twice
Thrice

117
Appendix 5 : Pamphlet

118
Appendix 6 : Projected Demand and Supply
Determining Sample Size
BARANGAY Household Percentage Sample
Barangay Uno 670 2 8
Barangay Dos 371 1 4
Barangay Tres 586 1 4
Sala 1,832 5 20
Niugan 6,292 16 64
Banay-Banay 6,039 14 56
Pulo 5,327 13 52
San Isidro 4,889 12 48
Banlic 3,371 8 32
Mamatid 11,161 28 112
TOTAL 40,538 100% 400

*Allocation of percentage was determined by dividing 670 over
40,358 as 100% of total household to arrive at 2%. Allocation of sample size is
determined by multiplying the sample size (396) to the allocated percentage
(2%,1%). for barangays to arrive at 8,4.The total sample size was
determined by using Slovins formula.


119
DEMAND ANALYSIS
Demand is the ability to buy something and the willingness to make the
purchase. Analyzing market demand plays an important role as it is considered
the determinant of market. Without the demand there will be no market for
certain product.
Demand for the proposed product constitutes the needs of people
gathered from statistics provided by the Municipality of Cabuyao for each of
the barangays. The analysis of demand should be carefully observed in order
to determine the needs of consumers. Since, there is no available data to
determine the exact number of those who consume lettuce, the proponents
established the gross household population for 10 barangays in the
Municipality of Cabuyao.
Survey Results on Households
Household Respondents Who Buys and Eat
Household
Eats Lettuce Percentage
Respondents
Yes 119 30.05
No 277 69.95
Total 396 100
*30.05 % are buying and eating lettuce while approximately 69.95%
of the consumers do not.


120
1. Do you buy and eat YES NO

lettuce?
Frequency % Frequency %
Barangay Uno 2 25 6 75
Barangay Dos 2 50 2 50
Barangay Tres 1 25 3 75
Sala 9 45 11 55
Niugan 14 22 50 78
Banay-Banay 15 27 40 73
Pulo 18 35 33 65
San Isidro 17 35 31 65
Banlic 13 41 19 59
Mamatid 28 25 82 75
TOTAL 119 30.05 277 69.95
*30.05% of the respondents are buying and eating Lettuce while
approximately 69.95% of the respondents are not.
2. How often do you 1x a week 2x a week 3x a week NONE


121
buy and eat Lettuce

in week?
F % F % F % F %
Barangay Uno 2 25 0 0 0 0 6 75
Barangay Dos 1 25 1 25 0 0 2 50
Barangay Tres 1 25 0 0 0 0 3 75
Sala 5 25 2 10 2 10 11 55
Niugan 10 16 2 3 2 3 50 78
Banay-Banay 8 14 5 9 2 4 40 73
Pulo 15 29 2 4 1 2 33 65
San Isidro 12 25 5 10 0 0

122
31 65
Banlic 12 38 1 3 0 0 19 59
Mamatid 23 21 3 3 2 1 82 75
TOTAL 89 22.47% 21 5.30% 9 2.27% 277 69.95%
*22.47% of the respondents are buying and eating Lettuce once a
week,5.30% twice a week and 2.27% thrice a week while approximately
69.95% of the respondents do not buy and eat.


123
Projected Household Population
BARANGAY 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Barangay
Uno 670 700 731 764 797
Barangay Dos 371 387 405 423 441
Barangay Tres 586 612 639 668 697
Sala 1832 1913 1998 2087 2180
Niugan 6292 6571 6863 7168 7486
Banay-Banay 6039 6307 6587 6880 7185
Pulo 5327 5564 5811 6069 6338
San Isidro 4889 5106 5333 5570 5817
Banlic 3371 3521 3677 3840 4011
Mamatid 11161 11657 12174 12715 13279
TOTAL 40538 42338 44218 46181 48231

Based on 4.44% population growth of the City of Cabuyao, Laguna
Demand Analysis

124
Computation of Demand: Barangay Uno
Total Projected Household, 2016 670
Multiply by % of household who buys and eat lettuce 25 %
Total household who buys and eats Lettuce 168
Projected Demand for Barangay Uno
Demand for
Frequency of Percentage of
Buys and eat Lettuce Lettuce per
Buying Household
Year
168 1 x 48 weeks 25% 2,016
168 2 x 48 weeks 0% 0
168 3 x 48 weeks 0% 0
168 0 75% 0
TOTAL 100% 2,016
It shows the frequency of buying and percentage of household in
order to arrive at the demand for lettuce per year. 168 multiply by 48
weeks then multiply by 25% to come up with the demand of 2,016 and
so on.
Projected Demand for Barangay Uno


125
Demand for Lettuce per Size of Lettuce Demand for Lettuce in

Year Grams per Year
2,016 83g 167,328
It shows the demand for lettuce per year of 2,016 multiply by the
size of lettuce of 83 grams to arrive at demand for lettuce in grams per
year of 167,328.
Computation of Demand: Barangay Dos
Projected Demand for Barangay Dos
Demand for
Buying Household
Year
186 1 x 48 weeks 25% 2,232
186 2 x 48 weeks 25% 4,464
186 3 x 48 weeks 0% 0
186 0 50% 0
TOTAL 100% 6,696
weeks then multiply by 25% to come up with the demand of 2,232.


126
Projected Demand for Barangay Dos

Year Grams per Year
6,696 83g 555,768
year of 555,768.
Computation of Demand: Barangay Tres
Projected Demand for Barangay Tres
Demand for
Buying Household
Year
147 1 x 48 weeks 25% 1,764
147 2 x 48 weeks 0% 0
147 3 x 48 weeks 0% 0
147 0 75% 0
TOTAL 100% 1,764

127
so on .
Projected Demand for Barangay Tres

Year Grams per Year
1,764 83g 146,412
year of 146,412.
Computation of Demand: Sala
Total Projected Household, 2016 1,832
Multiply by % of household who buys and eat lettuce 45%
Projected Demand for Sala
Demand for
Buying Household
Year

128
825 1 x 48 weeks 25% 9,900
825 2 x 48 weeks 10% 7,920
825 3 x 48 weeks 10% 11,880
825 0 55% 0
TOTAL 100% 29,700
so on .
Projected Demand for Sala

Year Grams per Year
29,700 83g 2,465,100
year of 2,465,100.
Computation of Demand: Niugan


129
Total household who buys and eats Lettuce 1,385
Projected Demand for Niugan
Demand for
Buying Household
Year
1,385 1 x 48 weeks 16% 10,637
1,385 2 x 48 weeks 3% 3,989
1,385 3 x 48 weeks 3% 5,983
1,385 0 78% 0
TOTAL 100% 20,609
order to arrive at the demand for lettuce per year. 1,385 multiply by 48
so on.
Projected Demand for Niugan

Year Grams per Year

130
20,609 83g 1,710,547
year of 1,710,547.
Computation of Demand: Banay-Banay
Projected Demand for Banay-Banay
Demand for
Buying Household
Year
1,630 1 x 48 weeks 14% 10,954
1,630 2 x 48 weeks 9% 14,083
1,630 3 x 48 weeks 4% 9,389
1,630 0 73% 0
TOTAL 100% 34,426
so on.

131
Projected Demand for Banay-Banay

Year Grams per Year
34,426 83g 2,857,358
year of 2,587,358.
Computation of Demand: Pulo
Projected Demand for Pulo
Demand for
Buying Household
Year
1,833 1 x 48 weeks 29% 25,516
1,833 2 x 48 weeks 4% 7,039
1,833 3 x 48 weeks 2% 5,279
1,833 0 65% 0
TOTAL 100% 37,834

132
so on.
Projected Demand for Pulo

Year Grams per Year
37,834 83g 3,140,222
year of 3,140,222.
Computation of Demand: San Isidro
Projected Demand for San Isidro
Demand for
Buying Household
Year
1,711 1 x 48 weeks 25% 20,532
1,711 2 x 48 weeks 10% 16,426


133
1,711 3 x 48 weeks 0% 0
1,711 0 65% 0
TOTAL 100% 36,958
so on.
Projected Demand for San Isidro

Year Grams per Year
36,958 83g 3,067,514
year of 3,067,514.
Computation of Demand: Banlic


134
Projected Demand for Banlic
Demand for
Buying Household
Year
1,382 1 x 48 weeks 38% 25,208
1,382 2 x 48 weeks 3% 3,980
1,382 3 x 48 weeks 0% 0
1,382 0 59% 0
TOTAL 100% 29,188
so on.
Projected Demand for Banlic

Year Grams per Year
29,188 83g 2,422,604

135
year of 2,422,604.
Computation of Demand: Mamatid
Projected Demand for Mamatid
Demand for
Buying Household
Year
2,790 1 x 48 weeks 21% 28,123
2,790 2 x 48 weeks 3% 8,035
2,790 3 x 48 weeks 1% 4,018
2,790 0 75% 0
TOTAL 100% 40,176
so on.

136
Projected Demand for Mamatid

Year Grams per Year
40,176 83g 3,334,608
year of 3,334,608.
Consolidated Demand
BARANGAY Household Demand in grams per year
Barangay Uno 670 167,328
Barangay Dos 371 555,768
Barangay Tres 586 146,412


137
Sala 1,832 2,456,100
Niugan 6,292 1,710,547
Banay-Banay 6,039 2,857,358
Pulo 5,327 3,140,222
San Isidro 4,889 3,067,514
Banlic 3,371 2,422,604
Mamatid 11,161 3,334,608
TOTAL 40,538 19,858,461
Projected Demand for Lettuce
Demand in
Year Household Volume (grams)
2016 40,538 19,858,461
2017 42,338 20,740,177
2018 44,218 21,661,041
2019 46,181 22,622,791
2020 48,231 23,627,243

138
Based on 4.44% population growth rate in City of Cabuyao, Laguna
SUPPLY ANALYSIS
The availability of raw materials and necessary tools and equipment are
components considered in determining the supply of the product. Sources of
the primary raw material is almost available in Hydroponics Garden Supply
situated in Sala, City of Cabuyao, Laguna. In addition, other raw materials
such as styro cups,plastic bags amd styro are available in public markets as
well as in other stores. Thus, there is an assurance of all necessary materials
needed in the production. Moreover, the tools and equipment associated in the
production are available in every medium enterprises.
All the required raw materials, tools and equipment are available in
different prices yet in affordable amounts. All the supplies are easily obtainable
in City of Cabuyao proper since most of the markets and medium enterprises
are located there.
Unsatisfied Demand

139
Unsatisfied demand will determine by subtracting the projected demand
to the projected supply and it will assure if there will be a space for the
proposed business in the market. It will also show if there is a still market that
is not yet served by the competitors. It is vital to combine the findings on the
demand and supply analysis. Comparing these two trends will now determine
the amount of satisfied demand.
The unsatisfied demand for the proposed business was determined
through the usage of the formula stated below. The unsatisfied demand per
piece is computed based on the projected demand over 83 grams per piece.
Unsatisfied Demand = Projected Demand Projected Supply
Unsatisfied Demand

140
UNSATISFIED
PROJECTED PROJECTED UNSATISFIED DEMAND PER
YEAR DEMAND SUPPLY DEMAND PIECE
2016 19,858,461 69475448.8 17368862.2 209263.4
2017 20,740,177 72560158.4 18140039.6 218554.694
2018 21,661,041 75781829.6 18945457.4 228258.5229
2019 22,622,791 79146543.2 19786635.8 238393.2024
2020 23,627,243 82660648.8 20665162.2 248977.8578
Target Market and Market Share


141
The target market share of the proposed business is computed based
on the projected capacity which is production per year over unsatisfied
demand multiplied by 100.
To determine the market share, the projected capacity was divided to
the production capacity per days or the unsatisfied demand per piece.
Target Market Share
UNSATISF
IED
PROJECT PROJECT UNSATISF DEMAND PROJECT
ED ED IED PER ED MARKET
YEAR DEMAND SUPPLY DEMAND PIECE CAPACITY SHARE
2016 19,858,461 9929230.5 9929230.5 119629.28 2,772,165 27.92%
20,740,177 10370088. 10370088.

2017 5 5 124940.82 2,895,249 27.92%
21,661,041 10830520. 10830520.

2018 5 5 130488.19 3,023,798 27.92%
22,622,791 11311395. 11311395.

2019 5 5 136281.87 3,158,055 27.92%
23,627,243 11813621. 11813621.

2020 5 5 142332.78 3,298,272 27.92%

142
Appendix 7: Request Letters
February 1,2017
HON. EMERSON DEVOMA
Brgy. Captain, Barangay San Isidro
City of Cabuyao
Dear Sir;
Greetings!
We, the undersigned, students from Pamantasan ng Cabuyao would like to inform
your good office that we are conducting a research entitled THE
INTRODUCTION OF SNAP HYDROPONICS TO THE FARMERS OF THE CITY
OF CABUYAO LAGUNA : AS A SOURCE OF INCOME
In line with this, we are asking for your approval to conduct a survey to the
farmers of Brgy.San Isidro.
We are hoping for your kind consideration.


143
Respectfully yours,
Cruz, Gelyn C.
Evaristo, Mary Jelvie L.
Macutong, Kaycee C.
Punongbayan, Maricar G.
Noted by:
Prof. Flordeliza Em
Adviser

144
Appendix 8 : Notes To Financial Statement
RAW MATERIALS
DIRECT Quantity Cost TOTAL
Seeds 420028 0.25 105007
SNAP Solution 1050070 0.55 577538.5
TOTAL COST
INDIRECT Quantity Cost TOTAL
Plastic bag 42002.82 1 42002.82
Coco Coir 10500.7 12.5 131258.75
Styro Cups 252016.89 1 252016.89
Packaging Tape 42002.82 0.24 10080.6768
TOTAL COST 435359.1368


145
Production Schedule
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

SALES 15,490 17,039 18,743 20,617 22,679
Units to be sold
(kg) 15,490 17,039 18,743 20,617 22,679
Required Ending
Inventory 1,311 1,442 1,586 1,745 1,919
Total 16,801 18,481 20,329 22,362 24,598

Less:Beginning
Inventory 0 1,311 1,442 1,586 1,745
Units to be
Produced (kg) 16,801 18,481 20,329 22,362 24,598
Production Supplies
Item Quantity Unit Cost Annual Cost
Face Mask 15 10 150
Hair Net 15 5 75
Gloves 125 7 875
Weighing Scale 1 1000 1000
Cutter 4 50 200
Total 2300
Maintenance Suplies
Item Quantity Unit Cost Cost


146
Scrub 2 35 70
Scissors 2 30 60
Broomstick 2 50 100
Total 230
Office Supplies
Annual
Item Quantity Unit Unit Cost Cost
Bond Paper-Short 2 Ream 160 800
Bond Paper-Long 2 Ream 185 370
Brown Envelope-Short 10 Pcs 2.5 25
Brown Envelope-Long 10 Pcs 2.75 27.5
Log Books - 500pgs. 1 Pcs 81 81
Paper Clips-Small 1 Box 7.25 7.25
Papper Clips-Big 1 Box 25 25
Folders-Short 10 Pcs 3.75 37.5
Folder-Long 10 Pcs 4 40
Yellow Pad 5 Pad 21 105
Scotch Tape 5 Pcs 6.5 32.5
Stapler 2 Pcs 65 130
Staple Wire 5 Box 38.75 193.75
Puncher 1 Pcs 270 270


147
Ballpen 1 Box 65 65
Pencil 1 Box 60 60
Ink Refill 1 Pcs 375 375
TOTAL 2644.5
Furniture and
Fixtures
COST USEFUL
FURNITURES PER TOTAL LIFE IN
AND FIXTURES UNIT NO. OF UNITS COST YEARS DEPRECIATION
Monoblock Table 250 1 250 20 12.5
Monoblock Chairs 250 2 500 20 25
Office Table 1100 1 1100 10 110
Office Chair 700 1 700 10 70
RACK
TOTAL 2550 895.5
Office Equipment

148
COST USEFUL
FURNITURES & PER TOTAL LIFE IN
FIXTURES UNIT NO. OF UNITS COST YEARS DEPRECIATION
Electric Fan 700 3 2100 10 210
Fire Extinguisher 3750 1 3750 15 250
Wall Clock 100 1 100 10 10
TOTAL 6610 540
OTHER
STRUCTUR
ES
NO. USEFUL
COST PER OF TOTAL LIFE IN
OTHER STRUCTURES UNIT UNITS COST YEARS DEPRECIATION
600 per 700

GREENHOUSE SQM SQM 420,000 10 42000
Delivery Vehicle
NO. USEFUL
VEHICLE UNIT UNITS COST YEARS DEPRECIATION
DELIVERY JEEP 160000 2 320000 15 21333
PRODUCTION TOOLS

149
NO. USEFUL
PRODUCTION TOOLS UNIT UNITS COST YEARS DEPRECIATION
GROWING BOXES 20 4200 84000 5 16800
Light and Water
MONTHLY YEARLY
DESCRIPTION COST COST COST
40 kWh Ave.
Monthly
Electricity Consumption 12.00/kW 480 5760
14 cu.m Ave.
Monthly
Water Consumption 150.00/1cu.m 2100 25200
TOTAL 1840 22080
Labor
MONTHLY
DESCRIPTION COST COST
35 days per
Labor cropping 350 12250
TOTAL 1840

150
Appendix 9 : Curriculum Vitae


151
CERTIFICATE OF RECOMMENDATION
This thesis is hereby recommended for Proposal Defense in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science in
Accountancy.
The Researchers :
Cruz, Gelyn C.
Evaristo, Mary Jelvie L.
Macutong, Kaycee C.
Punongbayan, Maricar G.
Prof. Flordeliza Em
Adviser

Final Thesis2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Final Thesis2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pamantasan ng Cabuyao

Katapatan Subd., Banay-banay, City of Cabuyao

College of Business Administration and Accountancy 1

THE INTRODUCTION OF SNAP HYDROPONICS AS AN ALTERNATIVE WAY

OF FARMING TO AUGMENT INCOME

A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of College of Business

Administration and Accountancy

City of Cabuyao, Laguna

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree

Bachelor of Science in Accountancy

Mary Jelvie L. Evaristo

College of Business Administration and Accountancy 2

Approved by the panelist on the day of , 2017 at the

Oral Examination with the grade of

College of Business Administration and Accountancy 3

INTRODUCTION OF SNAP HYDROPONICS TO THE FARMERS OF THE CITY

OF CABUYAO LAGUNA : AS A SOURCE OFINCOME for the degree Bachelor

of Science in Accountancy at the Pamantasan ng Cabuyao embodies the results

of the original and scholarly work read out by the undersigned.

education institution, except where proper referencing and acknowledgment were

Mary Jelvie L. Evaristo

College of Business Administration and Accountancy 4

The researchers would like to acknowledge and express their deepest

appreciation for the assistance, support and encouragement of the following :

all these things without Him and His abundant blessings.

Mr. Noel B. Hungria, Dean, College of Business Administration and

Accountancy, for giving encouragements and constructive criticisms that

us about important matters in doing the research.

this research possible.

Ms. Remedios Bucal, Professor, for being patient and understanding an

meeting the deadlines of research study.

College of Business Administration and Accountancy 5

And lastly, to our respondents, Farmers of City of Cabuyao, your

College of Business Administration and Accountancy 6

future. It was an extraordinary and enjoyable journey indeed!

College of Business Administration and Accountancy 7

THE INTRODUCTION OF SNAP HYDROPONICS TO THE FARMERS

OF THE CITY OF CABUYAO LAGUNA : AS A SOURCE OFINCOME

The main purpose of this study is to assess the respondents level of

acceptability on the SNAP Hydroponics in terms of quality of harvest and quantity

farmers,to determine the respondents level of acceptability on the SNAP

Hydroponics in terms of quality of harvest and quantity of harvest and to

determine the aspects to be considered in the introduction of SNAP Hydroponics

as a source of income in terms of Technical Aspects,Management Aspects and

Socio-Economic Aspects to the farmers of the City of Cabuyao as a source of

This study was supported by researches of Dr. Primitivo Jose A. Santos

and Eureka Teresa M. Ocampo from Plant Physiology Laboratory, Institute of

Plant Breeding, College of Agriculture, UP Los Baos, College, Laguna.

Experiments were conducted by the Professors which results to the formulation

College of Business Administration and Accountancy 8

The descriptive research method was applied in this study.The respondent

have the most number of farmers in City of Cabuyao. The

frequency,percentage,weighted mean and t-test were used to evaluate the level of

acceptability of produced crops from SNAP Hydroponics as a source of income to

the farmers of Barangay San Isidro City of Cabuyao Laguna.

hydroponics was assessed through the performance indicators adopted and

modified by the researchers.

Based on the result, farmers answered mostly maybe when asked

College of Business Administration and Accountancy 9

the SNAP hydroponics.

As evaluated, the level of acceptability of the farmers with regards to

College of Business Administration and Accountancy 10

Chapter 1 THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND