Bulgarian experience in flexibility implementation?

Dessislava Dimitrova Teodora Ivanova, Yulia Bosseva, Michele Rumiz

Hygiene and Flexibility for Small Food Producers. Fit for Purpose?

BULGARIAN HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

1878 – 1944 – ca. 80% of the population in rural areas. Slow, but sustainable growth with entrepreneurial start;1944 - 1989 – nationalization of land (over 95%); political and economic deprivation of rural livelihoods; urbanization and industrialization1989 – 2007 – collapse of the socialist system; co-operatives and agro industrial complexes were destroyed and the land – mostly restituted2007 – 2014 – implementation of the first programming period of the RDP2014 – 2020 – new plans to be developed?

• Concentration of agricultural land in large farms owned by few landowners

• Limited access to market for small farmers and food producers due to mechanistic implementation of the acquis

• Long food supply chains – prices for raw goods are very low and the prices for the end user are being increased significantly

• Cheap imports of food - sometimes with low or questionable quality• Depopulation of rural areas due to development perspectives• Loss of Bulgarian plant and animal genetic resources• Loss of Bulgarian identity and tastes

RURAL AREAS OR AREAS FOR AGRICULTURE?

RURAL AREAS IN BULGARIA

QUALITY 1.Lack of constant quality standards 2.Difficult regular delivery of products 3.Lack of certification

ECONOMIC 1.No access to credit 2.Informal economic activities 3.Low level of income diversification

SOCIAL 1.Isolation 2.Lack of training opportunities 3.Mistrust

INFRASTRUCTURES 1.Low level of public services in rural areas 2.No adequate infrastructures for direct sale 3.Lack of production facilities (home production)

COMMON FINDINGS IN RURAL COMMUNITIES

•Scattered throughout the country•Low level of cooperation•A significant part of the farmers are elderly people;•Insufficient mobility due to age, economic reasons, and necessity for everyday duties in the farm•High depopulation rates in the rural areas

Small farmers as a social group

•Small number of young farmers

•Low access to information

•Low level of education

•Total number of farms - 370 222•Small farms - 92,07 % (340 864) •92 % of people involved are family members•Clear bipolar structure of agriculture – few large market-oriented farms and a large number of family farms

•Clear geographical distinction: big farms are in lowland areas and cultivate monocultures; small farms are dispersed in less favourable areas but preserve local genetic resources and related culture

Clean Food, Fair Livelihood

Bulgarian “flexibility” measures were initiated by NGOs in 2010!Ordinance 26 - specific requirements on direct sales of small quantities of

ONLY raw materials and food of animal origin

NO FLEXIBILITY FOR PROCESSING BUISNESSES – NO ADDED VALUE LIVELIHOODS FOR SMALL FARMERS AND PRODUCERS IN RURAL AREAS

Today: 464 registered producers of primary products (332 for honey) and 8 – for processed products (7 for milk and 1 for meat)

FOOD SAFETY

• What is safe food and how it is guaranteed to consumers?

• EU regulations implemented without availing of the flexibility provisions

• Small farmers, mainly producing meat and dairy products, consider the hygiene requirements of Ordinance 26 impossible to be implemented and refuse to comply with them. They prefer not to carry out direct deliveries or to offer their products on the black market.

• There is NO regulation for the production of small quantities of food of plant origin

• Specialized analysis to determine to what extent the flexibility provisions are applicable in the country – exclusion/derogation/adaptation so that the size of investment is acceptable for the farmers

There is a strong need for detailed, understandable and accessible guidance, good practice guides and other information documents to explain the meaning and contents of these requirements and give practical examples for compliance and enforcement, consistent with the Bulgarian conditions.

COMPETITIVENESS

• Need of research on good practices from other Member States relevant to Bulgarian conditions

• No studies have been made on how the requirements of Regulation № 852/2004 will raise the price of the final products of small farmers and whether these products would be marketable at all under these conditions.

• Due to the mechanistic implementation of the EU regulations small farmers in Bulgaria are probably in a more disadvantaged situation compared to those in most Member States of the EU

• Investments needed to comply with Ordinance 26 are comparable to that which are necessary to build a manufacturing plant, according to the general rules.

•Bulgarian Food Safety Agency (BFSA) exercises the control of the compliance with the requirements of Ordinance 26.

•Allocated funds for targeted visits of experts to the farms, laboratory analyzes, information campaigns, monitoring and other specific measures.

•Control organs often neglect the problems of the farmers or even do not know the correct answer

•Special training of the employees •Standardizing of the approach of the territorial units across the country•Prevention measures rather than fines - trust of farmers in the state institutions.

STATE CONTROL – FINES OR SUPPORT?

• Remote contact between the farmer and the administration.

• Registration under Ordinance 26 to be integrated into the registration procedures that take place prior to the registration for direct sales.

• Revision of the common registration regimes to which Ordinance 26 refers and create preferential conditions for small farmers and thus compensate their primordial inequality with other market participants.

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR REGISTRATION(Improvement required)

EEnvironmentallynvironmentally SSustainableustainable SSocioocio--EEconomic conomic DDevelopment of evelopment of RRuralural AAreasreas

Strengthening the capacity and giving voice to Civil Society Organisations in the Balkans and Turkey with particular reference on environment, agriculture, rural development and the food sector.Spread an agricultural model based on traditional food, which is good for the environment, good for our health, contributing to social and economical development.

Network of local communities for preservation of local breeds, varieties and traditional food.www.essedra.com

Slow Food Ark of Taste/Slow Food Presidiawww.slowfoodfoundation.com/ark). www.slowfoodfoundation.com/presidia).

The partnership• Slow Food International (Project leader)

• European Forum on Nature Conservation and Pastoralism (UK)

• VIS Albania

• OKUSI Hercegovinu

• Association of Slow Food Convivia in Bulgaria

• Udruga Kinookus (Croazia)

• Slou Fud Bitola (Macedonia)

• Fundatia ADEPT Transilvania (Romania)

• Natura Balkanika (Serbia)

• Mutfak Dostlari Dernegi – MDD (Turkey)

ENDANGERED PRODUCTS BY CATEGORY

PRODUCTS BY COUNTRY & CATEGORY

MAJOR THREATS

…and industrialization / urbanization of rural areas property rightsindustrialization of agricultural practicessimplification of the recipeclimate change

Economic benefits•Fair food prices•Income for local economies;•Higher life standard•Local markets of farm food•Synergies with relevant local business•Diversification of rural tourism•More effective and balanced absorption of EU funds

Social benefits•Employment and education at local level•Decrease of depopulation and consolidation of local communities•Diversification of local social services•Strengthening the contacts between urban and rural population•Access to fresh and healthy food

Ecological benefits•Preservation of genetic resources and related knowledge•Preservation of nature-friendly traditional agriculture•Decrease of green gases and mitigation of climate change•Preservation of soil fertility•Preservation and diversification of ecosystem goods and services•Preservation of wild species and habitats and sustainability of Natura 2000 network

(IM)POSSIBLE BENEFITS?

Thank you for your attention!